compassionategirl

Completely agree! I'm especially sad that you say you'd do it again, Bigbwii, even now that you know how the animals were killed Yeah, that's a shame. I don't mind ugly people being suppressed, too, as long as beautiful people have a nice life. ... Peace, Daywalker totally agree.

Good for you, ALLIEVERTOUCHED! You are not alone in many of your sentiments by the way!

Justice isnt a puppy. He is estimated to be 4 years old. I found him running around on a highway!

What are you crying about? You've met me, or more importantly, Justice.

I disagree. I think it is more than "some" and you havent given PETA enough credit there. Of course, I have no stats at my fingertips to back that up, but most people I correspond with or interact with who are vegan seem to have been at least partially influenced in that direction by PETA (albeit through PETA literature or meet your meat, not through ads that some people here have defined as sexist, exploitative of people, etc).

LIke I suggested earlier, Mike, I think Kathryn's suggestion is a fanstastic one. Have a billboard or campaign that juxtaposes beautiful big brown bovine eyes, with beautiful big brown human eyes. Not sure what a good caption for this would be, but the juxtaposition I think may be very effective. Cows have eyes that are so similar to beautiful brown human eyes...

I completely agree, and have complained many times about this to the THS. So has PETA. As far as the rest of your allegations, I will be sure to check out the blog and look into it. Thanks for your bringing this to our attention. The fact that the president of the THS is corrupt and doesnt really care about animals is not surprising. Ever heard of Barnoti, the execuive director of the MOntreal SPCA? Even the Ontario SCPA has let their politics with the Toronto HUmane Society cost animals' their well-being. It is truly ing how people who lack genuine and passionate love for all animals are the ones who end up in positions of any power. Thank-you for your post. You seem to love animals very much, so if you arent already, go vegan. And here is why: www.meetyourmeat.com .

Vega (free of soy and whey, etc)., hemp portien, pea protein, brown rice protein, beans, lentils, NUts and SEEDS, and all vegetables have some protein in it. For example, if you look at artichokes and okra, the proetin to carb ratio is pretty ideal. Robert gets pretty big and he has no problem getting enough protein. Here is one of my favourite pics of him. Maybe he can chime in on this thread as well. We have a few bodybuilding big guys here, so you can get big and bodybuild on a vegan diet. Will Peavy has a good before and after pic somewhere here too, and is thinking about getting into competitive bodybuilding. Anyway, here is that pic I promised of Rob. http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c210/VeganBodybuilder/posing1.jpg

Welcome, new veg Derek. You have made an awesome decision. Did www.meetyourmeat.com have anything to do with it? Either way, congrats. And kiss on us all you want too.

Health benefits? Anything "unhealthy" about cocoa powder? I have heard that cocoa powder is SOO good for you. high in anti-oxidants and also has been shown to lower blood pressure. So if you have any thoughts or info on cocoa powder, please type away! (P.S. I buy the Camino brand - organic and fair trade. Pricey but worth it).

Heehee! I feel like hugging you all! Ask Matt- nothing makes me happier than vegans coming together in friendship, and good times! Even if I am not there, it still makes me happy to know that you guys are happy. How did you make fresh salsa LL? Everytime I try and dice tomatoes, they end up turning into mashed tomatoes.

That's it! You should know by now that I will require **way** more details than that! Any pics? How many board members were there? Who? What did you all eat and drink? When did everybody leave and when did they get there. Details please, details.

Welcome back Richy baby

Gaawd does that argument get old. All I am going to do here is to state what should be beyond question: like LL said, nobody, **nobody** needs to be intentionally cruel. In that regard, you are wrong - compassion is not a luxury that only the privileged have; compassion is a moral imperative that the human race cannot afford to live without. To dismiss it as a "luxury" is to dismiss humanity's only hope for survival. . I see this is where the confusion started...I'm talking about veganism, not animal cruelty...but at the risk of re-igniting the debate...cruelty is a learned behaviour...when people stop being cruel to one another, cruelty to animals will halt soon after...not saying its right, just saying the cycle needs to be stopped...agreed? Or, some would argue (myself included), that not until people stop being cruel to animals will they stop being cruel to each other. As one person put it, cruelty to animals is a fundamental human debacle, a debacle so fundamental that all others stem from it. Good night.

