The topic of Nutrition just as heated as Religion - Page 8 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-24-2006, 11:30 PM
 
Mommay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here to There
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
Now, see, I interpreted that post differently. As in, she does NOT feel that she has a choice but to follow what she perceives as a species-appropriate diet, any more than do other animals, without her or her lineage suffering from the consequences.
I think that illustrates nicely how two people can read different things (such as nutrition info) and come to different conclusions based on personal interpretation.
Yes, that's what I mean. Veg*ns often "excuse" other animals from ethical expectations because they have no choice. A veg*n may very well continue feeding her cat meat. In my opinion, we have a choice of what we put in our mouth, but in terms of what my body needs, I don't have a genuine choice. I don't determine what my species needs nutritionally. So newcastle's choice between kill another animal or commit suicide to me is a valid one. Eventually, if it is not me, it is my child or my child's child that would bear the brunt of my "choices" today.

We are animals biologically no matter how big our brain has gotten. And guess what helped make that brain grow big? Yes, meat or animally-derived foods! I am definitely listening to all these former veg*n mamas who say they were depressed on their former diets. And they're fully grown. What affect does depriving children of the optimal human diet have? To me, it's experimental because a diet free of animal products would be so new in terms of our evolutionary history. It's dicey to stray from a diet tested over millions of years.
Mommay is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-24-2006, 11:43 PM
 
Mommay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here to There
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GiggleBirds View Post
As for vitamins B6 and B12, they are in abundance in nutritional yeast, which is very cheap. Here http://www.evitamins.com/product.asp?pid=6646 is a link to a nutritional analysis of it (scroll down). There are plenty of ways to get iron too. I have never had trouble with anemia and I don't go overboard worrying about it. I just eat spinach a few times per week (seaweed, etc, as well ).
I agree with the other part of the post that there are a lot of factors that go into any decision.

As for the above quote, we really don't know that B6 and B12 are all we need from animal products. Nutritional information constantly changes. See how often formula ingredients change. Only in the last few years did we find out that DHA was important and they added that to formula. But we all have the sense there is something about bm that will never be duplicated by formula. That's how I feel about animal products. Not that I eat a whole lot of it, but I find that it is as irreplaceable as veggies. Why do I defend eating animal products so strongly? As I said, I don't stand by it ethically, but to avoid it altogether would deprive the body of the essential nutrients that allowed our species to thrive.
Mommay is offline  
Old 11-24-2006, 11:45 PM
 
Mommay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here to There
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edamommy View Post
I would cause bodily harm to the idiot with the rabbit, rescue the rabbit and have beans and rice as usual.
So bodily harm towards a person is okay?
Mommay is offline  
Old 11-24-2006, 11:52 PM
 
CurlyTop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Valley of the Heart's Delight
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't read it all - too long to wait and I want to reply

I get bugged when I want my kids not to eat junk food and other parents offer it. Should I be "rude" and say no, even when the kids are saying yes! yes! yes! And if I say No, should I explain why? I feel like it's impossible to say no without implicitly criticizing the food choices of the other parent. If I want to be friends, I don't want to criticize such a hot topic!
CurlyTop is offline  
Old 11-24-2006, 11:54 PM
 
Mommay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here to There
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnw826 View Post
And the fact that I am on MDC and there is this thread which is blatantly anti-Vegan and Anti-Vegetarian and anti-Animal Rights is truly disturbing me. I have lost total faith in this whole board and I think this does it for me. I thought that this would be a board where people would be alittle more respectful. I was wrong.

Good bye, MDC.
To me, this sort of self-righteousness disturbs me a great deal. If this was the way people in general handled strife, including religion, we'd be in a whole lotta trouble. For some reason, some of the veg*n on this thread feel that they have the final say on what is right or wrong. How is it possible that anyone could think otherwise? : Doesn't genuine democracy and pluralism and diversity mean that there can be valid view points that are not YOURS?
Mommay is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:23 AM - Thread Starter
 
Janelovesmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: with water bugs.
Posts: 2,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnw826 View Post
I agree 100%.

And the hypotheticals? What next, which one of your kids would you save if your house was on fire and you could only take one? This is ridiculous.

