User Controls
Is honey vegan?
-
2018-03-28 at 1:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick Livestock consume several times what we do in crops every year. If you think farming is harmful to the planet, the solution is to eliminate animal agriculture.
youre an illiterate retard.
what exactly does livestock consume, exactly, you illiterate retard.
brainless dumbfuck -
2018-03-28 at 3:01 PM UTC
Originally posted by 杀死所有的白魔鬼 So Zanick, is eating fruit not vegan then either? Farmers often bring in bees to their orchards to pollinate their fruit. I imagine the conditions for these bees are much the same as in a honey farm (albeit, less cramped.)
Furthermore, do you really think the feelings of a bee are significant enough to base your moral beliefs around? Because personally, I don't think they really 'feel' anything. They simply react. I want you to separate your answer to this question from whether or not the feelings of the bee are relevant. If I could ensure you the bees felt nothing, and that they suffered none, would it be morally just then?
I'm personally not a champion of the honey issue, or particularly knowledgeable about bees, but I don't believe you have access to bees' qualia and I'm inclined to think that one cannot disprove the possibility that they suffer. You could say I'm agnostic on the issue and would prefer to be cautious in my treatment of them. Some vegetarians would accept that certain animals don't feel pain, but I'm not convinced that we can be certain that suffering is absent.
I don't subscribe to a hierarchy of animal life, so I don't see bees as insignificant and I do account for their feelings in my moral choices. We have no existential requirement to harm them, and it's in our interest to protect them as well.
As for farmers who bring bees on their property, I personally don't care that much as long as they transport them safely and give them lots of space. Maybe there are other needs bees have that I'm not aware of, but I'd think a big orchard would make them very happy.
Originally posted by infinityshock youre literally a fucking retard.
Yes, you've made that point several times now. On another note, I'm starting to think you don't own a thesaurus.if nature didnt intend for a substance or organism to be nutritionally viable for the human physiology there would be measures in place to prevent the substances consumption. for an example, go try to eat a dendrobatidae frog for a first hand lesson on natures own instruction manual.
Do you actually believe nature has intentions and intervenes with intelligent precision in the world to make them known? Are you really that stupid? I do like to joke that you didn't graduate elementary school, but before I saw this I actually thought you could just be a willfully ignorant high school graduate. I can see that assumption was incorrect.when bees are incapable of producing sufficient honey due to lack of sufficient pollen, the bee keepers provide the bees with a man-made (see that? MANMADE) replacement to sustain them until there is sufficient pollen.
Their honey is ideal for their nutritional needs, which is why they produce it. Why can't we eat our manmade honey replacement instead? We have no biological need for their honey, and they definitely don't want or need our substitute.youre an well read retard
http://www.thesaurus.com
Originally posted by infinityshock youre an well read retard.
what exactly does livestock consume, exactly, you well read retard.
brainless dumbfuck
Livestock consume crops, a lot more than we do. If we didn't have livestock, the impact of our agricultre would be reduced substantially. -
2018-03-28 at 3:14 PM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick I'm personally not a champion of the honey issue, or particularly knowledgeable about bees, but I don't believe you have access to bees' qualia and I'm inclined to think that one cannot disprove the possibility that they suffer. You could say I'm agnostic on the issue and would prefer to be cautious in my treatment of them. Some vegetarians would accept that certain animals don't feel pain, but I'm not convinced that we can be certain that suffering is absent.
I don't subscribe to a hierarchy of animal life, so I don't see bees as insignificant and I do account for their feelings in my moral choices. We have no existential requirement to harm them, and it's in our interest to protect them as well.
As for farmers who bring bees on their property, I personally don't care that much as long as they transport them safely and give them lots of space. Maybe there are other needs bees have that I'm not aware of, but I'd think a big orchard would make them very happy.
Yes, you've made that point several times now. On another note, I'm starting to think you don't own a thesaurus.
Do you actually believe nature has intentions and intervenes with intelligent precision in the world to make them known? Are you really that stupid? I do like to joke that you didn't graduate elementary school, but before I saw this I actually thought you could just be a willfully ignorant high school graduate. I can see that assumption was incorrect.
