you're delusional if you don't see the difference between sucking a cow's teat and killing it to eat its flesh. If you wanted to make the argument based on what happens to an animal after its milk/egg producing years are finished then I could see your point, but until then...
Yes, you're right. They come from animals (meat). However, most vegetarians eat dairy, and many still eat eggs. This is where the vegetarian variants come into play (lacto, ovo, lacto-ovo). Vegans, on the other hand, are those people who practice a diet of not eating ANYTHING derived from animals (including egg and dairy). There is a difference. Vegan =/= vegetarian
You are both ignoring my extremely obvious and accurate point that they may call themselves vegetarians, but it's a complete misuse of the word. No more accurate than me calling myself a wheelbarrow. Vegetarian implies they only eat vegetables. Not meat, not dairy, not fruit, not nuts, not grains... They are simply people who exclude meat, or some meat products, from their diet. The fancifully innaccurate tag "vegetarian" only illustrates the lack of conscious thought which has preceded their decision. And it's not founded in a nutritionally educated sense, as dairy products are far less healthy for you than meat is. And eggs are chicken embryos, and therefore, meat.
Fuck all you guys, I'm going to go get a chicken embryo quesadilla! And wash it down with a baby cow fetus milkshake!
I'm not arguing that they refer to themselves as vegetarians. I'm saying it's drastically inaccurate and it makes them seem foolish and slow thinkers to me. And I'm pretty sure that nuts, berries, grains and fruits aren't happy about failing to even get mentioned!
This thread resembles a bady made chef's salad. A little of everything thrown together badly. My little bit of everything thoughts: Thought #1: It is not that rare for a female animal, especially one who has just birthed/hatched her own offspring, to nurture an infant of another species. But as a biologist I am not aware of any animals who have cross-species sex on their own initiative. The crosses of closely related species like horse/donkey, horse/zebra, lion/tiger are initiated by humans. A domestic cat may allow a domestic dog in the same household to hump him/her, but they do not have actual intercourse, and the lives of companion animals in human homes are hardly a state of nature. OTOH, homosexual, bisexual and transgender individuals exist in varying percentages in every known animal species, including our closest primate relatives, and exist in every known human society. And yes, if something exists in nature it is natural, by definition. Thought #2: There is no biological reason why humans and chimps could not mate and produce viable, although probably infertile offspring. But as my college genetics professor memorably said, humans and chimps don't turn each other on. Thought #3: Every indication of the physical, emotional and social well being of children has shown that children raised by same sex couples do as well as those raised by comparable (same economic, educational, etc. level) opposite sex couples. There are some differences. Children raised by same sex couples are less likely to embrace rigid sex roles, having grown up seeing their dads mop floors or their moms change the oil. They are, not surprisingly, less likely to be homophobic. And while they are no more likely to be gay than children of opposite sex couples, those who are gay are more comfortable with their sexual orientation. If you think homophobia and rigid sex roles are good, then that is bad news. If you think acceptance and dividing tasks by talent rather than gender are good, then that is good news. Thought #4: Most gays were raised by straights. Ellen DeGeneris pointed out she had straight parents, straight aunts and uncles, straight friends, straight teachers, straight classmates, watched straights on TV, and is gay. Thought #5: Saying vegetables are more or less nutritious than meat is meaningless since vegetables vary so much. But the Anglo-American diet based on meat as the centerpiece 3 meals a day every day is not healthy for people or the environment. The advice in Omnivore's Dilemma is sound. Eat what you like, eat a variety, mostly plants, in moderation. Thought #6: Moderation goes out the window on Thanksgiving. Unfortunately, my guests are dropping like flies; 3 previously committed guests have said they can't come after all and I don't know if there will be enough people to eat the food. If the Blazers were in town next week instead of this week I'd invite Mike & Mike. Cashews, homemade salsa and chips, vegetable skewers Salad of winter greens with apples, dried cherries and baked goat cheese Herb brined turkey, sage and thyme dressing, pan gravy Roasted herbed potatoes, candied sweet potato casserole, sauteed green beans with pecans and orange essence, orange cranberry sauce, skillet conbread Apple cranberrry pie with homemade vanilla ice cream, sugar and spice pumpkin pie with brandied whipped cream Wine and sparkling cider Alka-seltzer
All this is true. Though you do get _some_ benefit from vitamin and mineral supplements, just not as much or the same as from food. The appeal of a vegetarian diet is the lack of cholesterol (which is only made by animals), the high nutritional content of vegetables (and the body's ability to absorb it properly), the lower calorie content, the fiber content, and I suppose that veggies don't have a face. The negatives to a vegetarian diet are the difficulty in ingesting enough protein, and that meat is a good source of minerals like iron. One one hand, meat contains a lot of the same things our bodies contain since we're meat, too. On the other, it seems odd to drink cow milk that is meant for cow offspring. Overdoing it with meat (Atkins diet) or vegetables sure seems like a bad idea to me. Some combination of a moderate amount of meat with a good helping of veggies seems right. At least the USDA thinks so.
The argument that the "american" 3 meals a day including meat diet is bad for the environment is patently UNTRUE! The environmental problems are caused by over-population.
The two are not mutually exclusive. A small population of meat eaters is sustainable. 8 billion is not.
So you are just trying to argue for the literal meaning when you break down the word...not the ACTUAL definition?
If by "pwned," you mean "shown to be correct," yes I was. Protein isn't a problem for vegetarians. You can get protein from a lot of sources: nuts, various dairy, soy and grains like wheat and rice. Iron is present in green leafy vegetables, lentils, various beans, various grains and other sources. It's not that hard to design a perfectly healthy vegetarian diet. But, like a low-fat or low-calorie diet, it's hard for many people to actually eat since our tastes have evolved to desire high fat and high calorie foods (meat being rather central) due to the survival importance of calories and fat back when it was difficult for humans to get either.
