We cooked hamburger last night

[Aaron]

Hello Blasto,

 

My friend was butcher for twenty years at Winn-Dixie, which is known for providing quality meats, at least for a grocery chain. He told me that you should always smell the meat you buy, especially hamburger, because one of the first things that happens when meat begins to go bad is it begins to smell. That isn't always a sure thing though, because some stores actually vacuum pack their meat using carbon monoxide in order to ensure it maintains a healthy reddish color longer. If you feel the meat and it's slimy, that's a sure sign that it needs to go in the trash.

 

In regards to whether or not one should eat meat, for the Buddhists out there, Buddha ate pork for his last meal. That's all that needs to be said about that topic I think.

 

Aaron

Edited April 2, 2011 by Twinner

[aridus]

How much energy is stored in peach just picked compared with an equal mass of "dead" meat?

I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure that the peach is still alive at least.

 

I find that a lot of people don't think much about plants. Plants have hormones, and genes, they reproduce, many of them have a gender. To me fruits are analogous to plant babies.

[mYTHmAKER]

In regards to whether or not one should eat meat, for the Buddhists out there, Buddha ate pork for his last meal. That's all that needs to be said about that topic I think.

Aaron

 

What does it matter what the Buddha actually ate for his last meal.

By saying it was pork, or wanting to believe it was pork is just an excuse - justification for eating pork.

One should not eat meat because the Buddha didn't but because they have come to certain realizations

and understanding on their own.

 

From a google of which there are many.

 

"This is a minor matter for sure, but has been debated since ancient

times. According to the orthodox Theravada it was soft pork

(although they don't overly insist on such a minor point):

"It is said in the Great Commentary that Sukaramaddava is the

already available meat of the pig that is tender and

succulent"(Udana commentary (masefield p1025)Cundasuttava.

Pataligamayaga Suukaramaddavanti suukarassa mudusiniddha.m pavattama.msan"ti

mahaa-a.t.thakathaaya.m vutta.m."

 

"Some (keci) however, say that sukaramaddava is not pigs meat but

rather bamboo shoots that pigs have trampled upon (maddita), others

that it is a mushroom that has come into being at a spot that pigs

have trampled upon, whilts still others proclaim that sukaramaddava

is the name for a certain elixer".

[torus693]

.

Edited April 8, 2011 by torus693

[aridus]

muscles release hormones with every expansion

 

Ah. I didn't mean to cloud the issue, sorry.

 

Was just pointing out how people suddenly 'stop' with their reasoning, for some reason. I guess they are trained to do that by repetition, maybe.

 

I know at least where I live, and probably in a lot of places, people think "you pick the fruit, it dies" or they don't even think that much.

 

It doesn't stop with picking, you drop it on the ground, and it rots. It doesn't stop there, if left, and conditions are right, it sprouts. We tend to forget about the sprouting, or at least somehow disconnect 'life' from 'sprouting' because we typically don't get fruit to plant it, we eat it and throw the seeds (if they haven't been genetically altered to be seedless) into the garbage.

[torus693]

.

Edited April 8, 2011 by torus693

[Encephalon]

muscles release hormones with every expansion

 

? ?

 

Sorry, I was a lowly medical assistant and most recently a certified personal trainer, so my armchair endocrinology is a little rusty, but muscles don't secrete hormones. That would be a job for the ... you guessed it... the endocrine system!

[torus693]

.

Edited April 8, 2011 by torus693

[Encephalon]

muscle movement or exertion triggers hormone release and production.

 

Yes, this is correct. This is why muscle-building routines begin with an olympic lift like deadlifts, squats, or bench presses to release testosterone into the blood stream for the rest of the workout. "Triggers" is the operative term. Once a critical thinking junkie, always a CT junkie. Should've gone to law school.

[torus693]

.

Edited April 8, 2011 by torus693

[Encephalon]

it was my writing.

 

my grammar veers in odd directions

 

its been along time, but I seem to recall reading where stem cell/muscle satellite cells actually leave the muscle body with blood flow, but I cannot find info like that now?

 

As much a freak about communicative precision as I am, I believe everyone whose native tongue is not English deserves plenty of slack. Is this the case with you, and do you belong to the Chuech of Jehovah's Witnesses, as you quote below would indicate?

