Question to Leo on Veganism @Leo Gura

[tatsumaru]

On 5/26/2021 at 6:37 PM, blueplasma said:

I am vegan myself I expected Leo to be a vegan, but found that he is not. If God is love and we are supposed to practice love and that is the purpose then why isn't Leo a vegan? We all know how cruel the meat industry is (go watch any of the slaughterhouse videos on YT).. plus all the environmental impact animal farming has... and the fact that we are not obligate omnivores or anything like that.

So my question to Leo, why aren't you a vegan?

The meat industry is cruel but killing animals or any life form for food isn't cruel. It's simply the nature of transformation. Believe it or not you can kill with respect and appreciation, just look at the reverence Native Americans have for their hunt. In fact you keep killing all the time whether you want it or not. You kill millions of bacteria as you breathe, you kill millions of insects with your cities and you even kill millions of animals with your plants. As long as you transform one energy form into another that has a higher potential you are fulfilling the purpose of your DNA, but if you are transforming that banana or that steak into a psychopath CEO scheming to rob people of their savings, then you should probably leave any food alone and not survive.

[Opo]

On 27/05/2021 at 0:34 PM, Twega said:

@mivafofa  Yes, of course. I agree. That is why there are 20,000 species of edible plants and 400 species of edible mushrooms—all of them possessing unique qualities. Even the fiber is different from one plant to the next.

Yet you only have like 4 farm animals to choose from... Plants are more diverse than all the other organisms on earth.

There's a shit ton of insects. 

Plus what percentage of animals is edible vs plants. 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Opo

[sholomar]

On 5/26/2021 at 10:55 PM, Leo Gura said:

I have tried vegan and vegetarian and it simply does not give me sufficient energy.

You vegans don't seem to realize something: not all human genetics and bodies work on a vegan diet. That is an unquestioned assumption you hold.

Also, you misunderstand Love. Since God is Love, murder is Love too. You cannot use the fact of Love to justify any action, because every action is Love.

The science on this one is obvious... we are omnivores.. when we left Africa and expanded into colder climates we hunted and ate a lot of meat, along with eating insects, fish, roots, and the like. To deny this is to deny basic good old fashioned science. I will not argue with vegans on this because I consider the "humans are vegans" statement to be akin to people who say "the earth is flat." I've studied enough ancient cultures, read about what the stomach contents of mummified remains had in them.

I've found the plant based alternatives do a good job of providing fairly complete protein sources though, and I actually prefer them to the meat versions when I'm in a hurry and just cooking on the stovetop. They cook quickly, and fast, and hit the spot. I really only like meat when I grill it with charcoal and applewood chunks, or it's made in a restaurant.  I don't like the fact that industrial farming exists, but I'm not going to totally give up meat at this juncture either.

Besides, a diet too high in carbs and fat causes lots of health problems in the long run, especially for the obese. The best diets are lower carb, higher fat, or lower fat, higher carb, but not lots of carbs and fat together.

Edited May 29, 2021 by sholomar

[Twega]

13 hours ago, mivafofa said:

. Can you accept it?

If you show me evidence that it is and not anecdotes, sure I will. Some people have a genetic mutation that makes them unable to synthesize creatine, and if they go vegan, they can die. However, if they take creatine monohydrate, a more soluble form of creatine, they can go vegan.

The nutritional academy of dietetics has stated that veganism applies to everyone at all stages of life. Please give me a reason why some people have the biology to go vegan, and others do not.

 

13 hours ago, mivafofa said:

. I am not arguing against veganism.

I never said you were. I said you have a bias against the claim that whole foods plant-based diets apply to everyone who doesn't have pre-existing health conditions / and or nutritional deficiencies (b12, iodine). I clearly admitted my bias towards advocating the claim; you can't even admit you have one........

 

13 hours ago, mivafofa said:

I'm very health conscious when it comes to diet and training since a young age. I'm an athlete and most likely I'm healthier than the average healthy ppl you meet. The worst sickness I've had was chickenpox as a baby and maybe a flu. Oh and a bad case of diarrhea when I tried to eat a salad washed with the dirty water in China. It was kinda funny though, the water was poisoning all the foreigners training there and we were all fighting for the toilets. When the Master aligned us all, there was a longer line to the toilets than there was in the cafeteria. Lol. 

LOL, I guess the stories I hear about china's lack of sanitation when it comes to food is true

 

13 hours ago, mivafofa said:

So no, there was nthg wrong with me in terms of health before veganism.  I didn't do the diet wrong. I have a normal biology. I choose not to be vegan today not only for personal well-being, but also it's just not my calling anymore.

