+1 agreed

 

Disgusting. I'm with Paul - I'd seriously unload on anyone I saw doing this.

 

The feeling's mutual, bro.

The snake is no big deal (although I much prefer it in soup form), but the fish dish I'm definitely not a fan of. Even I have to draw the line somewhere.

It's the cow's dharma to provide sustenance for me. Perhaps in its next life, due to faithful fulfillment of its dharma, it can be a hungry human like me.

 

You'd unload a clip of ammunition on someone who poured soy sauce on a dead squid/octopus?

Come on now is that really what you'd do?

 

Animals are food. A lion doesn't cry when it eats a steer from the rear.

Do you eat fruits only after they dropped from the tree?

 

Quick Insert Paul Watsonzzzz....

 

There are many, many things that can be unloaded on someone without involving firearms. Your semantic attack fails to see the point of my statement, which is to reiterate that regardless of culture or any other broad-form excuse, there is NO reason to put another animal through that type of treatment. Satisfying a sick urge to watch a creature suffer - however briefly - for the sake of ones own culinary entertainment is inexcusable.

Choku Dori presented a reasonable argument against anthropomorphizing the animals we consume, however it leaves out the unknown which is that we as humans have no evidence as to what extent a sea creature or any other being feels pain or experiences the agony of dying.

I was raised 100% lacto-ovo vegetarian due to having seventh-day adventist parents and never even ate any meat until I was well into adulthood. I tried plenty of things but never developed a taste for any of them. As such, I maintain the diet I was raised with for health reasons - not to provide idealistic support for animal rights. I agree mostly with the argument here that these creatures are here for us to eat - including Choku Dori's citation of the Bible. However, even that paradigm leaves no room for the intentional and willful infliction of suffering upon a creature that is ultimately losing it's life so we (you, really) can continue to maintain ours. I get it - cycle of life, etc. - but still, why even do this?! What stands to be gained by continuing this gustatory entertainment? That's why I say it is disgusting.

So to answer your questions, no I would not 'unload a clip' on someone. I'm not even going to bother responding to Aithien because their argument or whatever point they are trying to make is very irrelevant to this discussion.

 

The squid/octopus thing is dead though..the nerves react to soy sauce and makes them fire..its not alive so its not suffering?

 

preeeettty sure unless I massively failed in quoting whatever I did that I was referring to the deep fried fish thing.

thanks for playing!

 

You quoted the squid.

I'm open to a lot of different types of food, but the fish one is a little too much for me.

 

Thanks. Gah, my intarweb skills are fail.

And yeah - I was definitely referring to the fish/snake videos the whole time despite my quote mismanagement. I can't stand snakes but even at that I don't think its OK to treat them like that.

 

The snake was dead... that's the chicken without head syndrome.

But the fish... ugh. I would not do that. If I don't trust the restaurant that I require proof of a moving head that it's fresh, then I don't think I should eat at that restaurant. Unless we're desperate for food. Or there's gonna be some severe political backlash.... but in general that live head fish dish would not be my preference. Actually, I'm not even interested in the original squid dish. I just thought it was an interesting vid.

Now this is just gross (but no moral controversy):

 

This is almost like an arguement between a meat eater and a vegetarian. Where the vegetarian says there's stress hormones in the meat and it will transfer to you.

 

LOL Buddha would agree.

 

Samsara's a be0tch, right?