Why do omnis post here?

The reason why there's "no intelligent answer as to why fish isn't meat" is because.... fish are meat, as they are animals.

 

Most people on the S.A.D. don't have kosher rules though.




(Is it just me...or is it pretty funny how Standard American Diet is acronymed as SAD?)

 

doc: I just like to. You won't find me being aggressive or insulting - beyond what people clearly invite. Going 'round the internet laughing at fools may not be your idea of a good time, but it keeps me out of trouble! I'm sure you're right - some psychological imbalance must cause me to seek disagreement with conspiracy theorists and people who believe in astrology. I don't really think it's such a bad thing though - especially with the conspiracy theorists. Pressed_rat is just such a tit, I feel bad if I don't take the piss out of his posts. Surely you can empathize? Mabye not. I was in the debating club at school...

 

Well that's extremely subjective. I'm sure the people you insult don't generally feel as though they've invited it.

It might keep you entertained, but it seems like a total waste of energy. Why don't you engage intelligently with people? You seem to resort to insulting people with whom you disagree far to easily.

Oh, I can totally empathise (that's how we spell it over here ). All I'm saying is you should give people a chance and not insult them just because they hold a different opinion to your own. I'm all for flaming fools, but give 'em enough rope to hang themselves first.

 

none of that explains why it aint meat.

 

Yeah, I'm sure you're right. In fact, I think I've done pretty much what you say, in *this* forum. I respect the views of people in here (most, anyway ), so I interact with them more-or-less intelligently. However, when the person I'm disagreeing with is claiming to believe that the illuminati and GWB conspired to cause the WTC attacks, and the the CIA carried out the London bombings, there seems little point in arguing intelligently... ;-P

And actually, it should be -ize - that ending is Greek, and it's definately a 'z'. The reason that by-and-large only yanks use the 'z' is pretty interesting. When Webster wrote his American dictionary, he did a lot of violence to the language - 'ax', 'color' and so on. But he carried over '-ize' words unchanged from British English. Then, after the US/UK linguistic split, it became fashionable in Britain to spell some words in a French way, including -ize endings turning into -ise. But if you look in the OED, you'll find that -ize is the correct spelling. See? I'm not *just* a troll; I do help sometimes!

 

some people dont like lettuce . I cant stand uncooked tomatoes or pickles and i remove em from everything.

But i got you beat: i watched a vegetarian walk into mcdonalds and order a big mac no meat. Errr, say what?

 

heh... im not veggie but i buy most of my food at health/natural/vegan type stores and farmers markets and eat meat very, very rarely. sometimes i do eat it though.... maybe someday ill finally stop eating it all together. i assume i will...

 

fish is meat damn it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

crummy, explain why fish is not meat. there is NO LOGICAL EXPLANATION. none.

fish have bones, on the bone is the meat. they are living creatures, even if they are different and that stuff you eat is the meat.

 

Fish isn't meat in a culinary sense, nor (for some) in an ethical sense. Many people think that because fish are significantly less developed creatures (they don't have any kind of thought process - just responses to nervous impulses), they 'count' less. I don't really follow the logic, but that's what some people think.

 

hmmm well, then id ask them if fish can feel pain? and move? and if there is actual flesh on the bones? hmmm... i dunno... i got into an argument with lynsey on here before about that and there was no persuading the other so yeah.....

 

No, fish don't feel pain. And technically, fish isn't flesh. But of course they're still living things. It's a continuum - single-celled organisms, plants, insects, fishes, chickens, dolphins, chimps, people. No-one in his right mind would say it's ok to kill humans for fun, but picking flowers is fine. The question of where to draw that line (or lines, in most cases) is the fun bit.

 

yeah, I seeen em get a double double, animal style, from In and Out with no meat.
(californians know what I am talking about with the double double)


and Trish Jim pretty much got at what I was told...that fish have no central nervous system and it cant be proven they feel pain...likewise it cant be proven they dont....so if it dont feel pain it must not be an animal. I didnt say I agreed, I said it was the only halfway intelligent answer I ever heard. I mean just because they dont have vocal cords to scream when a hook gets riped out their mouth, does that mean they arent animal?

 

It HAS been proven that fish feel pain.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2983045.stm
http://www.liv.ac.uk/pro/news/trouttrauma.htm
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3673

These are all scientific articles. The only articles I came across that say fish DON'T feel pain were all from fishing and angling websites, who of course, would like to feel guilt-free.

 

yeah, those articles are pretty valid, it seems to me....

and dont worry crummy, i understand what you are saying but yeah, take a look at those articles....

 

well then thats settled, all hypocrit veggies can quit claiming fish aint meat. now that that is settled., lets move back to why I an omni am posting here.
Usually its because i went to active threads and the veggie one was active. I dint go hmmm, I am gonna invade the veggie forums this week or anything like that.

 

It's not quite that simple, unfortunately. There are good arguments for both sides, but that's hardly on-topic here.

The point remains though; everyone has to accept a kind of heirachy - plants are on the bottom, people on the top, and everything else has its place in between. Omnis and veggies can at least agree on this basic fact; then we can have a reasoned discussion about the moral issues involved.

 

the idea of heirarchy is exactly what I don't accept, that one is above another...we don't have to accept that for the world to work, the world still works if we are equal to other life forms. We all have amazing developments and adaptions, the beauty and amazing technology that a tree has developed in order to get water and nutrients to it's upper branches is something that I myself wouldn't claim to be better than, it is a remarkable piece of cellular engineering. We have all adapted to the world to work in a way that is efficient and life preserving and therefore if we can survive without damaging others around us or at least minimise the harm/impact we have on the world around us I don't think this is no bad thing...