[Aaron]

Hello Mythmaker,

 

That's fine. My question then is how can it be required if Buddha didn't seem to believe it was? In my opinion vegetarianism seems to be a way for people to feel superior to others. Now keep in mind I was a vegetarian for around six years, so I'm not making this argument based on conjecture. I believed the whole, "if you fed the grain the cows get to hungry people" stuff for a long time. I'm well aware of the arguments and I've come to believe that there's nothing inherently wrong with eating meat, rather vegetarianism is the same as any other ideology. One man thinks he knows what's right and tries to force their beliefs on others, either passively or aggressively. In fact most vegetarians make Christian fundamentalists look lazy when it comes to trying to convert people. One need only look at PETA to get an idea of this.

 

In my opinion each individual should worry about what they're doing and not what everyone else is doing. If a vegetarian doesn't want to eat meat, that's fine, but they shouldn't tell everyone else what they should eat, just because they believe that their beliefs are superior somehow. (Keep in mind this isn't directed at you, but the vegetarian ideology in general).

 

Aaron

[mYTHmAKER]

Hello Mythmaker,

 

That's fine. My question then is how can it be required if Buddha didn't seem to believe it was? In my opinion vegetarianism seems to be a way for people to feel superior to others. Now keep in mind I was a vegetarian for around six years, so I'm not making this argument based on conjecture. I believed the whole, "if you fed the grain the cows get to hungry people" stuff for a long time. I'm well aware of the arguments and I've come to believe that there's nothing inherently wrong with eating meat, rather vegetarianism is the same as any other ideology. One man thinks he knows what's right and tries to force their beliefs on others, either passively or aggressively. In fact most vegetarians make Christian fundamentalists look lazy when it comes to trying to convert people. One need only look at PETA to get an idea of this.

 

In my opinion each individual should worry about what they're doing and not what everyone else is doing. If a vegetarian doesn't want to eat meat, that's fine, but they shouldn't tell everyone else what they should eat, just because they believe that their beliefs are superior somehow. (Keep in mind this isn't directed at you, but the vegetarian ideology in general).

 

Aaron

 

First of all Aaron i am superior to you:

As i thought i stated in my earlier post no one really knows what Buddha's last meal was and it really doesn't matter. What he ate or didn't eat are just excuses for what we wish to eat or don't wish to eat.

 

I agree that PETA is too aggressive - i haven't been a member in years. However, i can understand why they take such drastic measures as the non aggressive approach just doesn't work.

 

Yes vegetarians are no different than any other born agains - in your face. Actually the worst would be a Republican vegetarian or is that an oxymoron?

 

While we are not on the subject i think it is ridiculous for vegetarians to eat mock meats. If i so had the desire

i would eat the real thing.

Edited April 2, 2011 by mYTHmAKER

[torus693]

.my gramma reflects my my grammar reflects my mind

[Encephalon]

[Aaron]

Wow. That's a boatload.

 

The argument about what the Buddha ate for his last meal should be ditched because there are plenty of references about the Buddha dying from a meal that accidently included poisonous mushrooms. Not a major point.

 

I’m glad you attribute vegetarians’ alleged ethical supremacy over meat-eaters as your opinion, but even on the level of opinion it is still a gross generalization. A lot of vegetarians don’t carry that baggage around with them. You might as well wage an argument that meditators and scholars all assume some moral leverage over those who aren't. It might be true for some but not all.

 

I don’t believe there is anything inherently wrong with eating meat either, but if we’re going to make sweeping moral arguments like that then we need to be clear about our criteria. Meat-eating, especially on the order of American meat consumption made possible by industrial meat cultivation, is environmentally reckless, unsustainable, and represents a vast diseconomy when measured by ecological criteria alone such as groundwater contamination, waste of water, soil erosion, and usurpation of fertile farmland for livestock feed. Further diseconomies include the health risks of a meat-based diet and the industry's practice of pumping high level of hormones and antibiotics into the animals, risking what could be outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant super strains.

 

You can easily quantify the travesty of social injustice in the way the meatpacking industry treats its workers, or the deliberate destruction of family farms and ranches by a handful of corporate mega-farms.

 

If you wanted to take a purely philosophical tack and try to rationalize our meat-based diet with the fact that 3 billion + people in the world live on $2 a day you’ll quickly come to the realization that you cannot successfully do so without absolving yourself of culpability and declaring your allegiance to social darwinism.

