• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Flight Shaming....I Like It !!

Audie

Veteran Member
There are plenty of other sources of protein. Try to keep in mind that a gorilla (a fairly close relative, who it larger and stronger than we are, hands down) is mostly vegetarian - with some species dabbling in termites and ants.

Sources of protein that are often glossed over when people think "vegetation only": seeds/nuts, beans - and as a vegetarian (rather than vegan), any dairy also contains loads of protein. Other nutrients thought of as "fish-centric" - like omega 3 fatty acids - are also present in nuts in no small amount and even tofu (a lesser amount).

I'm vegetarian - nearly vegan (and was strictly vegan for six years), but do sometimes consume cheese when it is included in some dish or appetizer, etc. There is simply no need to consume meat of any kind with modern knowledge of nutrients and nutrient sources. There are loads of detriments to health and environment to consider, and if we stopped growing/gathering food in order to feed all the farmed animals we raise to eat, we could feed the world of humans easily, and likely much more cheaply.

So your objection to eating fish is primarily
an ethical consideration rat her than something
objective.

Air enough as long as not applied to others.

I consider myself vegetarian btw, but do eat
some fish / shellfish.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
So your objection to eating fish is primarily
an ethical consideration rat her than something
objective.

Air enough as long as not applied to others.

I consider myself vegetarian btw, but do eat
some fish / shellfish.
Obviously humans can eat fish. That is, they are able to digest it, absorb nutrients from it etc. So there is no way a statement of "humans should not eat fish" comes without qualification. And those qualifications being that buying fish under the current (and likely future) paradigm contributes to environmental deterioration and the hoarding of food sources to feed marine livestock and make that dollar.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
"Brown people start nuclear war?"
Jews, Koreans, Pakistanis, Indians, Iranians, ....

I'd like to see the USA start denuclearizing the planet. France seems like the obvious place to start. What do the cheese eating surrender monkeys need nukes to protect?
How about slapping sanctions on the French?

Then they could better afford their share of NATO expenses.
Tom
 

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
How does it help the environment if everyone stopped eating fish?
Nobody kept a few chickens and ate eggs?
Because wild-caught fish are few and far between nowadays, relatively speaking. Large sections of seafloor that used to be teaming with life are now void of all but drifting muck and rare sardine-sized critters. You want seaweed, kelp, and plankton....go for it.
Much or most of our “ocean” harvests now come from ‘farms’, which are basically unflushed giant toilets with our food fish swimming around in the murk.....being poured truckloads of nasty slaughterhouse trash and barrels of antibiotics to keep them alive long enough for harvesting. Antibiotic resistant bacteria anyone?
global_trends_in_the_state_of_the_worlds_marine_fish_stocks.png




There’s also the fact that we, as top of the line consumers/predators also get all of the condensed lead, mercury, and other yummy pollutants that tuna et al suffer from.

Keep a couple of chickens and eat eggs? Sure, that’s much more viable than the vast majority which are factory produced. But each egg is still just a little cholesterol grenade. :eek:
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Because wild-caught fish are few and far between nowadays, relatively speaking. Large sections of seafloor that used to be teaming with life are now void of all but drifting muck and rare sardine-sized critters. You want seaweed, kelp, and plankton....go for it.
Much or most of our “ocean” harvests now come from ‘farms’, which are basically unflushed giant toilets with our food fish swimming around in the murk.....being poured truckloads of nasty slaughterhouse trash and barrels of antibiotics to keep them alive long enough for harvesting. Antibiotic resistant bacteria anyone?
global_trends_in_the_state_of_the_worlds_marine_fish_stocks.png




There’s also the fact that we, as top of the line consumers/predators also get all of the condensed lead, mercury, and other yummy pollutants that tuna et al suffer from.

Keep a couple of chickens and eat eggs? Sure, that’s much more viable than the vast majority which are factory produced. But each egg is still just a little cholesterol grenade. :eek:

I will assume that is for the lurkarians rather than for me.
Note my earlier comments about fisheries.

I am well aware that there are problems with
fisheries.
I trust you are aware that the subject is far more complex
and varied than your assessment.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson

I will second, third and even fourth that EEEEEEEWWWWW


I was told once, by a woman from Guangzhou that Cantonese eat anything with legs, except tables and chairs, but that video was just plain vile
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I will second, third and even fourth that EEEEEEEWWWWW


I was told once, by a woman from Guangzhou that Cantonese eat anything with legs, except tables and chairs, but that video was just plain vile
Ya know...rearrange a few letters, & "flight shaming" becomes "shight flaming" or "flaming shight".
Also ew.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Because wild-caught fish are few and far between nowadays, relatively speaking. Large sections of seafloor that used to be teaming with life are now void of all but drifting muck and rare sardine-sized critters. You want seaweed, kelp, and plankton....go for it.
Much or most of our “ocean” harvests now come from ‘farms’, which are basically unflushed giant toilets with our food fish swimming around in the murk.....being poured truckloads of nasty slaughterhouse trash and barrels of antibiotics to keep them alive long enough for harvesting. Antibiotic resistant bacteria anyone?
global_trends_in_the_state_of_the_worlds_marine_fish_stocks.png




There’s also the fact that we, as top of the line consumers/predators also get all of the condensed lead, mercury, and other yummy pollutants that tuna et al suffer from.

Keep a couple of chickens and eat eggs? Sure, that’s much more viable than the vast majority which are factory produced. But each egg is still just a little cholesterol grenade. :eek:
Do you eat the chicken afterward? If we're taking about pure numbers (and we are not, since most people do not have the space for a backyard henhouse. Or even a back yard). The most efficient thing to do is breed out new generation (with a bought or traded rooster) every two years to replace the hens after after fertility age then eat the hens.
Or, even better, keep a rabbit hutch and eat the babies. Which is a smaller, quieter, and more ecological option. Their carbon footprint being even smaller than chickens.
And MUCH smaller than dairy cows.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I will second, third and even fourth that EEEEEEEWWWWW


I was told once, by a woman from Guangzhou that Cantonese eat anything with legs, except tables and chairs, but that video was just plain vile

The "everything with legs" thing is a saying.
I prefer "be kind to animals by not eating them"

You did not like the video? Sorry ah.
I thought it was funny.
 
Last edited:

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
I would take the train if Amtrak didn't have a monopoly on American rail travel, and if they didn't treat their customers like garbage.

Miss my freight hopping days.
 
Top