Go to Taiwan, and you will meet many happy friendly vegetarians.
toldailytopic: Should vegetarians have equal rights?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Go to Taiwan, and you will meet many happy friendly vegetarians.
Plain to whom? It isn't at all plain to me....
You guess. Opinion.
So those are the ONLY scriptures you are going to share....meanwhile ignoring those that pertain specifically to God's giving us meat for our consumption?
Interesting.
lain:coulter4president
New member
that's easy: insufficient protein & fat to the brain (and other important body parts)
I lived in Taiwan for a number of years. I encountered many great vegetarian dishes there.
When I asked a great many people, however, if they were vegetarian...do you know their response to me?
"Sometimes."
In other words, they were vegetarian for periods of time, but they would eat meat (chicken, pork, fish) to suit their needs and when family occasions demanded such.
I am very confident that the great majority of Taiwanese people are NOT strict vegetarians.
I'm a vegetarian today. I'll be eating a tomato & mozzarella panini with broccoli and cheese soup for lunch and meatless spaghetti with fresh garlic bread sticks for dinner. :chew:
El DLo
New member
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but if you're asking if they should receive special treatment, I'd say no.
I was a vegan for three years until just a few weeks ago. I was never into it for the animal rights reason, but similarly I never expected someone to accommodate me. I realize that many vegetarians and vegans put off a bad stigma for the others by being militaristic about their diets or demanding special treatment, but they need to acknowledge that their lifestyle isn't one that really should require special treatment.
As a vegan, the only special treatment I've ever asked for was asking if a particular dish contained dairy products, and that was the extent of it.
edit: Reading back through the thread, I saw some people comparing it to gay rights. My stance is that they should be treated the same way. In the same way that I believe a religious institution should have the right to decide whether or not to allow same sex marriages, I think that a food establish should have the right to decide whether or not to accommodate vegetarians. It's not the responsibility of a burger place to maintain a second grill that meat never touches. If that burger place chooses to do so, they can chock it up to a selling point. As long as they're not lying about their facilities, then I see no problem with it.
I was a vegan for three years until just a few weeks ago. I was never into it for the animal rights reason, but similarly I never expected someone to accommodate me. I realize that many vegetarians and vegans put off a bad stigma for the others by being militaristic about their diets or demanding special treatment, but they need to acknowledge that their lifestyle isn't one that really should require special treatment.
As a vegan, the only special treatment I've ever asked for was asking if a particular dish contained dairy products, and that was the extent of it.
edit: Reading back through the thread, I saw some people comparing it to gay rights. My stance is that they should be treated the same way. In the same way that I believe a religious institution should have the right to decide whether or not to allow same sex marriages, I think that a food establish should have the right to decide whether or not to accommodate vegetarians. It's not the responsibility of a burger place to maintain a second grill that meat never touches. If that burger place chooses to do so, they can chock it up to a selling point. As long as they're not lying about their facilities, then I see no problem with it.
I don't doubt that many are "sometimes" vegetarians- but there are certainly some who are strictly vegetarian.
All in all I like Taiwan.
Cracked
New member
Interesting.
Here it is for you clearly:
In Eden, there was no meat eating.
God did not officially allow meat eating until after the flood.
You can try to argue against that if you will, but the more interesting question is - why would you? Obviously, we can eat meat now. It would seem to me that those who just don't want to believe the obvious do so in an effort to exalt their own behavior and place it beyond any argument. Is it not enough for you to simply be justified in eating meat? Is it your duty to belittle those that do not, even though there is biblical support for abstaining? Could it be that you hate the thought that perhaps (oh there is that word again) God's way, when fully realized, is not congruent with your own?
Somethings are difficult to be absolutely certain about. Invincible ignorance is not something that I consider a virtue so I avoid it. People who have it "all figured out" most certainly do not. Mystery is always better than half-truths and lies born from alien ideology and cloaked in self-righteous indignation. Somethings are not perfectly clear - wisdom recognizes that.
genuineoriginal
New member
The text was adapted from a state constitutional amendment that was passed by the majority of people in the state in an election then overturned by the united states supreme court for being too narrow and too broad at the same time.
<----Vegetarian.
Last time I looked I had the same rights as I had when I ate meat.
Last time I looked I had the same rights as I had when I ate meat.
This is convoluted presumptuous baloney! In Gen:4 is clearly states Able was a shepherd, one sacrifices the lamb by bleeding it and cooking it as part of an offering for thanks, as we sat grace today. You would have to be a moron to believe the sheep were not for food.
You think you will be on earth when Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world? You believe the earth is Greater then Heaven?
You idea about 'glorified body', being raised incorruptible does mean without decay. Further, you need to bear in mind, the people of that time would not imagine happiness without a body. Everything that swayed people away from God was carnal because all earthly pleasure was carnal. Grasping happiness without carnal reward was the major sin of man. Being of flesh, we are saved by faith in Christ, yet remain infected with carnality, until we are raised incorruptible, that which is incorruptible is no longer flesh. Yes, Jesus took on an earthly form, but did not bleed and was not recognized as He would have been as before the Resurrection.
You have made a mess of scripture.
Cracked
New member
This is convoluted presumptuous baloney! In Gen:4 is clearly states Able was a shepherd, one sacrifices the lamb by bleeding it and cooking it as part of an offering for thanks, as we sat grace today. You would have to be a moron to believe the sheep were not for food.
You think you will be on earth when Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world? You believe the earth is Greater then Heaven?
You idea about 'glorified body', being raised incorruptible does mean without decay. Further, you need to bear in mind, the people of that time would not imagine happiness without a body. Everything that swayed people away from God was carnal because all earthly pleasure was carnal. Grasping happiness without carnal reward was the major sin of man. Being of flesh, we are saved by through faith in Christ, yet remain infected with carnality, until we are raised incorruptible, that which is incorruptible is no longer flesh. Yes, Jesus took on an earthly form, but did not bleed and was not recognized as He would have been as before the Resurrection.
You have made a mess of scripture.
No - I have simply expressed what it says. You are being "presumptions", strictly speaking (assuming things not written). Perhaps the things in Scripture you have decided do not make sense to you theologically are your problem. This may help you:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1710844,00.html
I am not sure that I agree with everything Wright states in the interview, but I suppose the beginning could be enlightening to many.
As far as many can tell, we do not stay in a disembodied realm of clouds and harps, according to the Bible. As for the original basis of our discussion (meat eating), please see my most recent response to vegascowboy.
No would be a great answer to this question. Are you still as cracked wacky as you used to be? :idunno:
- Status