FWIW, When I was Omni, I had HORRIBLE depression. Since cutting out meat, I am starting to feel alive again. SO let's not make sweeping generalizations.

And the fact that I am on MDC and there is this thread which is blatantly anti-Vegan and Anti-Vegetarian and anti-Animal Rights is truly disturbing me. I have lost total faith in this whole board and I think this does it for me. I thought that this would be a board where people would be alittle more respectful. I was wrong.

Good bye, MDC.
Oh, no, mommy! Don't leave...This is the kind of thing I didn't want to happen on my thread.
Janelovesmax is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:24 AM - Thread Starter
 
Janelovesmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: with water bugs.
Posts: 2,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just want to mention something about nutritional yeast. I have read that it's not a reliable or consistent source of B12... and also read if overused, can cause candida overgrowth...
Janelovesmax is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:25 AM - Thread Starter
 
Janelovesmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: with water bugs.
Posts: 2,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have anyone read any books from BRAGGS? Famous health crusaders?
According to them, eating meat is like killing yourself. I do have to say that most people who followed their diet got better and their quality improved.
Janelovesmax is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:34 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janelovesmax View Post
Have anyone read any books from BRAGGS? Famous health crusaders?
According to them, eating meat is like killing yourself. I do have to say that most people who followed their diet got better and their quality improved.
You mean the apple cider ppl? I didn't know they wrote books.

Most people who go veg from a standard omni diet will improve in health in the short run - it's the longer term stuff I'm skeptical about.
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:43 AM
 
GiggleBirds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Silly Town!
Posts: 254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nutritional yeast is not actually yeast, so I don't see how it can cause candida overgrowth.

I don't want dnx to leave either. I don't think she was being self righteous, I think she is extremely frustrated.

Okay, here is what I've learned from this thread. It's very possible that some people need meat for their health. So, in terms of what I'm debating, that is now a neutral point.

However, my circumcision analogy stands. Substituting religion for necessesitation (which aren't equal, but close enough); eating meat is unnecessary for most. Many people think it is awful, horrible, cruel. Many people hate circumcision for the same reason. Please don't tell me you would bash them for being self-righteous and deciding to leave? If all the anti-circ threads were hijacked (not that this one was, but since I've been here, almost every one not discussing recipes has been) and flooded with circers, would that be okay? All I'm saying, is I feel the frustration that dnw feels, even though I personally want to stick it out).

Okay, now I'm going to get a bunch of people telling me they believe meat is necessary. Well, maybe all the anticircers are going to hell too (or wherever they go). That is not my point. My point in this post is that dnw feels what she feels for a reason, and that reason does not make her self righteous.
GiggleBirds is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:47 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GiggleBirds View Post
Nutritional yeast is not actually yeast, so I don't see how it can cause candida overgrowth.
I'm pretty sure it is a yeast, just not of the genus Candida

ETA: yup, I was right, it's Saccharomyces

(A yeast is a single celled fungus)
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 01:08 AM
 
GiggleBirds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Silly Town!
Posts: 254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh that is funny! I've heard for so many years that it is not actually a yeast. Hmm. But I found this:

Quote:
The nutritional yeast we use is Red Star Vegetarian Support Formula nutritional yeast. It is the highest quality nutritional yeast available. It contains good quality protein and B vitamins, including B12; it has a yellow or gold color from its riboflavin content. This kind of yeast is Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which is food yeast grown in a molasses solution. This yeast is easily digestible and contains all the essential amino acids. It is a different species of yeast than candida yeast; they don't have anything to do with each other. Candida yeast is a wild live yeast while Red Star nutritional yeast is cultured and pasteurized. In fact, Red Star nutritional yeast is guaranteed candida albicans negative.
GiggleBirds is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 02:30 AM
 
Gale Force's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Nestled in the Sierras
Posts: 4,950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The Red Star yeast fortifies the B-12. Otherwise, nutritional yeast is not a good source of B-12. It is not known whether the plant forms of B-12 provide us with any usable B-12. The jury's out. (As it is with the ALA-EPA-DHA conversion.)

