Preserved Topic: Hippocrisy Anyone? (Page 1 of 1)

How is it that I deserve to hear the opinion of a person, or the views of a person that is didnt ask for and didnt want? I respect a vegan's right not to eat meat or any animal products but why should i have to agree. It really is hippocritical of a vegan, or anyone for that matter, to force their beliefs on me when they themselves want respect from the masses.

And another thing, if the constitution prohibits the integration of Church and state, then why dont we remove god from money and the swearing in of officials or people who testify. I dont see why these people who want god in governement, hate other religious views and protest any hint of non christian ideas or acts in government.

I personally are in the inenviable position of being for government, but not for the current one or its leaders.

I love being politically incorrect.


Cell 650

Don't like Vegans myself...not that they are hypocrites but assholes too, they fail to relize that millions of animals are killed during their crop harvest as well...so dear vegan you are not limiting nothing, simply creating more animal suffer

as about god on money, I think it would be good idea to remove it, since this country is free to all religions....many faithes are possibly feeling minor because of large influence of christian "god" on money and government.

Riski:

quote:

---

Don't like Vegans myself...not that they are hypocrites but assholes too

---

I also hear they are prone to wild generalisations.

Patrick:

quote:

---

I respect a vegan's right not to eat meat or any animal products but why should i have to agree

---

You might have to give us some more background on this - how did they make you agree?

I have known a number of vegans who have been happy to debate the whole subject but I've never been forced to agree with them (like they could!!). I actually admire their stance on these things far more than people who go on about being a vegetarian but eat fish (and in some cases the occasional bacon butty - which must be the meat equivalent of crack).

Anyway as a Fruitarian I can feel smug

[edit: I spotted a typo above but it has so amused me I'm leaving it in Please ignore this edit]

[edit2: I spelt typo wrong so definetly ignore this edit]

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

quote:

---

(and in some cases the occasional bacon butty - which must be the meat equivalent of crack).

---

...wettimg myself right now...

Note for the unawares: A bacon butty is an English invention...basically a bacon sandwich, but done well it is a wonder in fatty, salty meat and bread.

From my own experiences with Vegan's (They sound like aliens), it's the fact that they discuss their views and get upset when you don't agree. They expect you to agree. They think you should agree and take it personally when you don't. It isn't that they are forcing you to agree, its just that they don't politely disagree with your views, they'd rather take offense to your views even though they brought it up. It is almost like they're looking for a reason to have issues with you.

As far as being vegan, well...I have several friends who are vegan, and I think it would be wonderful if everyone in the world was vegan, ( looks around to see if anyone notices as I chomp down a big serving of Kung-Pow Chicken).

As far as the money thing, I don't think anywhere on the US Dollar does it mention Christian's. It does say something about God, but as far as I know Christians and Muslims and everyone else worships the same God, they just have different beliefs about minor things. And I think the whole seperation of church and state is refering to a seperation of laws and religious beliefs. Or rather, not integrating religious beliefs with laws, it does not mean that we can't have mentions of God on our money.


.quotes.

Anybody who feels strongly about their beliefs or way of life is bound to try and convince you (collective) that they way they think is the "right" way. Vegans are no different from any other extremist idealistic group of people. I expect, if you don't want to hear what they have to say, a simple "I don't want to talk to you about this" would probably work. If not, walk away. No one can convince you to believe anything but you.

As for the "In God We Trust" issue, the US was founded on freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. On top of that, the country was founded by Protestants, as a reaction to the Catholic monarchy of England at the time. So of course all the documents from the period reference Christian ideals instead of some other religion. I guess if our founding fathers had been Hindu, our money might say "In Shiva We Trust"...

I swear, some of the debates that come up around here about this particular issue just amaze me. Makes me wonder how many people actually paid attention in US History in school. There've been a number of recent upsets about the Pledge of Allegiance, having "In God We Trust" on the outside of a building or on the Federal notes and all of that... But when you really think about the history of our government, it all makes sense. People just need something to bitch about I guess. There's so much more in the world to worry about than the US Government's mottos, which have been in place for several centuries now... None of this crap has anything to do with the real separation of Church & State, which really only dictates that the Government can't tell you what religion you should practice.


Cell 617

quote:

---

Note for the unawares: A bacon butty is an English invention...basically a bacon sandwich, but done well it is a wonder in fatty, salty meat and bread.

---

Yep - methods vary from thin and crispy bacon to the liberal applciation of HP/Brown sauce but you really can't beat the kind of bacon butty that you get a roadside cafes that largely cater to lorry drivers - extra thick bacon nicely (but not over) cooked on thick white bread with lots of butter which melts and gets soaked into the bread.

