Suing over Buddha

Debate Room
12

Thank you for bringing this up (and no, I’m not being sarcastic).

I’ve always admired the Buddhist ideals of vegetarianism (to refrain from doing violence), and the idea that inner peace can be cultivated despite the filth and corruption in the world. I also place a lot of credibility in the idea that suffering is often caused by desire . . . and that eliminating the desire can eliminate the suffering, which seems very relevant when one considers the mechanics of alcoholism, drug addiction, compulsive gambling, and so on.

I’ve recently had an interesting discussion with a religious person who made several interesting points that I’ve never considered . . . and these arguments are not only relevant toward your points about Buddhism, but also toward Christianity (and many other religions).

Basically, I said that abortion was an accepted practice (and even advertised on church community bulletin boards) until about 150 years ago, and then it became a religious and spiritual issue . . . so the force of tradition can’t be brought out by the pro-lifers.

He countered by asking me if scientific knowledge has evolved and become more refined with time, and I agree that it has.

So, because science is more advanced, does that make the science less relevant today than, say, 50 years ago?

“Of course not,” I replied.

"Then why do you believe that religion can’t evolve as well when new insights are codified? As an example, we have amendments to the Constitution. Slavery used to be considered Constitutional, but the Constitution was interpreted more precisely, which led to a determination that slavery is wrong.

"Why do you believe that it’s impossible to interpret religious scripture with greater precision . . . which shows that people before us were wrong, but it’s fixed now?

So, he argued that the permissiveness about abortion from 150 years ago was a mistake that is being remedied by paying attention to it now . . . with our deeper understanding of Christianity.

I’m sure we could make a similar argument about Buddhism.

However . . . I still asked my friend why it took thousands of years to reach the point where we’re fixing everything.

13

Is not the desire to end corruption a desire?
Is not the desire to not eat meat a desire?
Is the desire for inner peace not a desire?
Is refreaining from doing violence not a desire?
You are trapped by your own words.

Eliminate desire and what remains? A dead body. Do you not desire to drink when you are thirsty. Do you not desire food when you are hungry. The end of desire is death. A much better teaching is “All things in moderation.” or “The middle way.”

The desire to eliminate suffering is a desire.
The desire not to suffer is a desire.
Gambling, addiction, are also desires, the same as being addicted to seeking Nirvana.

Religion does evolve. A modern Christian would be burned at the stake as a heretic, were he to exist 100 years in the past.

It is not being remedied. Is he paying attention to politics? Religon changes slowly because it operates on tradition, belief without foundation, and dogma. (This includes Buddhism)

An excellent question. Because until the Church lost power, and science got its foot in the door by demonstrating its superiority, the Church was able to kill anyone who opposed it. (It really is that simple.)

1 Like
14

The choice is to eat meat, not to refrain from eating meat.

Not eating meat is the default, and then people choose to eat meat.

1 Like
15

I certainly disagree with that. We are not herbivores.

4 Likes
16

Ah, but we are omnivores, meaning we can eat both.

Just having the ability to eat meat, doesn’t mean a necessity.

We don’t have to eat meat, it isn’t a requirement for the majority of people.

The eating of meat is an action, and people choose to commit actions. (of course there are actions beyond our control, blinking, breathing, heart beating) eating meat is an action that we are ‘consciously’ aware of.

Not eating meat is a non-action.

Sure you could argue you are refraining from eating, but if for example you were on an island, and there was no access to meat, and you had to live off bananas and coconuts. Then suddenly a meat source came along, you would choose to eat that meat source. (I probably would too, if all I had is coconuts and bananas.)

I would also make the point, that our ancestors the Purgatorius were herbivores, and it was only due to stressors in our environments that caused us to become omnivores, which only actually occurred around 2.5 *million years ago, when our ancestors were Australopiths it is heavily contested whether or not that was the point we evolved into omnivores, but it is currently the most likely. (As our bodies couldn’t digest meat in large quantities, so eating a nut rich diet, with fatty acids, rather than a heavily fibre based diet, caused changes in our intestines.)

1 Like
17

FACTS:
In general, humans can eat seeds, fruits, vegetables, roots, and many other plant parts. That said, our bodies aren’t able to digest them all completely.

Herbivores like cows, goats, and deer likewise can’t produce cellulase on their own. However, they have friendly gut bacteria that produce it for them — while humans don’t have such gut bacteria (5Trusted Source, 6Trusted Source).

Yet, our bodies produce all of the enzymes, such as protease and lipase, necessary for the breakdown and absorption of meat

Plants don’t provide certain nutrients that animal products do.

One such essential nutrient that you can’t get from plants is vitamin B12, which is necessary for the normal function of the nervous system and the formation of red blood cells (11Trusted Source, 12Trusted Source).

This is why people who follow a diet that excludes all animal products are advised to take vitamin B12 supplements.