Amanda Rose, author, Rebuild From Depression: A Nutrient Guide. Don't miss this opportunity to build a business telling friends about probiotic foods and grass fed meats: Beyond Organic Review.

Gale Force is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 03:32 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I posted on a different thread recently that I never understood why a person is supposed to avoid yeast when they have chronic yeast infections - because they're two totally different things! Then a baker friend of mine told me that commercial yeast contains cornstarch. Don't know if that's always true, but

I've figured out my answer to kaydee's question, btw. I just need to find some time to type uninterrupted. Hopefully soon.
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 04:13 AM
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Palm Desert, CA
Posts: 1,182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudswinger View Post
We once went out to dinner with a vegetarian, and ordered a meat dish. She felt the need to leave a menu up in between us so she couldn't see what we were eating. Makes conversation kind of hard.
Yeah...it's kinda different on the opposites sides...a militiant TF follower could call a vegan ignorant at worst, but some militiant vegans all but call meat-eaters murders...ya know? That's just some militiant ones, though. Our former roomates were and are vegans...and we all lived in harmony in our home. Mainly because they are vegan for health and human concerns (the farmland/vs pasteuring land issue), not animal rights.

So hopefully we can continue to discuss nutrition rather than argue about it?
Each has chosen their path for a reason. It IS like religion as JaneS said...arugeing dosn't make converts to your faith. The only way help another person in anyway is to walk with them in love and exemplify your convictions.

Happily married to DH for 6 years, in process to foster-adopt 3 children DD4, DS3 and DS2. We may be bringing half brother age 9 one day as well! We are not infertile, we just have decided that since there are precious children who need homes there is no need for us to have biological children.

nicolelynn is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 06:00 AM
 
kaydee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hither & Yon
Posts: 2,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
Are you familiar with PolyfaceFarm, or with Permaculture concepts, intensively managed pastured animals, etc? There's a difference between the "let 'em out and do what they please" pastured cow and the intensively managed, mimicing-natural-grazing-patterns-as-closely-as possible-pastured-cow.
Yes to both. If one must farm animals, Polyface's model seems like a pretty good one. However, if that were the only type of animal agriculture we were to have, I think people would need to *drastically* reduce the amount of animal products they consume, as they use much more space per animal than intensive farming. The US slaughters 10 billion land animals each year; I don't believe grazing and pasturing and free-ranging could meet that demand. (I'm certainly not knocking better humane & ecological standards or a reduction in animal product consumption--just pointing out that I don't think factory farming can simply be replaced by grazing/pasturing/true free-range animal ag). We must also eat fewer animals.

Quote:
Who decides what defines sentience?
Well, there is an accepted definition of the term, and abundant scientific evidence that many species (mammals, birds) are sentient. About other species, there is some scientific debate about the degree of sentience (animals without a central nervous system). And no credible scientific evidence indicates sentience in plants. If evidence changes in the future, we will all have to re-evaluate our decisions, but it seems to me not too difficult to deem some species more sentient than others given the ample knowledge we currently posses.

Quote:
I was pondering this the other day, and it struck me that every single food in my house that isn't local is vegan.
Your fruits and vegetables are non-local? Bummer if you can't get any tasty plants in your area. I've not heard of such a thing except in the far far north.
kaydee is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 12:35 PM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
Your fruits and vegetables are non-local? Bummer if you can't get any tasty plants in your area. I've not heard of such a thing except in the far far north.
I'm in Saskatchewan, Canada. We can't grow oranges, coconuts, seaweed, bananas, nuts (except, I believe, hazelnuts, or at least I plan to try in the next couple of years) and mac&chreeze No greens in the winter. I'll admit, I need to get better at eating locally, but last time I tried to make the leap, I fell off the wagon completely. This thread has renewed my passion, though.
Babe in arms, will address the rest later (I'm staying at my parents' place tonight, so I hope to get some good typing time in )
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 01:24 PM
 
pixiexto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: among the coffee beans...
Posts: 1,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
I'm in Saskatchewan, Canada. We can't grow oranges, coconuts, seaweed, bananas, nuts (except, I believe, hazelnuts, or at least I plan to try in the next couple of years) and mac&chreeze
HerthElde, I'm in Canada too and your post made me giggle... at first I thought you said you COULD grow coconuts & oranges locally, and I was like - WOW! I'm impressed with that SK soil!
pixiexto is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 02:00 PM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixiexto View Post
HerthElde, I'm in Canada too and your post made me giggle... at first I thought you said you COULD grow coconuts & oranges locally, and I was like - WOW! I'm impressed with that SK soil!
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 04:37 PM
 