Virtually every vegitarian I know has fallen off the wagon and it has usually been a bacon butty that does it

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

Just because it was founded by Protestants does not mean that they were just thinking of the Christian God
when they came up with that slogan. I think it implied all people idea of who God is, since the whole idea was
freedom of religion.

Well, certainly - for all religions. But most of those men were deeply devout in their own faith and the majority of them were Protestant Christians. Of course some of that is going to filter through to their work.

Again, the intent of separation of Church & State is that the government can't tell you what you must or mustn't believe in - not that you must or mustn't believe.

I don't see anything wrong with the US motto - I don't profess to be Xian, nor do I consider myself deeply religious. I have my own beliefs. But it's nice to know that the government wants to exhibit faith in something greater than it. It acknowledges the fact that they know there is something greater.

From the title of the thread "Hippocrisy Anyone" I would just like to say that I am totally against the eating of ancient Greek Physicians!

On that note, my first thought when I saw the thread title was "Spelling Anyone?"

I still have no idea what this thread is about. If you're going to rant, at least provide some background information so the rest of us know what you're talking about.


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

Two points:

1) I was actually a vegan myself for about 4 years.

My expereince showed me very strongly that the majority of the time, it is the meat eaters that start things - people jsut can't seem to pass up the opportunity to rub in someone's face that they're eating meat: "ooooh. look at this big juicy steak, doesn't it look delicious?!" and so on....and the constant wanting to argue about it.

And then they get all pissed off when you go ahead and argue back, as if you're suddenly pushing your belief on them.

Keep that in mind next time you're around a vegan who think is pushing their ideas on you....and make sure you're not the one at fault.

2) The people who founded the United States (the nation - as opposed to the colonies...) were actually primarily Deists, who acknowledge "god" but not the christian dogma (or even the bible in many cases) associated with the concept of god - they promoted the idea of a private and personal relationship with god.

The country has always been full of protestants of course, but many of the things associated with the founding of the nation are not anywhere near as 'christian' as many people like to think.

As has been mentioned though, "god" does not imply or support any particular religion - it is very vague and open, and can encompass almost any actual religion, as almost any actual religion relies on some sort of god or gods.

The only thing it doesn't account for is atheism, which of course is not a religion or a particular belief set....but simply the lack of belief that there is a god or gods.


I would like to see "god" taken off the money, and out of the pledge, but...it really doesn't matter much.

The worse part of the issue is that everyone (ok, most people) automatically interpret that as "christianity". That pervasive ignorance is a much greater problem than whether or not there are generic references to "god" on our currency....

[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 11-27-2003).]

Here I am expecting this thread to be about horses with double standards...
gee... I wish Veganpoet could get back here and clear things out for me

Oh well; I don't care what you eat or not eat as long as you return the favour. Cheers!

[This message has been edited by Nimraw (edited 11-27-2003).]

Well I thought this thread was about a hippopotamus named Christine so what do I know?

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

Well, while we're on the subject (which is apparently "vegans pushing their beliefs on others"), I have to say that I have never had a vegan (or vegetarian) try to push their beliefs on me. I had a girlfriend in university who was vegetarian, and we never had a problem. I ate meat, she didn't, and we never really talked about it that much. I respected her beliefs and she respected mine, and that was about all there was to it.

And the way I saw it, it was a lot easier for me to compromise--I mean, how hard it is for me to not eat meat? So when we had dinner together, we ate vegetarian. I never thought of it as her "pushing her beliefs" on me. It just made sense. Then again, I guess it's different when you actually care about someone.


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

Well let me state for the record, and this is not mean as a insult, but i have always seen it spellt that way. It might just be around here where I live. Hey atleast it gets attention from the people who wouldnt put their two cents in normally but now do.

I understand that this country was founded by protestants, but think about it, why should religion influence a country's laws and government. Look at your islamic states, or any other country with a dominate religous force in it, like say Mexico, The religion of the people influences and usually controls all the politics of the country, and how have they done on the world scale, compared to more secular states. The problem with that style of government is their extremist idealistic conservatism.

Far Right and Left governments are not the answer but neither is a completly centrist one. What a country needs is a government willing to adapt to changes in society by changing what doesnt work and keeping what is. The US government is too bloated at the moment and could be reorganized to better help its constituency, the people of the US.

I love this board for the main fact i can express my political views and not get hoarded by a bunch of mindless drones who actually believe what the government tells them and will stick behind a sluggish ineffective governing system that is too resistant to change.