 

I meant no insult, I believe you when you say you are healthy. I'm just saying it is a red flag when someone eats an apple and starts falling apart, something very common with people who eat carnivore and switch to eating omnivorous or plant-based. I also said this isn't just unusual of you to eat plants. If I ate a piece of meat (assuming it's not infected with e.coli) and I started breaking down, that also would be a red flag! It goes both ways, not just for plants.

 

13 hours ago, mivafofa said:

That doesn't make sense. You can't support veganism while paying for animal slaughter!"

 

Haha, I'm not the typical vegan you've met. I focus mostly on health, not morality. If your health requires you to kill animals for meat, I find that 100% okay, I'm just not convinced from my own experience and from the plethora of literature on human nutrition and physiology that it is.

 

Side note: I live in the middle east, so literally 99% of the people around me are not vegan and kill goats with their bare hands. I'm not gonna hate someone because they are not vegan. I got my sister into watching Leo and she was surprised to know that he was not vegan, and I told her that not everyone has to be vegan for you to consider them "awake/conscious" I have no judgment against, I'm only speaking as to what my interpretation of the evidence says as nutritional biochemistry nerd who has been researching this field for 5 years now.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by Twega

[blueplasma]

20 hours ago, tatsumaru said:

The meat industry is cruel but killing animals or any life form for food isn't cruel. It's simply the nature of transformation. Believe it or not you can kill with respect and appreciation, just look at the reverence Native Americans have for their hunt. In fact you keep killing all the time whether you want it or not. You kill millions of bacteria as you breathe, you kill millions of insects with your cities and you even kill millions of animals with your plants. As long as you transform one energy form into another that has a higher potential you are fulfilling the purpose of your DNA, but if you are transforming that banana or that steak into a psychopath CEO scheming to rob people of their savings, then you should probably leave any food alone and not survive.

Because we can survive without meat so why not give it up?...

The truth is most of us are eating meat just for the taste.. for a whole lot of us taste is more important than the lives of the animals.

Also you can't compare killing plants & bacteria with killing cows, chicken goat etc.. because plants & bacteria don't feel pain like they do.

Ultimately its about minimizing the suffering...

 

Edited May 29, 2021 by blueplasma

[sholomar]

2 hours ago, blueplasma said:

Because we can survive without meat so why not give it up?...

The truth is most of us are eating meat just for the taste.. for a whole lot of us taste is more important than the lives of the animals.

Also you can't compare killing plants & bacteria with killing cows, chicken goat etc.. because plants & bacteria don't feel pain like they do.

Ultimately its about minimizing the suffering...

 

I have this mental fantasy right now of a piece of lettuce screaming in terror as I keep eating it.  I admit I do feel "good" about the fact that I am eating more plant based because it saves water and helps the environment, but certain plant based items also are resource intensive... producing almonds in areas that don't have the highest levels of fresh water, and the extensive use of palm oil as a replacement for trans fats is a BIG ONE.. we'd have been better off simply leaving trans fats legal for all the damage growing palm does to the rainforests so companies can market things like "plant butter" loaded with the stuff.  Partially hydrogenated soybean oil might be worse for the body, but much better for the environment. It grows all around me in South Dakota.  Palm requires tropical areas, and they cut down rainforests to grow it.  I would argue buying any product containing it is worse than consuming meat, so I don't buy products with palm oil when I can avoid it. It's a minor life adjustment that helps keep the rainforests from being destroyed.

Edited May 29, 2021 by sholomar

[AprendizZo]

Hi!

I think that veganism is not (only) about eating plants in a balanced way, although the vast majority of conversations around the topic are usually related to it. I think it is important to always make the statement that veganism is, fundamentally, the voluntary cease of hatred and violence towards animals. Nothing less. Nothing more.

Every time a nonvegan argues against veganism, he must know that he is arguing in favor of the unnecessary enslavement and murder of animals for the solely purpose os satisfying our cravings for taste, fashion and entertainment. We were deeply trained to do so.

Why would otherwise intelligent people, with genuine good intentions and compassionate hearts, maintain and defend a rather harsh and violent position against the most vulnerable beings on Earth? Were we taught to be blind towards the violence we unnecessarily inflict on other animals? Were we taught to express our hatred towards animals in a passive-aggressive way? Of course. This should not surprise anybody in this forum. We were indoctrinated into a belief system called speciesism. It is because of this belief system that we feel that:

• enslaving, harming and murdering a human animal (for it being useful for our pleasure, taste, enjoyment or fun) is radically wrong
• enslaving, harming and murdering a nonhuman animal (for it being useful for our pleasure, taste, enjoyment or fun) is just ok. Nevermind!