Yup, I would have to agree that this thread turned into a bit of a train wreck. Sorry PC! it would be so much easier to talk about these issues, live, in person.

Justice needs his walk. I am not ignoring you. I'll be back!

Acknowledged, with the qualification that refraining from deliberate cruelty to animals isnt existential food for thought like "why are we here"? Not in this day and age. Maybe it was back in the days of Plato and Socrates. But in the 21 st century, you do not need to devote time to leisurely pontificate the moral repugance of poisoning an innocent puppy because she annoys you. I am not making veganism an issue, period, in this thread. The discussion began when I asked PC about stray dogs and cats in Mexico, and whether Mexicans generally treated them kindly or viewed them as vermon to be eliminated. The topic of the thread, for the umpteenth time, was initially about basic decency towards animals. It was never about veganism, the "diet" or the lifestyle. Yet you continue to pretend that it was. which is why I said I was done - because I am getting a headache. Editted to add: never mind this last part. You cross posted a response above while I was editting this in which you acknowledge that I was not talking about veganism here with PC.

I dont have a leg to stand on. LOL! I thought you were playing a bit of the devil's advocate here but now I realize that you seriously dont get what I am saying, and refuse to acknowledge what you wrote, and meant, earlier. If you misspoke, just say so, it happens. I am done here because what you are saying is inconsistent and incoherent. Do you not see the problem, the contradiction, in the two highlighted phrases above? 'I never said that some people have no choice but to not be compassionate to animals. I said we are lucky to have that choice when most do not have the choice [to be compassionate to animals].' Is this not what you just said above? It is paradoxical and non-sensical! And forget about the vegan lifestyle for purposes of this thread. You know damn well I wasnt talking about the vegan lifestyle originally in this thread - I was talking merely about basic decency to animals (to stray Mexican dogs and cats, to be exact). Are you serious? Uh, no, veganism was not a choice we were able to make because we "put it at the top of our priority list". That is just assinine, dude. And again, you keep making it as 'grand' as the "vegan lifestyle" (even though the topic was about general decency to animals), because you won't have a leg to stand otherwise. As Daywalker would say, "uff"

You said: In other words, you are saying that perhaps the majority of the world has no choice but to be uncompassionate/unkind to animals. I say, **bull shit**. And I am done here, because we are just going around in circles.

Okay, so what are you recognizing? That some countries do not think about animal welfare? Agreed. Some countries dont think about animal welfare. But what is your point? If you claim that they dont think about animal welfare because it is a luxury they cant afford, [and that is what you said earlier], then that sounds to me like a justification of it, not "only" a recognition of it. And that is where you and I differ. Treating animals kindly is something that people shouldnt be given a free pass on. I have already stated that in some instances, compassionate treatment cannot always = veganism, but compassionate treatment should never be "waived" just becaused full blown veganism is not possible under the circumstances. You keep bringing this back to veganism when I am talking about the decent treatment of animals. The original question that spurred this debate is whether people in Mexico were generally kind to the strays, or whether they viewed them as vermon to be eliminated. So we werent originally talking about veganism - we were talking about needlessly being cruel to animals. There is **never** any reason or justification to be gratuitously cruel. My dad wasnt and isnt vegan because he believes that animals are put on earth for us to eat. Whether he is dirt poor or filthy rich, that is what his paradigm is and that has nothing to do with how much money he has or doesnt have. So, no, "while he was struggling with his cardboard shoes," as you so sensitively put it, he didnt insist anybody be vegan. But he didnt use his poverty as an excuse to be intentionally or gratuitously cruel to "non food" animals (while struggling with his cardboard shoes, in other words, he was as compassionate as any omni could be). I can assure you he didnt kick the stray dogs in Turkey or set any kittens on fire because he was too pre-occupied with more important matters of survival to take the time or thought to refrain from being cruel to animals. Just because an individual has more important concerns of self-preservation and survival on their plate, that doesnt mean that that individual should get a free pass on animal kindness, or that he should be excused for **thoughtlessly** subjecting animals to gratuitous suffering. I really dont understand why this point needs to be debated or defended. It seems pretty self-evident to me. Well, to me your earlier posts in this thread sounded like you were doing more than just probing it, it sounds like you were trying to rationalize/justify it, under certain circumstances. I know you are vegan, and that this is a vegan forum, but just because somebody is vegan, that doesnt mean that they think other people should be too, or just because somebody is kind to animals, that doesnt mean that they believe that other people should be too. Some of the strictest vegans I know are moral relativists.

