Welcome to Gaia! ::

Telith's avatar

Sparkly Shapeshifter

Baby Blue Bomber
ChemicaI Warfare
Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
I Shall Grant You NoMercy

What?
Is somebody butthurt?
emotion_awesome

I feel like it is a facetious statement is all. No one takes Ms.Ridiculous seriously for sure. But I have been taking most of the other vegans here seriously, Especially the OP
If you took their arguments seriously, you'd be a vegan.


False.
I can think of maybe 3 or 4 situations where saying 'False' doesn't make you look like a pretentious c**t.

You must not program much, or never take the True/False sections on tests...Or gone through Logic in math yet.
Telith's avatar

Sparkly Shapeshifter

Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
If you took their arguments seriously, you'd be a vegan.

Or a logical person who appreciates logic? "You're using that word[vegan] an awful lot, I do not think it means, what you think it means." ninja
It means exactly what I think it means. I was referring to vegans in my original post (the one you quoted). Maybe vegan doesn't mean what you think it means? lol


Quote:
I don't care about vegans at all.
Okay...
Quote:
They can be preachy, if it makes them feel special.
Great
Quote:
I don't give a ********.
Shiny
Quote:
It's not like anybody's taking them seriously.
You do not specify what topic we're taking them seriously on. Nothing is implied. So I must assume generally on any or all topics. I am somebody, I take Vegans seriously, on many topics, which makes this statement false.

Where does that make me a vegan? You don't seem to be following a standard strain of logic commonly found in arguments or debate.
Point out one single instance where I even suggested that you're a vegan.
If you took they're arguments for veganism seriously (which, if you followed a standard strain of logic commonly found in arguments or debates, you'd know are the arguments I was referring to), you would've converted to veganism.

Baby Blue Bomber
If you took their arguments seriously, you'd be a vegan.

You never implied any arguments is the point, you just said vegans in your original post, you never once mentioned their arguments for veganism, there is no reference to induce this logical conclusion that we are going to be talking about this. So anyone who follows a vegan diet or life style, not their arguments for being so. Which logically in debate means we can talk about ANYTHING and the resulting arguments. Agreeing with ANY of the resulting arguments does not imply I am a follower of the vegan diet or lifestyle. It simply means I agree. And in this thread, we're debating about preachy vegans, which many vegans have made excellent points about, so I take them seriously because they made a humorous or logical (Sometimes both) point on the topic. Still does not make me a vegan.
Telith's avatar

Sparkly Shapeshifter

Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
It means exactly what I think it means. I was referring to vegans in my original post (the one you quoted). Maybe vegan doesn't mean what you think it means? lol


Quote:
I don't care about vegans at all.
Okay...
Quote:
They can be preachy, if it makes them feel special.
Great
Quote:
I don't give a ********.
Shiny
Quote:
It's not like anybody's taking them seriously.
You do not specify what topic we're taking them seriously on. Nothing is implied. So I must assume generally on any or all topics. I am somebody, I take Vegans seriously, on many topics, which makes this statement false.

Where does that make me a vegan? You don't seem to be following a standard strain of logic commonly found in arguments or debate.
Point out one single instance where I even suggested that you're a vegan.
If you took they're arguments for veganism seriously (which, if you followed a standard strain of logic commonly found in arguments or debates, you'd know are the arguments I was referring to), you would've converted to veganism.

Baby Blue Bomber
If you took their arguments seriously, you'd be a vegan.

You never implied any arguments is the point, you just said vegans in your original post, you never once mentioned their arguments for veganism, there is no reference to induce this logical conclusion that we are going to be talking about this. So anyone who follows a vegan diet or life style, not their arguments for being so. Which logically in debate means we can talk about ANYTHING and the resulting arguments. Agreeing with ANY of the resulting arguments does not imply I am a follower of the vegan diet or lifestyle. It simply means I agree. And in this thread, we're debating about preachy vegans, which many vegans have made excellent points about, so I take them seriously because they made a humorous or logical (Sometimes both) point on the topic. Still does not make me a vegan.
Cool, too bad I wasn't talking about preachy vegans.
And I didn't say agree, I said take seriously.

And that is why we have had this long discussion.

I've never been in a situation where I have agreed with a person or idea that I did not take seriously, that's why I connect them. I'm sorry if that has confused you.
Telith's avatar

Sparkly Shapeshifter

Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
Telith
Baby Blue Bomber
Point out one single instance where I even suggested that you're a vegan.
If you took they're arguments for veganism seriously (which, if you followed a standard strain of logic commonly found in arguments or debates, you'd know are the arguments I was referring to), you would've converted to veganism.

