XPost: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, alt.religion.hindu   
   XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian   
      
   On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:47:34 -0700, "Dutch"  wrote:   
      
   >   
   >   
   > wrote in message news:47dv67578esv99c7lu8b4amr7iuqiftsju@4ax.com...   
   >> On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 21:05:23 +0100, Seum  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>dh@. wrote:   
   >>>> On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:43:40 +0100, Seum  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> I haven't eaten meat or fish since 1972 and recently I find that I am   
   >>>>> lacking some substitute for DHA. This can be made from fish and it is   
   >>>>> not expensive, but making it from vegetables has a cost that is   
   >>>>> ridiculously high.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Is there any alternative?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>     Would there be any in grass raised beef? Then you would be helping   
   >>>> yourself,   
   >>>> contributing to decent lives for livestock, and contributing to   
   >>>> something that   
   >>>> works well for wildlife too. And at the same time contributing to less   
   >>>> wildlife   
   >>>> deaths than you probably would by eating most grain products, and surely   
   >>>> less   
   >>>> than by eating rice products. Or grass raised sheep or goat if you don't   
   >>>> want to   
   >>>> eat beef...   
   >>>   
   >>>You must be kidding.   
   >>   
   >>    What I pointed out is true, though some people might find such facts   
   >> amusing   
   >> somehow.   
   >>   
   >>>Livestock is polluting our atmosphere and poisoning   
   >>>our streams and rivers. What we need is faaaaaar less livestock.   
   >>   
   >>    Plowing and harrowing, treating with chemicals and harvesting etc large   
   >> areas of grain fields is much harder on the environment than cattle are by   
   >> eating grass. How can you be unaware of that?   
   >   
   >You make some good points here.   
      
       You can appreciate some of the good points I make. Not all.   
      
   >stick to them.   
      
       I do. I stick to all of them...the ones you like and the ones you hate.   
   It's   
   surprising that you can appreciate this aspect though, since it works against   
   the misnomer.   
      
   >. . . [having appreciation for lives of positive value for livestock] is   
   >bullcrap.   
      
       Not to those of us who can appreciate them. The pastures also provide   
   better   
   environments for wildlife as well as lives of positive value for cattle. Maybe   
   you can appreciate the lives of the wildlife who benefit even though you can't   
   appreciate the lives of the cattle? You acted like you could appreciate life   
   for   
   some wildlife in the past, but then you acted that way toward livestock as well   
   before your unlearning.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)