JSerene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
However, if that were the only type of animal agriculture we were to have, I think people would need to *drastically* reduce the amount of animal products they consume, as they use much more space per animal than intensive farming. The US slaughters 10 billion land animals each year; I don't believe grazing and pasturing and free-ranging could meet that demand.
In my perfect world, the polyface farm model would be standard and no one would eat meat more than a few times a month. We would use every part of every animal for broths, etc. to supplement the times we actually ate a cut of meat. Happier, healthier animals, happier healthier people, sustainable environment = utopia .


10 BILLION, I can't even comprehend the suffering...
JSerene is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 04:48 PM
 
JSerene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GiggleBirds View Post
However, my circumcision analogy stands.
I respectfully disagree. For starters, this is not the vegan board. This is an open board and we are discussing a topic, one that the jury is still out on, despite your personal convictions. Most importantly, however, is the huge difference in topics. Circumcision is about the routine, unnecessary mutilation of newborns for cosmetic purposes. What we are discussing here is basic human biological needs as well as, if I'm not mistaken, our place on this planet and our responsibilty toward it and it's creatures. I understand your wanting to boil both topics down to the pain and suffering involved, but it's not that simple.

(and before you say it, I know that you think that it IS that simple )
JSerene is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 05:03 PM
AJP
 
AJP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: land of the fruits and nuts
Posts: 1,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
Yes to both. If one must farm animals, Polyface's model seems like a pretty good one. However, if that were the only type of animal agriculture we were to have, I think people would need to *drastically* reduce the amount of animal products they consume, as they use much more space per animal than intensive farming. The US slaughters 10 billion land animals each year; I don't believe grazing and pasturing and free-ranging could meet that demand. (I'm certainly not knocking better humane & ecological standards or a reduction in animal product consumption--just pointing out that I don't think factory farming can simply be replaced by grazing/pasturing/true free-range animal ag). We must also eat fewer animals.
I agree the volume should be reduced, both in terms of actual consumption and waste (the amount of food wasted is sickening). However, if animal agriculture were to be switched to a Polyface Farm model, then the VAST acreage now used to grow corn and soybeans for animal feed would be reduced to a fraction of the current amount, which would free up that land for other ag uses within a sustainable model (pasture included). Intensive animal farming actually uses a great deal of land to grow the grains and legumes fed to those animals, which compared to mixed pasture is a very inefficient use of the land.

There is no secret ingredient.
AJP is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 04:47 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
To turn the tables What if the crystal ball told you that you DIDN'T need animal products to be "healthy, strong, and virile"? Would you still eat meat?
Short answer: it depends

If the crystal ball showed me that my descendants were healthier if I didn't eat meat, it would change my whole perspective. I would not eat meat then. And I would come to the conclusion that humans were not meant to be omnivorous.

If the crystal ball showed me that it was equal, I would then weigh the ecological consequences of each decision, and err on the side of what I believe to be the least damaging. I believe that this is an impossibility, though, because if either decision was more ecologically damaging, that in itself would affect the health of my descendants.