Baby Blue Bomber
If you took their arguments seriously, you'd be a vegan.

You never implied any arguments is the point, you just said vegans in your original post, you never once mentioned their arguments for veganism, there is no reference to induce this logical conclusion that we are going to be talking about this. So anyone who follows a vegan diet or life style, not their arguments for being so. Which logically in debate means we can talk about ANYTHING and the resulting arguments. Agreeing with ANY of the resulting arguments does not imply I am a follower of the vegan diet or lifestyle. It simply means I agree. And in this thread, we're debating about preachy vegans, which many vegans have made excellent points about, so I take them seriously because they made a humorous or logical (Sometimes both) point on the topic. Still does not make me a vegan.
Cool, too bad I wasn't talking about preachy vegans.
And I didn't say agree, I said take seriously.

And that is why we have had this long discussion.

I've never been in a situation where I have agreed with a person or idea that I did not take seriously, that's why I connect them. I'm sorry if that has confused you.
But if you did take their arguments seriously, you'd see their point of view and convert to veganism.

Except, that I know vegans that exist simply because it benefits their health, hence people that follow the Vegan diet. And I know vegans that follow the lifestyle, but I believe they follow it because of twisted reasons and do not take them seriously in any capacity (Ms.Ridiculous is one of them, these are mostly people that are looking to rebel, instead of actually helping in my opinion), I know people who are vegan as a test of willpower, and more often then not they fail after a few months, like a smoker trying to quit...I take many Vegan arguments seriously, but it doesn't change my path. I accept that factory farming is destroying our ecological diversity, our humanity, threatening our food safety, and contributing to global warming. That doesn't change that my meat free diet is based on religious practices, or that I consume little dairy based on health reasons. You can physically admit that an idea is valid/sound and not add it on to your life, because you believe that it will not work with your current path. This is probably why preachy vegans piss me off so much. Like the baptists on campus that show up with pamphlets condemning everyone to hell. What makes one 'truth' more important than another?

I'm honestly sincerely not trying to troll you, I swear, but I live so firmly in the grey area because of my Buddhism that I can't stand general statements. “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”-Siddhartha Guantama (Buddha)
I'm sorry that this has developed in an antagonistic fashion.
sweatdrop I need to work on that a bit.

I'm not a Vegan. I don't consume any products that result in the death of an animal, but that means I'm still just a vegetarian who has to excuse herself if they need glue in her theatre. I sided with the Tibetans. Anything that actively tries to preserve it's life is worthy of being allowed to live it's life. Mosquitoes are honestly the worst thing EVER because of this.

I still admit that Vegan's have a point. And it's valid. I just can't avoid all animal products ever. I do my best to prevent death and inhumane instances...but wood glue has saved many a life, and I can't put my actors and theatre in danger because bone jelly is evil. Morals are tricky things...I consider animal life equal and destroying it is evil. That doesn't mean I'm 'right' but it also doesn't mean anyone else is necessarily 'wrong'. Grey area. It's great and infuriating at the same time.

( I feel like this is unnecessarily long, and I apologize again. I couldn't figure out how to shorten it right now.)
I'm a vegetarian, and I could care less about what others eat. It's my personal choice and I'm not going to try and preach it to someone else like a bible pusher. smile
Sai X Kaitou
Thisistotallyridiculous

I'm pretty sensitive about factory farming.

I'm not a speciesist, and I find people who are to be insensitive assholes.


Tell that to the millions of Jews or the families of survivors that inhabit this planet and see what happens.
Everyone is a speciesist to some extent. If I were to choose between saving an ant and a man who has family and friends, it's a no brainer that I'd save the human.
Never seen an ant commit suicide or cut themselves after losing a few of it's members.
And be glad that we're one of few species that actually even manages to care about what happens to other species.
If I saw a starving cat, I'd share my meal with it. However, if I were starving and left for dead, what are the odds that the cat would share it's food with me or even give a s**t about how I'm doing?
You owned everyone in this thread and didn't even get any recognition for it. This guy is absolutely correct. Anyone who says that they'd save an animal over a human is a liar or just an a*****e. That animal is not going to give a single ******** about you or the fact that you saved it. Most animals don't have the ability to feel any kind of emotion and the ones that can, we don't eat.

Tell me this, why should I care about animals that were bred for the sole purpose of being consumed? They wouldn't even be in existence if we weren't going to eat them. Are we supposed to breed them, gain some kind of emotional attachment to them, wait for them to die, have a funeral, and then eat them?

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games