The GOATest Uber Map of how land is used in Murka

What if beef consumption required one to raise, house and feed ones own lifestock? Same with Chickens? You didn't have to kill and butcher them yourselves, but you were required to provide for them up till slaughter.

Wonder how many people would still consume either beef or chicken?

I could very easily kill an animal for consumption. Wouldn’t think about it twice.

Does that make me an asshole?
 
the amount of BLM land always surprises me

what's crazy is I live in the largest county in the contiguous US, yet it's almost entirely built up of Military bases, BLM land, various National Parks/Wilderness Areas/Natural Preserve/Widllife Areas

san-bernardino-county-map-1.jpg

For a second there, I thought you were talking about Black Lives Matter not Bureau of Land Mgmt.
 
Easy there, welfare queen Brown. Farmers get to enjoy being subsided through food stamps all the time. Whats wrong with not polluting the world, and costing the tax payers less money?

It's not your place to decide what others should or shouldn't eat.

No matter how you try to justify it to yourself, and no matter how much you wish it was your place to decide, it's not, and it never will be.

Trying to couch your desires in environmentalist language is a deceptive attempt to co-opt the entire environmentalist movement to appear to endorse your personal dietary choice.

Self-important full belly hubris.
 
No problem at all.

I would even butcher my own animals meat. I already do when I go deer/pheasant hunting.
this argument is ridiculous. If everyone suddenly hunted wild meat for sustenance, we would wipe out wild herds within months. There is simply no way to feed dense urban populations with game. The only solutions are either veganism or factory farming. Neither are ideal for most people, but this is the hellscape we have created with our huge populations. And keep in mind that America is not nearly as dense as Europe or Asia- even with our vast grazeland, we could not feed everyone with free range cattle, let alone wild deer or bison.
 
heard that shit makes people into infertile gay boys

I dont want any

I do wish we could farm in a more responsible manner as Beef is my preferred choice for dinner
There are also vegan athletes who develop soy allergies, and are incapable of keeping up with the lifestyle. Daniel Bryan, for instance.
 
There are also vegan athletes who develop soy allergies, and are incapable of keeping up with the lifestyle. Daniel Bryan, for instance.

Isnt phil in that category too but both of them had to become pescatarian or whatever the word is so they didnt die of rickets
 
For a second there, I thought you were talking about Black Lives Matter not Bureau of Land Mgmt.

I remember a short period of time when the news was just using BLM to mean either group, but they weren't specifying which group they were using the acronym for.

It made for some very interesting article reading.
 
It's actually the other way around, the amount of resource it takes to grow meat is ginormous and it's a huge waste from a calorie perspective; if people were starving they wouldn't utilize most of their crops and most of their water to grow meat, what they'd get in return is a ridiculously tiny fraction of the calories they wasted on growing the meat and they would starve faster, if anything.

I saw a story a while ago about lab grown beef or cultured meat. Not sure if it'll be economically feasible any time soon but it seems like a good option compared to the resources used on meat farms.
 
There are also vegan athletes who develop soy allergies, and are incapable of keeping up with the lifestyle. Daniel Bryan, for instance.
Frank Mir went vegan for a little while. He said he had to go back to eating meat to achieve "greater athletic outcomes", his words not mine.
 
When I look at a BLM map, all I see is Family Farms, Ranches, and Homesteads taken by a legalized form of theft.
where I live it's mostly former homesteader land that nobody took, and mostly used for like shooting rifles
 
What if beef consumption required one to raise, house and feed ones own lifestock? Same with Chickens? You didn't have to kill and butcher them yourselves, but you were required to provide for them up till slaughter.

Wonder how many people would still consume either beef or chicken?
This is a rediculous argument.
1)Completely impractical and unrealistic. Theres not enough room for everyone to own enough land to raise cattle themselves.
2)Most meat eaters wouldnt give a shit about the killing part but the cost of raising and feeding them would be counterproductive enough to make it not worth it.
3)I love meat but i dont think i can eat a whole cow before it goes bad. Am i allowed to sell parts of it in this hypothetical or do i have to consume it all myself?
 
It’s 2018... we already moved westward man
The BLM came after the fact of many of these Homesteads and ranches already being in place.

Some of these family ranches had been in these locations since before their area had received Statehood.

I understand why you wouldn't get it, you're not a farmer. You don't see the encroachments in your day today, so you don't think it's important.
 
The BLM came after the fact of many of these Homesteads and ranches already being in place.

Some of these family ranches had been in these locations since before their area had received Statehood.

I understand why you wouldn't get it, you're not a farmer. You don't see the encroachments in your day today, so you don't think it's important.

You are correct about this.
 
It's not your place to decide what others should or shouldn't eat.

No matter how you try to justify it to yourself, and no matter how much you wish it was your place to decide, it's not, and it never will be.

Trying to couch your desires in environmentalist language is a deceptive attempt to co-opt the entire environmentalist movement to appear to endorse your personal dietary choice.

Self-important full belly hubris.

You are going to deny that cattle farming is one of the largest producers of green house gasses? Raising cattle requires large amounts of land. Clearing land to raise cattle is what has directly resulted in the ever shrinking forest lands on earth.

How dare I tell you something is bad. I'm sorry go ahead and beat your wife and children, I should not have tried to stop you.

Cattle farming has negative effects on our planet. You desire to eat beef does not Trump my desire to have clean water.
 
this argument is ridiculous. If everyone suddenly hunted wild meat for sustenance, we would wipe out wild herds within months. There is simply no way to feed dense urban populations with game. The only solutions are either veganism or factory farming. Neither are ideal for most people, but this is the hellscape we have created with our huge populations. And keep in mind that America is not nearly as dense as Europe or Asia- even with our vast grazeland, we could not feed everyone with free range cattle, let alone wild deer or bison.

I don't think you understand the full context of the conversation.

The question was if you were to have to raise your own animals for the meat you were going to consume within that year, would you be okay with that.

The poster who raised the question said some would have a problem with butchering meat, but in this hypothetical assume you wouldn't have to butcher the meat.

I replied that I would have no problem raising the animals on my own property, nor would I have a problem butchering them.

I think you've set up a false dichotomy, but if the choices are truly just veganism or factory farming, any thinking, rational person will clearly choose factory farming.

A vegan diet doesn't offer all the nutrition that every person needs. A vegan diet can even cause malnutrition in a growing child.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...fed-vegan-diet-hospitalized-for-malnutrition/
 
Back
Top