Bottomline:

• Being violent towards a human being is always wrong. Slavery is violence. Slavery is wrong. Always. No negotiable. Regardless of treatment.
• Being violent towards an animal is wrong, but only if the violence is too obvious and there's not a good amount of humans benefitting from it. Have you noticed? It is wrong to harm and kill one puppy in the microwave to entertain ourselves, even if we later eat the rest of it. The whole nonvegan planet gets enraged. But harming and killing billions of pigs in a gas chamber to entertain our taste is magically just fine. "Just make sure you have one of those humane treatment labels and stickers. We love animals, don't forget. We. We. We."

Don't you think that this could be a double standard messing around with the way we see others? If so, it needs to be explored with self honesty. Integrity is at stakes in this territory. Here we have the core of Narcissism, usually referred to as anthropocentrism. "We humans own the Universe and everything which is in it". Ownership can be a very violent hallucination, don't you think?

Most nonsense argued by (still) nonvegans to justify animal slavery and the animal holocaust comes from this unresolved confusion regarding what Nonviolence is. Being omnivore only means that we can digest the flesh of other animals, including the flesh of other humans. Does our ability to digest the flesh of other humans mean that it is ok to consider (only the most delicious, of course) humans as commodities, living objects whose whole purpose is to be used as resources for food? Of course not. The same with animals. No double standards if we are serious.

Leo Gura still being nonvegan only means that speciesism can survive in our minds, as any other form of hatred, even if they are filled with high levels of theoretical and empirical knowledge about "Love" and "Nonviolence". Don't relay on a guru, no matter how powerful she is, to tell you what's wrong and what's right. That answer can only be found where the sound ceases to exist. TIP: remember that there's no such thing as "nonviolent violence", or "humane slavery", or "compassionate holocaust", or "considerate exploitation".

Please, don't believe anything I have written. Expect me to be just someone messing around with your mind. By the way, it is the One who reads these words who needs to awaken from the speciesist dream.

Animals don't belong to humans ?

Edited September 23, 2021 by AprendizZo

[AprendizZo]

By the way, there's no such thing as a 99% vegan. Anything less than veganism is unnecessary violence towards animals. Vegetarianism is still 100.00% nonveganism. Nonveganism is hatred and violence towards animals, which cannot be labeled as Nonviolence. There's no point in saying that something is 1% in favor of animal slavery. It's just another nonvegan nonsense in an attempt to justify animal exploitation. Nonveganism is basically self-deception.

Why don't we stop distracting us and start unlearning speciesism? Here it is a short talk on the question: Should animals have any right? And later on there's an interview with interesting and demanding questions.

? — [ T H E C A S E F O R A N I M A L R I G H T S ]

1. Reading the prologue of Tom's book Empty Cages, "The cat" 0:12:30
2. The common core of compassion we share and the three types of ARA: the Da Vincians, the Damascans and the Muddlers 0:17:20
3. How does one answer to the question "Do animals deserve any right?" — The invitation of philosophy: to think for yourself, without fooling yourself 0:27:47
4. Legal rights and moral rights — A right is a protection against the intrusion and excessive freedom of others 0:30:34
5. But, do animals have rights? Important questions for inquiry — The structure of experience: the SUBJECT OF A LIFE ? 0:35:50
6. What have other philosophers said historically? — How do we fool ourselves? The double standard 0:41:13
7. Is it even relevant having a soul? — The deep implications of having rights and double standards 0:43:20
8. So, do animals have rights? — Where not to find the answer 0:49:45

? — [ Q U E S T I O N S ]

1. What's your opinion about the images shown? (not shown to us) — The difference of being somebody and something 0:52:47
2. What about pets? — Guilt vs need — How do we show respect for them? 0:54:57
3. Are you a philosopher or an activist? — I'm just sensible 0:58:11
4. Which role had the Vietnam war in your life? — A butcher read Gandhi 1:00:08
5. Are you a cult leader? — I just understood I had to be responsible 1:03:57
6. Is Animal Rights the only "right" way? — Imposing vs persuading 1:06:16
7. How far do you endorse illegal action in your campaign? — Responsibility 1:07:15
8. Is the movement divided? — The role of the media in the perception of the Animal Rights movement 1:09:09
9. Quite recently an animal rights activist has committed a murder — Animal Rights would never endorse this behavior 1:11:38
10. Peter Singer's Bigger cages vs Tom Regan's Empty Cages — Well, where to begin... ? 1:13:19
11. How can the law lead us towards Animal Rights? — The myth of humane treatment 1:16:26
12. So, what legal instruments do we have? — The futility of legislation and the importance of education 1:20:30
13. Is it ok to go to the zoo? — I admire Tom's uplifting way of answering 1:21:15
14. ou have written several film scripts — Agitate, agitate, agitate / Educate, educate, educate 1:23:40
15. How realistic it is not using animals? — It can be real as far as we believe in human goodness ♥️ 1:26:48
16. Have you seen any progress since you started your advocacy? — Yes! 1:28:13
17. So, has humanity become a bit less hypocritical? — I think we are making progress 1:31:22
18. Where are we now in the movement? — We are in the discussion phase, on our way for the critical mass ???1:31:54

What do you think? Should animals deserve any right? Should humans deserve any right?

