@adiam7: Depending on how you do the math, a single US soldier in Afghanistan costs ~$255,000 to ~$1,000,000 a year. So the 2.4 million NPR gets indirectly from the US federal government converts over to a handful of soldiers (or, you know, a fraction of a single CEO's salary bonus)
@misssmaris: NPR gets 2.46 million from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. NPR, in total, only has $164 million in revenue. You're so wrong it hurts.
You channel the spirit of Voltaire:
"People must have renounced, it seems to me, all natural intelligence to dare to advance that animals are but animated machines.... It appears to me, besides, that [such people] can never have observed with attention the character of animals, not to have distinguished among them the different voices of need, of suffering, of joy, of pain, of love, of anger, and of all their affections. It would be very strange that they should express so well what they could not feel."
"People must have renounced, it seems to me, all natural intelligence to dare to advance that animals are but animated machines.... It appears to me, besides, that [such people] can never have observed with attention the character of animals, not to have distinguished among them the different voices of need, of suffering, of joy, of pain, of love, of anger, and of all their affections. It would be very strange that they should express so well what they could not feel."
"...For the most part, people view the choice whether or not to eat meat as a personal decision..." Most people who believe eating animals is wrong try to get other people to stop eating animals. In exactly the same way that people who believe abortion is wrong try to get people to stop having abortions.
"Forcing ideals down other peoples throats, especially in a condescending manner, does less for your point anyway." Agree. Who is forcing ideals down anyone's throat? I made a comment which did not even support one side or the other of the argument and am now merely replying to comments directed at me. You will note that, as I said above, I have not made any declarative statements about whether it is right or wrong to eat meat. As for whatever condescension I may have displayed, I believe I am mostly, if not completely, justified in whatever snarky comments I have made. This Graviton fellow seems like a turd.
"Forcing ideals down other peoples throats, especially in a condescending manner, does less for your point anyway." Agree. Who is forcing ideals down anyone's throat? I made a comment which did not even support one side or the other of the argument and am now merely replying to comments directed at me. You will note that, as I said above, I have not made any declarative statements about whether it is right or wrong to eat meat. As for whatever condescension I may have displayed, I believe I am mostly, if not completely, justified in whatever snarky comments I have made. This Graviton fellow seems like a turd.
The key here is in the description of Libya as "a promising market"; it's easy to blame capitalism but we can also certainly conceive of an America without the agents of the military industrial complex pulling enough strings in congress to keep the cash and guns flowing.
@Graviton1066: Maybe you should keep your bizarre comments to yourself (AKA I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!).
And I certainly find it interesting how you choose to express your opinion. The claim that you are not attacking someone is odd considering you replied to my comment which was merely bemoaning the inevitable onslaught of meat-based jokes that occur on the comment section of any vegetarian related article (on this site and most others). You should have saved that comment for someone who came out with something like "SEE GUYZzzz this one study PROVES eating chicken is teh evil; you will all burn in chicken-hell".
Also, all matters of ethics are matters of choice and nothing is an automatic sign of enlightenment given humanity's lack of access to a handy book that explains everything that is right or wrong.
Also, all matters of ethics are matters of choice and nothing is an automatic sign of enlightenment given humanity's lack of access to a handy book that explains everything that is right or wrong.
@dukes_up: Absolutely fair. It's just the types of vegetarians/vegans relevant to the chicken story would be those with ethical reservations and not environment/health/religious reasons.
You realize I made no declarative statement about whether it is right or wrong to eat meat, right? Or is reading not your forte?
Also, if I did I do not see why I shouldn't? This is a post about the ethical implications of eating chickens...
Maybe reading just isn't your forte?
Also, if I did I do not see why I shouldn't? This is a post about the ethical implications of eating chickens...
Maybe reading just isn't your forte?
Are you serious? I'm not advocating for vegetarianism or veganism but there are a shitload of non-animal protein sources (most require combining incomplete proteins).
Observe: [www.google.ca]
Observe: [www.google.ca]
Uh, you realize that vegetarians/vegans don't eat meat for ethical reasons, right? You can go ahead and disagree with them, but I hope you realize that for people who consider the killing of animals to be wrong other peoples eating habits are of concern (in the same way that other peoples behavior that you would consider unethical should be of concern to you). It's not a 'lifestyle choice' in the way one chooses to use a Mac or PC.
You can attack those who actually post in a smug or superior manner but I don't see that happening downthread (I will take exception to the 'humorless' remark; for those who actually believe the killing of animals is unethical it makes sense for them to be humorloss about it. It's usually not considered kosher to joke about rape, murder, torture, etc.; I'm sure many vegetarians/vegans would class killing animals with such serious crimes).
You can attack those who actually post in a smug or superior manner but I don't see that happening downthread (I will take exception to the 'humorless' remark; for those who actually believe the killing of animals is unethical it makes sense for them to be humorloss about it. It's usually not considered kosher to joke about rape, murder, torture, etc.; I'm sure many vegetarians/vegans would class killing animals with such serious crimes).
Yay, an excuse for people to post countless inane "I LOVE MEAT" jokes.
@anonryan: The Chinese Communists did not overthrow the Emperor or the Chinese Empire. That was a proto-republican effort.
@reimoise: Property is a legal relation and pets are certainly understood as property. Even in that most horrific of institutions, chattel slavery, slaves were property even though they were sentient human beings.
If fact, calling a pet owner anything other than an owner sugarcoats the relationship. If I am someone's 'companion' I am not authorized to control their movements, make end of life decisions, discipline them, etc.
If fact, calling a pet owner anything other than an owner sugarcoats the relationship. If I am someone's 'companion' I am not authorized to control their movements, make end of life decisions, discipline them, etc.
@Belladonna77: Well, when dogs feel the need to bite some toes off of a diabetic person it is because said diabetic person has poor circulation resulting in tissue death. It's actually a good thing as it forces a hospital visit and follow-up treatment.
@tech42er: Can you cite those studies? All I've seen indicates that when controlling for socio-economic status race drastically drops in importance as a determining factor in educational outcomes.
Everyone involved in wonder showzen needs to run for the hills.
@bawheid: That should have been Mubarak's defense.
@Ack: "(Although "Canada's the best country in the world" did make me laugh out loud.)"
That's probably the same mirth many of us feel when you replace Canada with the US in that sentence. Both claims (indeed any such claim) is obviously stupid.
That's probably the same mirth many of us feel when you replace Canada with the US in that sentence. Both claims (indeed any such claim) is obviously stupid.
The problem with snobbery is no one does - or can - conform to the innumerable forms of snobbery.
If you like beer with ice than but ice in your beer. If you are a brewer and don't want people putting ice in your beer than require anyone purchasing your beer to sign a contract (or just don't sell your beer and sit on it while masturbating furiously).
If you like beer with ice than but ice in your beer. If you are a brewer and don't want people putting ice in your beer than require anyone purchasing your beer to sign a contract (or just don't sell your beer and sit on it while masturbating furiously).
