Greenpeace has lost its moral compass

As humans do not have a herbivore's digestive system or dentition, they are obviously "designed" to be omnivorous. However, that doesn't stop those who choose to be vegetarians – or even vegans – from eating a balanced and nutritious diet that is in accord with their principles. However, I think it is quite hard to provide an adequate nutritional vegan diet for a growing child but I don't doubt that, with care and thought, it can be done.

That's exactly what bothers me Deedaa

When ever I talked about the dear little lambs and calves LizG my mother used to say that if we all stopped eating meat there wouldn't be any lambs or calves except a few rare examples in zoos.

{{grin}} I do hope the grin works faye and bags. Opinionated - we gransnetters, never!

Good morning Iam64 and others. One genuine thing which has always bothered me with vegetarianism is this: if we were all to become vegetarian what would happen to the animals? There would be no requirement for them so I suppose we could use the empty fields for building more homes.

Sorry I haven't read through this entire thread so this aspect may have been covered already.

We do know we are all opinionated Iam64. We promise we were only discussing the issues quietly.

faye knows that a smiley comes with my last post, but I'll add it for everyone else's benefit.

I know this isn't the Good Morning Sunday thread, but good morning Sunday anyway. The grumpy and personal exchanges on this thread are (for me) a bit heated for so early in the morning. I enjoy serious discussions, so I'm reluctant to say let's lighten up a bit, but maybe we could stop shouting at each other and personalising comments quite to much? I'll put my tin hat on now, in case of a barrage of criticism.

Gotcha, faye. I guess it's the same whether one's an omnivore or a vegetarian or a vegan.

You might like to think about your own tone sometime too, aka.

I might just add baggy you might think some of us "keep blethering on about how brilliant and morally superior vegetarianism is." Put yourself in my place, having been a vegetarian since I was fourteen years old in 1966. OMG how many times over all those years have I heard "where do you get your protein from, you must be one of those crazy vegetarians, or what do you eat?" I believe I have earned the right to stand up and say, hey I am healthy and I have not eaten meat for forty seven years and don't tell me eating meat is necessary.

I do understand the defensive feeling people get when they are questioned about what they eat. I felt the same when a friend said to me that I didn't need to eat dairy. I told him that was one of the things I always ate, how could I replace cheese. I have since found there are so many foods that replace dairy. It's really what you get used to!

This is a prime example of not reading previous posts carefully why I can't be bothered with some people. Note the tone too. Puerile.

Um... why is the fact that there are more calories in 1g of fat than in 1g of carbs relevant, aka? Of course jess knows that. All she said was that you could get most of your calories from fats if you wanted to. I then remarked that Eskimos did. They didn't have access to high carb foods until relatively recently.

Monty Pythonesque!

As in "this isn't an argument".

PPS sorry to hear about your proselytisy thing hope it clears up with any medication.

Jess you're just digging a bigger hole. You know perfectly well that there is 4 x the amount of calories in 1g of fat than in 1g of carbs. And then there's calories from protein ditto carbs.

But I'm leaving this thread because it's getting boring. No hard feelings just fed up in general and with GN in particular.

PS nothing to do with you or Bags, honest.

That's just a chuck in remark by the way, in case anyone thinks I'm proselytising.

Eskimos did, jess.

And none of them have to go. None of them even have to shut up. It's only me pointing out what I find irritating and wishing out loud.

Several posters actually, jen. All the ones who keep blethering on about how brilliant and morally superior vegetarianism is.

100% minus 30% = most, last time I looked. You could get most of your calories from fat if you wanted to. In poor countries it is probably less than 30%.

I guess that remark about not lecturing was directed at me, Bags.
Okay.
Goodbye.

OK. I see now. Thanks.

Seems like a good reason to me. There's also the fact that it is very nourishing, but I wouldn't eat it for nourishment if I didn't like it, unless there was nothing else, of course, and I wanted to stay alive.

I was referring back to my post of yesterday at 18.23.47 thatbags. Peter Singer's point that people eat meat for no other reason than they can. And they want to. Now I really am off shopping.

Not sure I follow you, nightowl. What was to be demonstrated?