Thank you for your time and attention ?

Edited September 23, 2021 by AprendizZo

[BadHippie]

Quote

By the way, there's no such thing as a 99% vegan. Anything less than veganism is unnecessary violence towards animals.

So if I eat an unfertilized egg, that´s violence? If my grandma has a cow, threats the cow well and gets some milk from the cow that´s violence? 
I think that´s too simplistic. It´s about living in harmony and love with animals and NOT seeing them as products / objects that we can use to "fill" our "desire" as Egos. 

I certainly agree with you on many points though. Though Leo will definitely use the argument of oneness that it doesn´t matter if we kill each other and animals or use them for food. 

Though I have a different perspective, this forum is full with hardcore followers of Leo ;D Good luck with the backlash on your post.

I will watch the Video when I have time. Sounds like a topic that would interest me. Animals definitely need rights. It shouldn´t be possible to threat animals the way we threat them now. But I think we are far away from that sadly. 
Someone once said: "As long we threat animals the way we threat animals, we will also threat humans the way we threat animals." I think this describes your point perfectly

Edited September 23, 2021 by BadHippie

[Scholar]

3 hours ago, BadHippie said:

So if I eat an unfertilized egg, that´s violence? If my grandma has a cow, threats the cow well and gets some milk from the cow that´s violence? 
I think that´s too simplistic. It´s about living in harmony and love with animals and NOT seeing them as products / objects that we can use to "fill" our "desire" as Egos. 

I certainly agree with you on many points though. Though Leo will definitely use the argument of oneness that it doesn´t matter if we kill each other and animals or use them for food. 

Though I have a different perspective, this forum is full with hardcore followers of Leo ;D Good luck with the backlash on your post.

I will watch the Video when I have time. Sounds like a topic that would interest me. Animals definitely need rights. It shouldn´t be possible to threat animals the way we threat them now. But I think we are far away from that sadly. 
Someone once said: "As long we threat animals the way we threat animals, we will also threat humans the way we threat animals." I think this describes your point perfectly

Anything that wouldn't be considered exploitation would basically be vegan. However, in the context in which your grandma keeps your cow most likely, as property not in the context of guardianship, is inherently exploitative and therefore not vegan.

If you find an egg that you know a chicken will not eat (because chickens eat their own eggs to get their nutrients back), so you are not stealing it from anyone, then you could possibly eat it and that would be considered vegan, as it wouldn't be exploitative. However, if you were to keep chickens as property so you can consume their eggs, that would be slavery and be non-vegan, no matter how nicely you treat your slaves.

 

Also, we have to consider that nowadays we would be normalizing the consumption of eggs if we were to continue to do so, which also would lead to more suffering indirectly. But in most cases, even backyard chickens exist in an exploitative relationship towards their owners, so unless it is an animal sanctuary it will most likely not be vegan. Acquiring chickens in most cases will not be vegan in the first place, it has to be in the context of rescue.

Edited September 23, 2021 by Scholar

[PurpleTree]

i tried to get my protein with lentils the recent few days

let's just say it wasn't successful and my gut hurts/feels inflamed

[Derrida]

This notion that veganism is not for everyone, doesn't sustain everyone with enough "energy" and depends on your body type or something like that sounds like the usual pseudo science that you hear from self proclaimed 'enlightened people', who think they have somehow transcended the empirical through mere introspection.

Sure, of all the people in the world there are perhaps some where a pure vegan diet might be problematic, but for the vast majority who claim so, it's most likely bs.

If you feel like a vegan diet doesn't sustain you, there might be other mistakes that you're making, after all there isn't just one kind of vegan diet.

 

On 9/23/2021 at 3:48 PM, PurpleTree said:

i tried to get my protein with lentils the recent few days

let's just say it wasn't successful and my gut hurts/feels inflamed

Your digestion needs time to adapt to new food, it doesn't just happen in a few days.

Someone who's been vegan for a long time and starts eating meat again would get a heavy stomach from that as well.

Edited September 25, 2021 by Derrida

[Hatfort]

Can I post some vegan memes? Please, just today!

[Danioover9000]

   I think this thread has run it's course.

On 26/05/2021 at 4:42 PM, Opo said:

He has gut problems that veganism can't solve. 

 

Edited September 26, 2021 by Danioover9000