Opinion of Vegetarians/Vegans

[/]

For some reason, a lot of people are biased against them.

http://bites.today.com/_news/2012/07/06/12598333-survey-30-of-meat-eaters-wont-date-a-vegetarian?d=1

[/]

I'm surprised by the mainly positive reviews - from my experience, it seems like a lot of people are unfairly biased against vegetarians/vegans for some reason...

Voted FF, of course.

[/]

Basically the same as my view of religious people. I have no problem with them, as long as they don't try to force me to live the same way as they do.

Huh, in Hinduism and other Eastern Religions, the older people, people in villages and more religious people tend to be vegetarian, while younger people are the one's eating meat. My experience with my family anyway, and other Indian and Nepalese families.

Anyway FF of couurse, even though I'm not one.

'Tis a shame.

[/]

I've never understood this crap about "as long as they don't try to force me to live that way."  Force you how?  I'm pretty sure I've never seen ~1% of the population successfully force ~99% of the population to live in any way.  Or do you mean vegetarians are fine as long as they don't try to argue that you're wrong?  To begin with, arguing a position is not coercive.  I have never understood that attitude, especially coming from a political forum...politics is inherently so much more coercive than one-on-one moral argumentation.  I get being opposed to people being obnoxious jackasses, but absolutely not people who don't want to be challenged at all, and that attitude seems so common on this issue.

with that in mind...

HP if they are doing it for humane reasons. As long as you are buying from Certified Humane sources, I see no problem with meat consumption.

I'm not sure I've ever met a single meat-eater who consistently buys from Certified Human sources...or even regularly does.  Even if one did, it doesn't require much mental stretching to figure out why someone might prefer to not unnecessary take animal lives when doing so is not particularly burdensome.  You basically are arguing people are automatically "HPs" because they attribute non-zero intrinsic value to animal life, even though I imagine you attribute value to human life that's way more than zero.  Why?

HP for the most part. I don't care what vegetarians/vegans eat, so why the Hell do they care about what I eat?

For the same reason I would care if you were kicking some random stranger in the street -- because essentially all of us hold that animals are (to some extent) rights-bearing creatures, and because a lot of the way meat products (and some non-meat products) are derived results in pretty regular cruelty to those creatures that's completely unavoidable.  Perhaps you don't think animals are rights-bearing creatures and have no problem even with torturing them, but I'm sure you're aware other people disagree, so I'm not sure why you didn't already know an answer to this question.

I find that either diet would be too limited for me.
I am much more against high carb/sugar than eating meat.
I have lost weight on Atkins.
How difficult is a low carb Vegan/Vegetarian diet?
Is Vegan/Vegetarian healthy?
Is it better just to cut out calories, fat etc?
Meat can be eaten in moderation.
I tend to eat a lot of chicken and eggs.

Soda isn't good.
People tend to much more anti-smokers than anti-unhealthy food.

Obviously, different people prefer different things, but the complaint that the vegetarian diet is "too limited" is baffling to me.  There is an incredible amount of food in the world, and a lot of it is (usually incidentally) vegetarian.  Most people have self-imposed diets way more restrictive (even with meat) than the diversity of potentially available vegetarian food.

(Also, for the record, the way to lose weight is mostly to eat fewer calories than you spend.  Other things can have a marginal effect, but if you're below your calorie limit, soda isn't intrinsically "bad."  I know someone who survives just fine exclusively on pizza and multivitamins.  Our bodies have energy requirements and nutrition requirements, and beyond that, weight loss is about minimizing calorie consumption while meeting energy requirements and nutrition requirements.  Vegetarianism results in fewer calories consumed on average, but it's not a weight loss diet.)

For people that do it for legitimate and pressing health concerns or religion/cultural reasons, FF, why not.

Seeing as many people here in Amerikkka that go vegan or vegetarian are rich liberals trying to feel morally superior, I voted HP.

Are you arguing that vegetarianism based on moral reasoning is inherently objectionable?  Even if you're arguing that it's only usually objectionable, you give deference to people doing it for religious reasons because...many people who are religious don't do so to feel morally superior?  Also, considering it took me like twenty seconds to find a post where you explicitly designated a given group as morally superior (and better as Christians) for holding a political view, does that make you an HP?

[/]

Veganism can take a lot of effort if you are poor just in terms of what is available in a lot of places in the US.  Cheap processed foods with animal based ingredients are often more available than a good selection of vegetables and non-meat proteins, and easier if you do not have a lot of time to cook.

Effort is irrelevant in determining morality...