That answer really wasn't that hard to come by once I was able to get past my current beliefs and look at the bigger picture.
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 05:28 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
Yes to both. If one must farm animals, Polyface's model seems like a pretty good one. However, if that were the only type of animal agriculture we were to have, I think people would need to *drastically* reduce the amount of animal products they consume, as they use much more space per animal than intensive farming. The US slaughters 10 billion land animals each year; I don't believe grazing and pasturing and free-ranging could meet that demand. (I'm certainly not knocking better humane & ecological standards or a reduction in animal product consumption--just pointing out that I don't think factory farming can simply be replaced by grazing/pasturing/true free-range animal ag). We must also eat fewer animals.
I truly believe that animals or plants raised in optimum natural conditions are much more nutrient dense than when conventionally farmed. I also believe that if one eats in such a way that all needs for vitamins and minerals are met, one doesn't desire as many calories, period.
If factory farms did not exist, I think that fewer animals would be eaten as a natural consequence. And as AJP pointed out, there is a LOT of waste in the current system. I'm also not advocating that everyone eat beef - it simply doesn't make sense to eat grazing animals in an area where they cannot exist in concert with the land. Different people have different physiological needs for nutrients and I believe that's closely linked to genetic heritage as well as environment.
I don't think that feeding the world (or, more accurately, feeding the humans of the world) is a global concern. Rather, it should be a local one. Furthermore, I believe that if the average city/suburb dweller grew food on their land instead of lawns, food production in human settlements would be much much higher.
I also believe the average person should eat waaaaaay more vegetables. In fact, I think that vegetables should make up the bulk of a person's diet, in volume. That alone would cut down the amount of meat eaten significantly (I'm sure we all know at least a few people who never touch anything green).


Quote:
Well, there is an accepted definition of the term, and abundant scientific evidence that many species (mammals, birds) are sentient. About other species, there is some scientific debate about the degree of sentience (animals without a central nervous system). And no credible scientific evidence indicates sentience in plants. If evidence changes in the future, we will all have to re-evaluate our decisions, but it seems to me not too difficult to deem some species more sentient than others given the ample knowledge we currently posses.
See, here's where I get to don my flameproof suit (thanks gardenmommy, for that phrase, I got a kick out of it). I feel the energy of things around me. I have communicated with both plants and animals. I know every living thing to be "sentient" in it's own way (which I realize doesn't fit the literal definition of "sentience", but I'm at a loss for another word to describe it right now). I'm almost reluctant to bring this up, however, because my own experience has been belittled by others simply because they don't see things the same way. Or it's taken as "baiting", which is not what I intend at all.
Further to that, death does not scare me. It is not final. I view it as part of the flow of life, not separate from life. Death is the beginning of life. The method of death can be energy depleting/negative, as can negative life experiences (such as the suffering that occurs in a feedlot). What occurs after death can affect the energy of the whole universe. I could go on at length, but I think I'd go very far off topic if I did. My train of thought finishes with the fact that the only fear I have about death is that someone will bury my body, full of toxic chemicals, in an airtight box (also likely toxic) when I go.
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 09:37 AM
 
twinkletoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
[QUOTE=Gale Force;6583576]I imagine there would be plenty of nutritive value in eating a human living on a traditional human diet. It looks like I erased my comment that you can all eat my dead body if you need to. I still mean it and I'm on a traditional diet, so you could make Gale Force jerky. You could call it GF jerky because it would also be gluten free.QUOTE]




Thank you Gale Force, I needed a good laugh!
twinkletoes is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 10:37 AM
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: ct
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
See, here's where I get to don my flameproof suit (thanks gardenmommy, for that phrase, I got a kick out of it). I feel the energy of things around me. I have communicated with both plants and animals. I know every living thing to be "sentient" in it's own way (which I realize doesn't fit the literal definition of "sentience", but I'm at a loss for another word to describe it right now). I'm almost reluctant to bring this up, however, because my own experience has been belittled by others simply because they don't see things the same way. Or it's taken as "baiting", which is not what I intend at all.
Further to that, death does not scare me. It is not final. I view it as part of the flow of life, not separate from life. Death is the beginning of life. The method of death can be energy depleting/negative, as can negative life experiences (such as the suffering that occurs in a feedlot). What occurs after death can affect the energy of the whole universe. I could go on at length, but I think I'd go very far off topic if I did. My train of thought finishes with the fact that the only fear I have about death is that someone will bury my body, full of toxic chemicals, in an airtight box (also likely toxic) when I go.
this is the basis of my whole belief system.