 

The fact is that many vegetarians base their choices on one or more of these empirical facts, and the important point you’re missing is that fundamentalist christians don’t appeal to empiricism, but superstition and religious bigotry. There are also collective consequences of matters usually relegated to the arena of personal choice which most people overlook. We have over 7 billion people on earth now. Many people still believe that the earth is too big for humans to have a deleterious effect upon, but if everyone drove a Hummer and ate dinner at Outback Steakhouse every night we’d see the causal relations quite clearly. Your closing paragraph reminds me of Rush Limbaugh when he said that it’s nobody else’s business what car you drive, and on one level he’s right. But this is a small and crowded planet, and if we fail to adequately tease out new rules in light of our connectivity then we're fu**ed.

 

Hello Blasto,

 

Honestly, I love vegetarians, my nephew is one after all. I would like to point out that you seem to have no problem with people beating up Christians, but you rush to the defense of Vegetarians in an instance. I think that's a bit hypocritical, but so be it.

 

Closing point, simply because we're raising cattle in a way that is causing damage to nature is not a reason to stop raising and eating cattle, but just a sign that we need to pursue different methods. Meat is good. Vegetables are good. There are just as many "fundamentalist" vegetarians as there are "fundamentalist" Christians (percentage wise). Why are you attacking one and not the other? You eat meat so obviously the former is attacking your way of life as well. I really don't think it has much to do with empirical evidence, rather it has to do with a perceived injustice you feel Christianity has done to you.

 

I would rather like it if you examined this question a bit before replying, because the first answer you give might not be the most honest.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I've been told by more than one vegetarian that meat eaters are evil. They don't say they are morally superior, but you can put two and two together. It's sort of like "hate the sin, not the sinner". It rarely works in a practical sense.

 

second edit- Blasto... it's quite easy to blame, not so easy to practice the solution. I would say you are ultimately the bigger hypocrite, because you know all about this empirical evidence, believe it to be true, yet you're doing nothing about it. The reason I eat meat is because I'm pretty sure the numbers are fixed.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Twinner

[mYTHmAKER]

Honestly, I love vegetarians, my nephew is one after all.

 

Some of my best friends are vegetarians. LOL

 

The reason I eat meat is because I'm pretty sure the numbers are fixed.

 

I don't understand. Why would the numbers, whatever they are, dictate your choice.

[Encephalon]

Hello Blasto,

 

Honestly, I love vegetarians, my nephew is one after all. I would like to point out that you seem to have no problem with people beating up Christians, but you rush to the defense of Vegetarians in an instance. I think that's a bit hypocritical, but so be it.

 

I take you at your word that you had an opportunity to go to school and learn things about life but it often seems like you got really shitty grades. So to clarify, I come to the defense of IDEAS I defend and to the offense of IDEAS that are weakly constructed. This crap of yours betwen christians and vegetarians is your nonsense so save the hypocritical crap for someone else.

 

Closing point, simply because we're raising cattle in a way that is causing damage to nature is not a reason to stop raising and eating cattle, but just a sign that we need to pursue different methods. Meat is good. Vegetables are good. There are just as many "fundamentalist" vegetarians as there are "fundamentalist" Christians (percentage wise). Why are you attacking one and not the other? You eat meat so obviously the former is attacking your way of life as well. I really don't think it has much to do with empirical evidence, rather it has to do with a perceived injustice you feel Christianity has done to you.

 

Again, I'm bringing up ideas about carrying capacity, utilization of resources, ethics governing the distribution of resources, major themes in human ecology and environmental studies and geography, all subjects I studied in grad school and subjects which clearly have no bearing on how you preceive the world, which is really no crime, okay? But again, the ideas and the arguments that vegetarians make in support of their arguments use these empirical facts, while fundamentalists of ALL faiths (there, is that better?) do not appeal to empiricism. Do you need it spelled out for you any more than that or is that clear enough?

 

I would rather like it if you examined this question a bit before replying, because the first answer you give might not be the most honest.

 

Aaron

 

That's really sweet and presumptuous of you. thanks.

 

edit- I've been told by more than one vegetarian that meat eaters are evil. They don't say they are morally superior, but you can put two and two together. It's sort of like "hate the sin, not the sinner". It rarely works in a practical sense.

 

That's not the point I was bringing up. I was addressing evidentiary support of arguments, not defending people's tendency for zealotry.

 

 

second edit- Blasto... it's quite easy to blame, not so easy to practice the solution. I would say you are ultimately the bigger hypocrite, because you know all about this empirical evidence, believe it to be true, yet you're doing nothing about it. The reason I eat meat is because I'm pretty sure the numbers are fixed.

 

I haven't accused anyone of bigotry at all here, and you're out of line for even bringing this kind of rhetoric up, particularly since you have no idea what I do with my life, the reasons I pursued the course of study I did, and what my family and I do in the name of global sustainability, of which limiting meat consumption is only one tool we employ. But I seem to remember that you have a fondness for believing that you have psychic ability and can detect the details of what others do.

 

Maybe you should channel someone other than the victim fairy when you write.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Blasto

[aridus]

Whoa whoa... peace!

 

I've learned very hard and painful lessons.

 

One of them is "slow down". If you feel you have to fight, slow down. If you feel you need to accuse, slow down. If you have something to prove, slow down.

 

And please, don't take my word for it... I'm not trying to be righteous. I just don't like to see people stabbing at each other like this. Painful to watch.

[Aaron]

I haven't accused anyone of bigotry at all here, and you're out of line for even bringing this kind of rhetoric up, particularly since you have no idea what I do with my life, the reasons I pursued the course of study I did, and what my family and I do in the name of global sustainability, of which limiting meat consumption is only one tool we employ. But I seem to remember that you have a fondness for believing that you have psychic ability and can detect the details of what others do.

 

Maybe you should channel someone other than the victim fairy when you write.

 

 

Hello Blasto,

 

I was actually going to remove this post and rewrite it because I thought I was being a bit presumptuous and accusatory, so I apologize. The editing time has changed on the site so I wasn't able to. I apologize for what I said.

 

In the future I will allow you to bash whoever you choose. I really don't have the time or inclination to defend those that can defend themselves. I would suggest that you take a look at your own interactions with others, something I've done myself, and decide for yourself what you should do.

 

Just so you know, I was forced to attend church as a child and ended up in a Christian Cult in my late teens. I broke away from the cult shortly after my eighteenth birthday and I think it had a lot to do with my eventual abandonment of the religion and search for something else. I understand better than most what goes on within the veil of Christianity, it's weakness and strengths. With that said I don't endeavor to try to convert anyone or deny anyone their right to convert others, rather I try to live my life as an example that there are other ways to find happiness and purpose. Live and let live and all that.

 

I do want you to know that I am sincerely sorry, that was one of the reasons I tried to edit my response. I actually had you on ignore for a couple of weeks, but recently took you off because I thought there were other ways to handle our obvious disagreements regarding people's rights to express themselves.

 

My personal view stems from my experiences in college and my professors, one in particular who was an anarchist. Those who don't actually know what anarchism is may think that this is strange, but those who understand the philosophical process can perhaps understand my own belief that everyone has a right to live their lives as they choose.

 

In a perfect world those people who wanted to live a certain way could live that way with others and those that didn't could find someplace to live that suited their own beliefs, sadly that's not how the world works, but I do believe the next best thing is to allow others to believe whatever they want and to mind my own business regarding those beliefs. Normally the only time I intercede is when their beliefs tend to cross over to my own personal freedom.

 

These last few weeks my nephew has been trying to "convert" me to vegetarianism, which is where my first response came from. I have explained to my nephew that I have no desire to be a vegetarian, his argument is that I know it's wrong and that I'm just to selfish, i.e. want to eat meat more than ease the animals suffering, and that's why I don't return to my vegetarian ways. If that was the only time this has happened that would be different, but in the past few years I have had several vegetarian friends and cohorts also try to return me to the "path" of vegetarianism and I've resisted.

 

My experience with vegetarianism has showed me that it as much a religion as Christianity and Buddhism, regardless of the empirical evidence. The idea that because something is done wrong that everyone should simply stop doing it doesn't make sense to me. My belief is that we should instead find a better more ecologically friendly way to raise livestock. As far as the state of the world, I think the rapid expansion of suburbia is as much to blame for the ecological downturn as meat is. And yes I've read all the books on the fast food industry and I am in agreement with much of what they have to say. I personally don't eat at fast food restaurants unless I absolutely have to. I try to buy meat from farms that are ecologically friendly and treat their animals ethically. Regardless of this, I did go a bit overboard and I apologize.

 

As for the future, I don't think we are on the same page, so to ensure that there will be no further misunderstandings I am going to place you on ignore until such time that I feel we can discuss things amicably. I have had three "incidents" with you so far and that's my limit. Please don't take this the wrong way, I just would much rather discuss things with people rather than argue points of disagreement, which is how I feel you wish to express yourself. I am currently working more than 40 hours a week and I don't have the time or inclination to waste the little free time I have debating on things that in the end matter very little. I think for the sake of the forum this will be much more harmonious than me seeing what you write and trying to be the devil's advocate.

 

Aaron

Edited April 4, 2011 by Twinner