I know some of you may think I am ignorant and that I am mistaken in my views of the government and that i should be forced to "conform" to the idea that Bush really is doing a great job and that is administration is working to help us. But if you really look at the entire administration and the background of the leaders you would probably find some things that despise. Instead you agree with the Government and think it is right to use the threat of what you could say is a form of excommunication.

That's another thing I really dislike about the state of affairs the past few years, Jingoism and Extreme Patriotism. My beliefs by our president standards would make me an "enemy of the state", since i dont agree with what the adminstration policies are. Have any of you heard a song by the "new" Lynard Skynard called "Red, White, And Blue"? Fuck, i would rather have a hot coal shoved up my ass that to hear it again, or Toby Keith their is another tool of the government propaganda machine.

Yes the Government Propaganda Machine, deny all you want but it exist and pumps out information to help corral the masses. The Govt Prop Machine is not the classic concept of "Big Brother is Watching You" it is simply the spewing of patriotic one liners and media that helps the government seduce the people into thinking it is fighting for justice and the American Way.

Dont get me wrong when i say i dont like our government and think i am a supporter of terrorism, because I'm not. I want to see something done about global terrorism but I feel it isnt being handled correctly or at least it is not being planned out and strategized. To fight global terrorism you need global help, the policy of Pre-emptive spontaneaous warfare makes the US look like a Moralistic Warmonger. If the US is going to fight terrorism, wouldnt it be nice to have the backing of the UN members. At least this way you can get the man power you need and the legal authority to wage war.

Since I'm on a rant, why not talk about Iraq? I'm sure the media is not telling the complete story and their are positive thing happening there, but the fact that soldiers are being murdered everyday really does say something about how prepared the US was for this. It really does seem optimistic to give sovereignty to the possible Iraqi interim Government not later than June 30. If some how the government is installed and does work, then Bush will lose a major campaign issue.

The situation between 92 and now isnt exactly the same. Iraq was repulsed from kuwait but that was in 91, the economy was in a recession, and there was only one democrat who really had a chance to beat Bush, C*****n. Yeah I know of Kerry but come on. Not almost twelve years after, Iraq is now under US control, if you can say it is under our control, the economy is in a slump and their are 9 democrats who think they have what it takes to oust Bush.

Yeah the economy is not in a recession for say, but really can you have a good economy when many people dont have jobs, people call it a jobless recovery,if you recover dont you bring things back to a state of normality? People getting laidoff isnt recovery.

Really if you look at the democrats, about five of them have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. Al Sharpton, Carol Mosley Braun, Dennis Kucinich, Wesley Clark, John Kerry, and Dick Gephardt. John Edwards and Howard Dean are the two who truly could oust Bush. Dean with is abilty to rouse up the crowd and Edwards who is the closest thing to JFK you will ever get. Kerry and Gephardt have ran before and they neither can connect with the youth voters. Dean is more likely to get thge vote of people 18-30 because of his personailty. Edwards is the youngest of them all, so that could give him the edge of being a outsider or sorts eventhough he is a US senator. Personally i think Dean has the most potential and popularity to win the election.

So now i leave this for ya'll to read and reply or point out mistakes with my statements. Please try to be as non biased as possible when telling me what's wrong. Im not trying to sound arrogant or cocky, just wanting the straight truth and not a fluffed version.


Cell 650

Sponsor a Vegan
Guiltless Grill


"I make and I sell soap."

[This message has been edited by cfb (edited 12-03-2003).]

And here I thought we were talking about vegans... I'm so confused.

And I don't know where you've seen "hypocrisy" spelled (or "spelt") "hippocrisy"--this is the first time I've seen this spelling. It is, in fact, incorrect. Yeah, I know descriptive linguistics has the upper hand on prescriptive linguistics these days, but you've got to draw the line somewhere.

Great. Now we're talking about spelling. I've got to remember to take my ADD medication.


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

Patrick: Did you post that in the right thread?

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

quote:

---

I love being politically incorrect.

---

Cool beans. It would also be cool if you could find a way to be more grammatically and orthographically correct

You don't have to accept what the vegans tell you. I have looked into veganism and I do not agree with its basic tenants. I am a lacto-vegetarian going on 5 years now, so I feel like I can speak to this a bit. When I first became a "veggie", I asked myself if I would bug others to become the same. I did it primarily for moral reasons and I usually try to convince others to do what I believe is right. I make a lot of jokes with those I come in contact with about eating meat. I refer to meat as "carnage" or "savagery" with my friends and always call the meat their eating by the name of the animal whose demise it represents to try to keep that imagery fresh in their minds. I guess I keep it light and am certainly not pushy about it at all.