Mom to two perfect kids earth.gif  surrogate to two sweetpotatos heartbeat.gifheartbeat.gif born 4.21.11  

I love someone with ataxia telangiectasia http://www.atcp.org

homemademomma is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 01:28 PM
 
lisalou's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,568
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ditto HearthElde that's the basis of my belief system too.
lisalou is offline  
Old 11-27-2006, 03:09 AM
 
kaydee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hither & Yon
Posts: 2,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HerthElde View Post
I truly believe that animals or plants raised in optimum natural conditions are much more nutrient dense than when conventionally farmed. I also believe that if one eats in such a way that all needs for vitamins and minerals are met, one doesn't desire as many calories, period.
If factory farms did not exist, I think that fewer animals would be eaten as a natural consequence. And as AJP pointed out, there is a LOT of waste in the current system. I'm also not advocating that everyone eat beef - it simply doesn't make sense to eat grazing animals in an area where they cannot exist in concert with the land. Different people have different physiological needs for nutrients and I believe that's closely linked to genetic heritage as well as environment.
I don't think that feeding the world (or, more accurately, feeding the humans of the world) is a global concern. Rather, it should be a local one. Furthermore, I believe that if the average city/suburb dweller grew food on their land instead of lawns, food production in human settlements would be much much higher.
I also believe the average person should eat waaaaaay more vegetables. In fact, I think that vegetables should make up the bulk of a person's diet, in volume. That alone would cut down the amount of meat eaten significantly (I'm sure we all know at least a few people who never touch anything green).
Mostly-plant-based and predominantly local sounds pretty good. A heck of a lot better than the current state of affairs, even if it isn't a vegan paradise!



Quote:
See, here's where I get to don my flameproof suit (thanks gardenmommy, for that phrase, I got a kick out of it). I feel the energy of things around me. I have communicated with both plants and animals. I know every living thing to be "sentient" in it's own way (which I realize doesn't fit the literal definition of "sentience", but I'm at a loss for another word to describe it right now). I'm almost reluctant to bring this up, however, because my own experience has been belittled by others simply because they don't see things the same way. Or it's taken as "baiting", which is not what I intend at all.
No flames, but no agreement either. While I feel that all of nature has a life force, I don't think that all beings can experience pain and suffering. And in the absence of other proof (and the absence of personal experiences such as yours), I choose to believe the scientific evidence in assessing sentience.


Quote:
Further to that, death does not scare me. It is not final. I view it as part of the flow of life, not separate from life. Death is the beginning of life. The method of death can be energy depleting/negative, as can negative life experiences (such as the suffering that occurs in a feedlot). What occurs after death can affect the energy of the whole universe.
No real argument here about the death/life continuum. I just prefer to cause the least harm to other animals. It's not the fact of killing animals that bothers me such much as the methods of killing--and the hell so many animals are put through at human hands during their lives.
kaydee is offline  
Old 11-27-2006, 03:41 AM
 
HerthElde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Mother Earth
Posts: 2,999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaydee View Post
It's not the fact of killing animals that bothers me such much as the methods of killing--and the hell so many animals are put through at human hands during their lives.
I feel the same. I was at an interesting website tonight and I think I'm actually post-PPD enough to do some letter-writing, especially to the small, locally owned grocery store a block away. Wish me luck, I've never done any activist-type things before (other than talking to people I know and meet - food always seems to come up )
I think we're all just trying to do first what's best for our family and next what's best for the planet, and even though we don't all agree about what that is, at least it plays an active part in our decision making. I know appalingly few people in real life who even think about the state of the planet - friends refer to me as a "hippie" (which I take as a compliment) and will tell me to cover my ears if they're about to tell a story about something not eco-friendly : My parents and ILs kind of try, but don't really get it (like, my MIL was going on at length about how important it is to recycle, meanwhile they're conventional grain farmers).
Anyway, MDC is the one place I can come where the vast majority of people care, even if we do have different ideas.
HerthElde is offline  
Old 11-27-2006, 01:18 PM
 
granolamomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: In my head, care to join me?
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edamommy View Post
: I'm kind of sickish feeling yet feel like adding some hysterical laughter in there on this one! I guess, this is why I do not believe in a "god". But how nice that "he" gives one the ability to push of that guilt on "him"! WOW. I'm glad you wore the suit.
Feel better now?

That was completely unneccesary and out-of-line.
granolamomma is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off