Are Meat Eaters Hateful to Plant Eaters??

Have you noticed that meat lovers seem pretty touchy about even being in the presence of a vegan? have you been told how 'cruel' you are to the 'poor plants?' Has anyone told you how apparently 'disgusting' it is the way cows use their tongues to eat plants? do you often wonder why they even say that? it may be simpler than you realize.

Many animals we eat are plant-eaters

Have you ever did a run-down of statistics on how many animals or more specifically what kind of animals are slaughtered, hunted, or raised for food? statistically we eat more plant-eaters, or vegans than any other. while there are few exceptions to the rule, namely Asia and a few other places, statistically we only eat animals who live by the same rule as vegans do. kinda puts the hate into perspective doesn't it?

Most pets are carnivores

Then you look at their pets, how many are herbivores? how many are carnivores? statistically society's two most favorite, and often adopted pets, happen to be carnivores. dogs and cats. oh sure the odd rabbit ends up 'adopted' but i have seen more bunnies fed to snakes afterwards than treated as members of the family like the dog or cat. if you go to most any shelter around the globe, you often find dogs and cats shown. even if there are herbivores available, and lord knows they need all the help they can get as well, the shelter workers try to convince you that a dog is more proper for you, even if say, a pygmy goat, is just like a dog and no larger than a small toy breed at that. it seems the shelter workers don't want you to adopt an herbivore. wonder why that is?

If you look at it this way, it makes one wonder if it is a hangup we have against those who eat plants. do meat eaters truly believe in the plant suffering argument? if they are trying to debate us, i am sure they must, or they would seem to intentionally look stupid by the mention of that line, which obviously is not what they want on their side in a debate! so it does make one wonder, do they love plants more than plant-eaters? do we get insulted because we are 'murdering' more plants? their pets are meat eaters, they eat plant-eaters, even if humans are truly herbivores, which i believe they are, they certainly show great insult at that mention as well.

it is funny, how incorrect it is to see humans biting into flesh with flat teeth, claiming we are evolved carnivores or omnivores, that tools are evolutionary features. but then our bodies remain 100% herbivorous, our ability to live healthy on fats and cholesterol are certainly not in our favor, our teeth are flat, yet we cling to the omnivore myth. we seem to ignore the obvious. meat is uncomfortable for us to chew, we don't like the taste of blood, (an herbivore trait) yet instead of accepting that, we just cook instead, flavor it with plant-ingredients, and even go to the dentist to treat the symptom of the problem our teeth deal with eating meat--tooth decay, who's primary cause is meat stuck in between and finding its way into the gumline.

if you look at the teeth of any carnivore or true omnivore, their teeth are well spaced apart and it is nearly impossible for meat to get caught in between, and they seem to have healthy teeth even if they gorge on flesh and blood. herbivores, like deer, have perfectly white teeth well into old-age, and eat only plants.

Pigs, a true omnivore, don't need grills to eat meat!

Deer, true plant-eaters, need no dentists to keep their teeth white

It always makes me giggle to see humans treating the symptom instead of the actual problem, since the solution is right directly in front of them in the mirror. we take the easy way out often, but as for the original topic, the hate of plant eaters, it stems from religious, historical, and possibly ancient savagry. many herbivores today were once carnivores in ancient times, the horse for example used to prey on humans back in our ancient history, when we were no more than 3 ft tall. the horse has since become evolved to be 100% herbivorous but that does not stop humans from racing them to death, using them to carry their tools, or even eating them.

Have you ever wondered why horses, an herbivore, have such a large mouth gape?

I may never find out why we truly have it out for plant eaters, but i am going to solve it one day, and until then, i will remain ever vigilant to the plight they face. keep in mind this is nothing against carnivores, and vegans don't hate carnivores the way meat lovers hate herbivores. in fact, i greatly admire nature, and predation, when it is natural. it's those of us who are un-natural that bother me!

"You cannot wantonly justify an immoral act, just because you believe it may be connected to some higher purpose!"

--Star Trek: The Next Generation "Man of the People"

Human beings the most Intelligent?

I hear this far too often. "Humans are the most intelligent species" or "Animals are inferior and humans are superior we use tools" all the time to justify our use and abuse of animals, it is the most often used superiority complex in history, longer than the Crusades, longer than the Nazi regime. but no different in its violence towards another being. i never could understand it because, frankly, i do not see our species as intelligent. violent, destructive in ways that animals could never be? sure. but intelligent? no. let's do a run down shall we?

1. What truly rates intelligence? an IQ test designed by and for humans?
Many try and use the long-used Intelligence Quotient test, designed by and for humans, to rate how 'dumb' animals are. when the cow, for example cannot figure out how many 'people' are in the puzzle, the animal fails. of course, i failed this test too, as i am not good at patterns, puzzles, and math, which  the IQ test favors. i favor real knowledge that obviously is beyond the scope of the IQ test's favoritism of memory spans, and pattern recognition. if the IQ test could rate real knowledge of real life events, history, biology, psychology as is used in the true reality of things, many humans who pass as a 'genius' would fail miserably.

                                          "our shields are down! we are defenseless!"

2. But humans have 'evolved' to use tools, animals have not! that makes us the superior being!
Incorrect. true, we, after learning how animals do it, have in fact replicated tools that help us do what they do, such as fly using aircraft, or dive using submarines, or to simply survive (Air conditioning? stoves? homes?) but is that truly superiority, or living inside a bubble to keep our species alive. i am  not kidding when i say we are on technological life support. animals can survive without tools, their anatomy geared for even the harshest of conditions, but humans? we are only as superior as our infrastructure permits. if, by some miraculous event, the infrastructure collapses for long enough, as evidenced by any major disaster (Hurricane Katrina, