I eat meat
I choose to. I love bacon, burgers, steaks, pork chops, sushi, seafood, it's all good. When I think about the little lambs being slaughtered, or the big eyed cows getting the old stun gun to the cranium, I think to myself, "well that's a part of life, that's what happens so that I get my lovely steak", I don't feel happy about it, but I realise that it's something that has to happen in order for the majority of the UK population to eat the diet it wants to.

So when I see meat-eaters getting horribly squeamish and offended by the very idea of animals being killed, telling me that they love all animals, I get annoyed. You're eating a thing that was once alive, that once walked this earth, if you can't deal with the fact that it had to die for you to eat it, then stop being such a hypocrite and go veggie.

Also, what's wrong with eating cats? Just because they're cuter than pigs, doesn't mean they deserve to live more. We eat rabbit, and that's a comparably domesticated animal.

Pah, if all the hypocritical meat-eaters just became veggies they could leave all that delicious animal flesh for cynical cold hearted buggers like me.
(LickOutTheJamsMotherfuckers!, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 18:17, 18 replies)

I don't think that cat would taste very nice
not much meat either

a juicy dog though....

*drools*
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 18:19, closed)

It's like when
the tabloids got all cutesy about the Tamworth Two, the pigs that escaped the slaughter house.
Where do they think bacon comes from?
( Mrs Entity is in hiding., Fri 20 Feb 2009, 19:01, closed)

Mmm
Tasty tasty meat.
(Ghost Atreides enjoying incontestable health benefits on, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 19:46, closed)

Nobody is criticizing you for eating cats...
but for not having the same taboos they have.

Think about the child porn lovers (not the pedophiles) to understand what I mean. They're not doing any harm to anybody more than snicker wearers do (made in sweat shops, exploiting children, you know), but they just don't share your taboo, and that's a capital offense.

I, for example, dislike gay people for no fucking reason except not being straight.
(randomset, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 22:29, closed)

Child porn lovers
are pedophiles.

They're still party to the abuse, even if they don't carry it out themselves.
( greedyostrich Cheese is evil! Cheddar is VOODOO!, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 22:49, closed)

Well, not "active" pedophiles
As in they don't look out to fuck children.

Just like straight people watching gay porn doesn't make them gay too.

Wearing Nike or smoking weed (and, generally, living in the civilized world) makes you part of a bigger abuse. So it's not about the abuse, it's all about the taboo.
(randomset, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 23:09, closed)

One very, very subtle difference
which escapes a lot of people, so it's understandable that you missed it as well:

The creation of child pornography involves abuse. The child is unable to give informed consent. Ergo, looking at child pornography makes the viewer a party to that abuse.

The creation of gay porn doesn't automatically involve abuse. It is assumed that the participants are all consenting.

See the difference? It's a tricky one, so take your time.
( flake has nothing against your right leg, Fri 20 Feb 2009, 23:38, closed)

if you get the kids drunk and they consent
then that is ok, right?
(amauriosis fugax took more than one snow day off, Sat 21 Feb 2009, 2:49, closed)

It's my fault
The gay example was just to show how watching doesn't mean involving.

But buying products made in sweatshops is no less abusing than paying for kid porn.

| Ergo, looking at child pornography makes the viewer a party to that abuse.

Really? Just because someone gets a kick out of it that makes him a criminal? Are you nuts?

I mean, not paying for it, just watching. Looking at some breasts on a beach makes you a pervert because you didn't get consent first?

Unless you directly provoke or order the abuse you're only guilty of bad taste, at most.
(randomset, Sat 21 Feb 2009, 3:22, closed)

I'd like to be on the jury when you use "it's bad taste, at most" as a defence for your collection of kiddy porn
Looking at a cracking set of norks on the beach doesn't require anyone to be abused first.

For child pornography to exist, a child has to have been abused. Ergo, deriving pleasure from child pornography makes one culpable in the abuse, albeit at one remove.
( flake has nothing against your right leg, Mon 23 Feb 2009, 23:55, closed)

err...
...you know that most 'child porn' arrests are for nude pictures, not abuse pictures, right?

And what about someone who owns a picture of an adult being raped, or beaten, or shot, or beheaded by Iraqi insurgents? Are they any less jailworthy than the Glitters of this world? If so, why?

...and yeah, obviously it'd fail in front of a jury - that's because people are idiots, not because there's any sensible principle going on.
(stalinism, Tue 24 Feb 2009, 18:18, closed)

Look up the doctrine of relative evil.
And then think again about your post.
( flake has nothing against your right leg, Tue 24 Feb 2009, 23:31, closed)

OK, lets try that road.
it's not a cracking set of norks, it's a few kids running around starkers. The kids are totally unaware that some bloke is getting off on watching them.

Just as bad?

Not condoning it, merely pointing out that the abuse angle is detracting from the point being made.
(bblgoose, Tue 24 Feb 2009, 19:07, closed)

So by extension why not eat people who die of natural causes, or unnatural causes if the flies don't get to them first...
( enoughblueskyforsailorstrousers, Sat 21 Feb 2009, 9:50, closed)

You would
If you were reasonably hungry.
(randomset, Sat 21 Feb 2009, 14:44, closed)

I would
if I could get away with it.
(Dangerous Disco Trev Isn't my real name, Sun 22 Feb 2009, 16:16, closed)

Why not cats?
The only logical explanation I can think of for not eating cats, dogs etc is that they are carnivores. Most domesticated livestock tend to be herbivorous.
(I grew it myself, Sun 22 Feb 2009, 12:58, closed)

Oink
As above.
(stalinism, Tue 24 Feb 2009, 18:19, closed)