Other nutrients, such as creatine, vitamin D3, and omega-3 fatty acids like docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), are also missing in a plant-based diet. Yet, your body can produce them in small amounts, so you don’t need to rely solely on your diet to obtain them.

Keep in mind that vegan and vegetarian diets should be properly planned to avoid nutrient deficiencies. Other nutrients that may be difficult to obtain on such diets include protein, iodine, zinc, and calcium.

Nothing wrong with being a vegetarian or a vegan, but if you are trying to convince me it is more natural, you are barking up the wrong tree. Biology does not support your claim. It is a poor argument. Do you have an argument outside basic biology?

Sorry I should have cited the source - There is a whole lot more: Should Humans Eat Meat? Biology, Nutrition, and Culture
I’m not putting down vegetarianism or veganism. Just saying, if you are trying to make a biological case for it, you are going to fail.

5 Likes
18

I actually agree with most of your points. As I said, my friend’s ideas are interesting, but I don’t neccesarily agree with him.

And I do have the impression that religion has changed because it has to . . . not because it wanted to.

I have the idea that the recently departed Pat Robertson would still burn people at the stake for crimes like heresy and apostasy, and the religious right has exerted political and financial influence in other countries (such as Uganda) to make homosexuality a crime that justifies life imprisonment or the death penalty.

So . . . maybe religion hasn’t evolved as much as my friend says it has.

1 Like
19

I am actually a very strict vegetarian.

I agree with your points about enzymes and vitamin B12, but as to whether or not it’s more natural?

Vegetarians generally live longer. Please see below:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.sanitarium.com/amp/au/health-nutrition/vegetarian-eating/eating-a-vegetarian-diet-can-help-you-live-longer&ved=2ahUKEwiCuO3a2eX_AhWMtoQIHWIPDwMQFnoECBMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3K7dOElLnx88yPsFPvtywZ

I’m not a vegetarian because I’m health-obsessed (although it would be nice to live longer and be healthy) but, rather, out of an effort to express kindness.

When I worked in South Florida, I had any number of friends and co-workers from places like Haiti, Jamaica, etc…

A Haitian friend went back to Haiti to visit relatives, and they had a video of the family reunion.

Part of this was a pig roast.

There was a pig who was a part of the family for a few years. There was video of the pig cuddling with the children, playing fetch, and rolling over to have his belly rubbed.

In any case, the family patriarch called the pig over by whistling to it, and then straddled it and slashed it’s throat with a large butcher knife while it struggled. Everybody was chearing, and when some of the kids started sobbing . . . they were beaten.

So, I became a vegetarian . . . although I will eat lionfish if I can find out where it’s being sold, as lionfish are invasive in South Florida and are being killed anyway for this reason.

1 Like
20

I’ll agree. I am not certain that actually has to do with vegetarianism though. Vegetarians, in general, take better care of themselves overall. They eat better, sleep better and schedule their lives better. They tend to be more concerned about their bodies and their health. A meat eater with the same concerns would never sit down to consume a 16 oz steak.

I have lived in Korea for 27 years now. I eat meat. I have a steak dinner perhaps once a year and I end up bringing most of it home. Small bits of meat are generally served with loads of vegetables. One American style steak dinner could feed a family of four in Korea. I would say my meat consumption has drastically reduced. Perhaps I will live longer.

I am agreeing with you. Meat based diet carries with it health risks. I am also asserting that being a vegetarian means you think more and care more about your health than the average person. That also leads to longevity. A meat eater with the same concerns might well reap the same benefits. (All things in moderation.)

4 Likes
21

I agree with moderation, but it is interesting that a strict vegetarian diet is just as (if not more) effective at lowering bad cholesterol as statin drugs . . . and this keeps heart disease, stroke, and embolisms at bay.

See below:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/24/health/vegetarian-vegan-diet-reduce-cholesterol-wellness/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjzjdTJ3uX_AhUEszEKHZL1CVIQFnoECAsQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0wVYj9DIhQ9GIFjB9IC_cm

In any case, I just reached a stage in my life when I decided that I don’t want to kill things any more than I absolutely have to. I can distance myself from the process that involves a screaming, terrified animal experiencing horrible agony for no other reason than my gustatory pleasure.

I’m still implicated in the ongoing deaths of animals because I’m a modern person who uses synthetic materials (made in factories that produce industrial waste), and drives a car that contributes to global warming . . . but I’m trying to do the best that I can to be a kinder person, and not because of religious belief.

I want to be kinder just for it’s own sake.

1 Like
22

LOL: Perhaps the most extensive empirical information, write Fischer and Lamey, comes from a 2003 paper that estimated the average number of field deaths at about six per acre. That figure was extrapolated from earlier studies on rodent deaths during grain and sugarcane harvesting. Another oft-cited figure comes from an Australian finding of 40 mouse deaths per acre of grain. Wild bird, reptile, amphibian, and freshwater fish deaths are trickier to pin down but likely amount to a small fraction of the overall total, which Fischer and Lamey estimate at 7.3 billion wild animal lives.

That’s a rough estimate, to be sure, not a rigorous figure, but it would put plant agriculture’s toll in the same ballpark as industrial animal consumption. “Traditional veganism,” say Fischer and Lamey, “could potentially be implicated in more animal deaths than a diet that contains free-range beef and other carefully chosen meats.”

Enjoy your salad! LOL (Okay, I’m being a bit of an ass.) Fact is, life feeds on life. There is no free ride. We all kill animals. We all eat what we kill, and we will be eaten. In fact, we are being eaten as we live and breath. There is no escaping. Not that I am aware of.

6 Likes
23

Thoughly agree.

Bears are also omnivores as are primates.

My eldest preferred not eating meat since he was born. I adapted to his needs for food types and nutrition. My other two eat meat about twice or three times a week. I have meat in my diet daily.

3 Likes
24

Uh, not to be quarrelsome, but I prefer “Everything in moderation, including moderation”

Edit (just a little off the top)

2 Likes
25

I use something similar. I like to be balanced. This is subjective (my idea of balance in my life may not be acceptable to someone else :woman_shrugging:t2: ).

I avoid extremes.

I realize I will do harm, but try to reduce the harm done and work towards better well-being.

I avoid as much as possible the idea of expectation.

1 Like
26

Wouldn’t this be shifting the goalposts, as the goal isn’t to digest them completely, but to get enough nutrients from them.

But I never claimed herbivores can eat meat, we are omnivores, so what a herbivore is capable of isn’t entirely relevant. goal posts again! :kissing_cat:

I also never claimed our bodies cannot digest meat, of course it can.

Vegetarians have several options for sources of B12. These include eggs and dairy products, such as milk and cheese, shiitake, tempeh, tofu for a few examples.

Vegans have a more limited list of options. Fortified foods, or those with added vitamin B12, are a great source. (Vegan’s can also eat animal products like egg, depending on definitions, some define veganism as ‘reducing animal suffering to the highest degrees practicable.’ eggs and dairy aren’t always disqualified in a vegan diet.)

In general, we need to replenish between about 1 and 3 grams of creatine a day, depending on how much muscle we have.

Creatine can be produced by our liver. It’s synthesized from the amino acids (protein building blocks): arginine, glycine, and methionine. so as long as you intake these building blocks, you can forgo eating creatine directly, I do eat cranberries also though, which is a pretty good source of creatine.

Arginine, glycine and methionine are found in dairy products and eggs, tofu, beans and some nuts.

All found in eggs, dairy and tofu, oranges, almond milk, and one of my favourites Agaricus bisporus mushrooms. :yum:

Chia seeds, edamame, avocados, beans, edible seaweed, assorted cooking oils, soya, and hemp oil.

That’s not the case at all, convincing is not on my agenda at all, I am simply highlighting it is arguably more ethical.

But it does, we don’t require meat in our diet, with a few exceptions for some people.

I’m also not sure what claim I have made, that is in need of supporting, if I am missing it, apologies, can you highlight it for me?

Well that’s not fair, I’d say you are jumping the banana launcher on this one.

27

Don’t those additives (fortified foods) come from animals as well? It has been a while but the last time I looked into it I thought that was the case.

28

I also like to avoid extremes.

Could it be argued that eating meat is an extreme choice, as an animal is having it’s life cut short to feed another animal, when that animal is cognitively aware of this occurrence and also has an alternative available?

29

Until we acquired the ability to control fire, which provided the opportunity to cook meat which made it far more digestible and the protein more readily available, translating to availability of the energy required for the lifestyle.

Depending upon where your research is centered and what time period concerned, eating meat was definitely not just a choice. Where I live, there is evidence of a primarily meat dominated diet for an extended period. (Paleo-Archaic) Although fire was being employed, climatic changes dictated when a pivot to a more plant-based diet became even possible. Poignantly, fire also played a role in the adoption of certain vegetative diets (e.g. maize) due to the acquired abilities to fire pottery, allowing for the cooking of plants which improved digestion, nutritional availability and reduced the need for nomadic lifestyles, due to contributing localized controlled agriculture.
A discussion of the “Cooking Hypothesis” , among other related subjects can be found here: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/692113#:~:text=The%20cooking%20hypothesis%20posits%20that,of%20novel%20digestive%20adaptations%20and

1 Like
30

They often do, yet synthetic options are apparently becoming more readily available, but this also rolls back to what definition of veganism is being used.

I also want to reiterate, I am not a vegan, I am a vegetarian, as I don’t believe a vegan diet is sustainable.

1 Like
31

Ah, I don’t hold the position that we ‘chose’ to eat meat as a species, that would be absurd.

We evolved to eat meat due to necessity.

Yet, it is no longer necessary for many people, culture and location dependant.

1 Like