Their honey is ideal for their nutritional needs, which is why they produce it. Why can't we eat our manmade honey replacement instead? We have no biological need for their honey, and they definitely don't want or need our substitute.
http://www.thesaurus.com
Livestock consume crops, a lot more than we do. If we didn't have livestock, the impact of our agricultre would be reduced substantially.
you done gone and went full-Bill Krozby, you dumb illiterate fucking faggot. everything you post makes it more and more obvious youre mentally incapable of coherent thought and are utterly clueless on everything. you completely ignore the statement where i specifically said the bees were unable to produce their own honey due to natural conditions beyond anyones control and were assisted by the human beekeper who literally fed them. the 'livestock consuming crops...' thing...that was nice. youre completely clueless on agriculture and the entire purpose of why the livestock that were domesticated...were actually chosen for domestication. what i am curious about is where you get your delusions from...are they complete fantasy? are they stories your daddy tells you while hes cornholing your crapper? are they visions that pop into your head while youre high on jenkum? no, really...inquiring minds want to know.
im not even wasting my time berating your illiterate retard ass. im going to leave this right here as a pictograph showing the entirety of what i think of you and your delusional beliefs.
you and Bill Krozby should make a baby together. that would be a fun spawn to quiz on its beliefs and thoughts. -
2018-03-28 at 4:16 PM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick I'm personally not a champion of the honey issue, or particularly knowledgeable about bees, but I don't believe you have access to bees' qualia and I'm inclined to think that one cannot disprove the possibility that they suffer. You could say I'm agnostic on the issue and would prefer to be cautious in my treatment of them. Some vegetarians would accept that certain animals don't feel pain, but I'm not convinced that we can be certain that suffering is absent.
I don't subscribe to a hierarchy of animal life, so I don't see bees as insignificant and I do account for their feelings in my moral choices. We have no existential requirement to harm them, and it's in our interest to protect them as well.
As for farmers who bring bees on their property, I personally don't care that much as long as they transport them safely and give them lots of space. Maybe there are other needs bees have that I'm not aware of, but I'd think a big orchard would make them very happy.
Yes, you've made that point several times now. On another note, I'm starting to think you don't own a thesaurus.
Do you actually believe nature has intentions and intervenes with intelligent precision in the world to make them known? Are you really that stupid? I do like to joke that you didn't graduate elementary school, but before I saw this I actually thought you could just be a willfully ignorant high school graduate. I can see that assumption was incorrect.
Their honey is ideal for their nutritional needs, which is why they produce it. Why can't we eat our manmade honey replacement instead? We have no biological need for their honey, and they definitely don't want or need our substitute.
http://www.thesaurus.com
Livestock consume crops, a lot more than we do. If we didn't have livestock, the impact of our agricultre would be reduced substantially.
Do in essence you base your personal morals on stuff you're not certain of. Got it. If you had simply said so in your OP think of all the space you would have saved on Lanny's HDD. -
2018-03-28 at 4:40 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock if nature didnt intend for a substance or organism to be nutritionally viable for the human physiology there would be measures in place to prevent the substances consumption.
a drop of semen has about 6 calories.
and i dont see any physiological trait in human that would prevent one man from inserting his penis into another mans mouth.
does this mean nature intends men to suck each other off ... for nutritional gains ??? -
2018-03-28 at 4:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader a drop of semen has about 6 calories.
and i dont see any physiological trait in human that would prevent one man from inserting his penis into another mans mouth.
does this mean nature intends men to suck each other off … for nutritional gains ???
No, it means you are gay for bringing it up. -
2018-03-28 at 5:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader a drop of semen has about 6 calories.
and i dont see any physiological trait in human that would prevent one man from inserting his penis into another mans mouth.
does this mean nature intends men to suck each other off … for nutritional gains ???
yes. now get over here and suck me off. -
2018-03-28 at 5:09 PM UTC
-
2018-03-28 at 6:03 PM UTC
-
2018-03-28 at 6:09 PM UTC
-
2018-03-28 at 6:21 PM UTC