Your right it isnt complex and I really dont understand what the disagreement is here. The point is that if they eat an ostrich egg or a fish, but is ISNT "all they could find," then they have the "luxury" of making the kind choice to forego the ostrich egg or fish. And so they should. The stats show that there is a positive correlation between increased wealth and increased meat consumption. In other words, people in poorer countries eat meat only as they grow richer or less poor. So as somebody mentioned, it seems that veg*ism is something that is totally within the reach of many of the world's poor (which you suggest dont have the "luxury" to be compassionate). In fact, they have little other choice. And they do have the choice to refrain from setting a puppy on fire, so again, there is no excuse. This whole discussion reminds me of the defence of poor poor migrant workers that "have no choice" but to work in slaugherhouses to feed their families. That compassion is a "luxury" they just dont have. Or the poor sealers who have no other choice than to butcher baby seals to death to feed their famlies, which the other privileged Canadians dont understand. My father immigrated to Canada from Turkey before I was born. His father died when he was 8, and being the eldest son in a **dirt** poor family, he had to drop out of public school at age 8 and start working to feed the family. ***He had to make his own shoes from cardboard boxes he found in the streets.*** Back then, there existed to a much lesser extent organizations like World Vision, etc. that try to alleviate some of the poverty, and you didnt have concerts like Live 8 back then either. Nor did you have ghastly organizations like Heifer International. And on top of the hardships that came from being WAY below the poverty line, they were Armenians living in Turkey so their lives were in danger every minute of every day. When he moved to Canada, he spoke not a word of English and came with $2 dollars in his pocket. He had two kids. He managed. The whole time, back in Turkey and in Canada, my dad somehow managed to find the "luxury" of not working in a slaughterhouse to feed his family. I know what poverty is. I come from poverty. I ** DO NOT** subscribe to the argument that poverty precludes decent treatment of animals. I will restate what I said before, compassion is NOT a luxury. That is not the same thing as saying that everybody in all circumstances and at all times and in all places can always be vegan. But just because somebody cant be vegan, it doesnt mean they get a free pass with respect to decent and kind treatment of animals. And it makes me ***cringe*** when I see or hear people trying to carve out exceptions to circumscribe this human moral imperative, or to "put it into context." No context inevitably needs to be devoid of compassion for animlas. Regarding your argument "many animal torturers had a rough emotional life, etc etc so there may be extenuating circumstances. Where is your compassion, compassionategirl?", again, there are **plenty** of people that have been through emotional hell and back, but they dont get drunk and set puppies on fire. My compassion has its limits, and where it stops, misanthropy begins.

Vegan Potter: re the Earth Island vegan cheese. Earth Island is the same company that makes Veganaise.

I cant recall - this was a while back when I was a new vegan, and annoyed as hell at the whole soy cheese with casein thing. Like MV, I never thought that soy cheese would STILL have dairy in it. WTF? Speaking of vegan cheese, the only kind that is even remotely palatable to me is the Earth Island Monteray jack flavour. So, if anybody once to give it a try, it may be enough to curb those damn hankerings.

Gaawd does that argument get old. All I am going to do here is to state what should be beyond question: like LL said, nobody, **nobody** needs to be intentionally cruel. In that regard, you are wrong - compassion is not a luxury that only the privileged have; compassion is a moral imperative that the human race cannot afford to live without. To dismiss it as a "luxury" is to dismiss humanity's only hope for survival. **Everybody** should strive to be as compassionate as they can under their particular circumstances. To some, like veganpotter suggested, that may not be veganism, but everybody should be as kind as possible under their circumstances nevertheless. It is no coincidence that almost every spiritual, religious, etc etc path, journey, teaching, etc always comes back to compassion. Having said that, I just cant muster up even just an ioda of compassion for sadist f**ks that torture animals for fun, and even less sadist animal abusers. Nobody in this thread said they were surprised by the atrocities committed by humans against animals. I said I was not desensitized to it. Being surprised and sensitized/devastated are two different things.

' Dont even get me started on that one. I once inquired to one of these companies why they would even put casein in SOY cheese, and they said it is because they dont cater to vegans - they are catering to people with a lactose intolerance.