When I first became a vegetarian, my wife thought that I expected her to do the same, which I didn't. But one day she kind of broke down and cried because she really wanted to get some barbecue but didn't tell me because she thought I would be upset. We got that all cleared up and I told her that this was a very personal decision and while I certainly thought she shouldn't eat meat, that I totally respected her path. This is a life change that cannot be forced on a person no more than I can force anyone to believe in Christ.

I also want to point out that I have problems with many vegans and especially groups like PETA. My main problem is their lack of priority and perspective. It seems to me that so many of these activists have tunnel vision when it comes to their causes. There are far more important things in this world than making sure no one mistreats animals. We have starving people in this world and wars and all sorts of human evil that are far more hideous and need much attention if they're ever going to be fixed. It is "better" not to eat meat but it is not the "only" thing that matters. I'm just saying to lose one's perspective on life is wrong too.

I will give one example of how PETA has simply lost its collective mind. A while ago, they had a campaign that equated the eating of chickens to the Holocaust. That position is simply obscene and vile. The murder of millions of human beings *far* outweighs any number of meals served at KFC.

I can hear it now "so you think killing animals is ok huh?". Nope. It would be better if we reserved the eating of animals for when it is required for human survival. The vast majority of us, I think I could say 100% of the members of this board, do not need to eat animals to survive. The only reason it continues, I suppose, is because they just taste so damn good

[edit]fixed an orthographical mistake... DOH!!! [/edit]

. . : slicePuzzle

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 12-03-2003).]

^^yup - what he said!

lacto/ova-vegetarian myself for about the same length of time. It was also a personal decision, and had little to do with the treatment of animals, but rather a personal distaste for handling meat and meat products. Eggs somehow don't hold the same level of distaste... I guess because they come so securely packaged... At any rate, I married an incurable omnivore. He respects my desire not to eat meat, and when we cook at home, we eat vegetarian. But if we go out, or we go to someone's house for dinner, he eats the meat, and I don't get upset about it.

Even if I wanted to be upset, I couldn't... because I have no right to tell him how he should live his life. I can only be satisfied that he respects me enough to adjust his diet when I'm in charge of the kitchen...

When i talk about pushy vegans i certainly dont mean all of them seeing as i havent met all of them. There is never a definite about anyone. However, i speak of the pushy vegans who seem to be o a self-righteous quest to stop all meat consumption. I dont mind listening to the ideas of a vegan but i dont want them to get mad a t me if i dont agree and become a vegan.

This premise isnt just a vegan thing. Most of your fundamentalist groups have the same problem. It's a unwillingness to agree with a different point of view. I have also noticed a alot of it at my school. I try to keep this in mind

"Everyone has an opinion, but every also has an asshole."

And yeah i should really check my spelling.


Cell 650

Patrick, remember that it's not about "agreeing with a different opinion" as much as it is "agreeing to disagree" and trying hard to keep the lines of communication open between the two parties. But I very much understand there are those out there who refuse to even consider opinions other than there own. I have encountered people like that and it is very frustrating. In those cases I believe it is best to just steer clear of them.

I would also like to point out what a hypocrite really is, "a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion".

A vegan who really believes in her cause *and* lives according to it is *not* a hypocrite. If she told you to be a vegan and every night she had a big juicy steak now that would be hypocrisy exemplified. I suspect you are mostly dealing with self-righteous zealots, there is a difference

. . : slicePuzzle

_____________
Is this thing on?

A Work In Progress

After reading in hindsight what i wrote i want to say that i was being hippocritical. Here i am saying i dont want to agree with them but then i say in the next line they wont agree with others.

Emp you are right a concede that.

I think i meant that some dont care to believe that some one else has a different belief or opinion. That is what we have, It is always good to exchange idea nad keep things flowing but for one side to say "You have to follow what i do or bad things will happen"

you hit it right on the money, zealots are the problem.

To move on to something that hgas been bothering me lately. In my classes, there are too many people wanting to speak their mind. Now i know i just got done talking about stubborn zealots and their inablity to see a different POV. But you havent met these people, ive known them all for some time and they never seem to be this egotistical. For example, my govt. class has many egos in it. There is one in paticular, as i see it and from knowing her she is a "kicker punk" Love country but is a punk. She's know to speak her mind but all the sudden this year she seems to be looking for an arguement. I know people change but she, at least in my opinion, doesnt know when to pick her fights.

Now to fill in a little info, i am a senior in high school. I have been told and try to adopt an attitude, public schools force people to come where as colleges are full of people who wnat to be there. Do ya'll think that is a little ignorant on my part or is it a good thing to remember?

Im going off to wander the back alleys of the Internet, look for some kill.


Cell 650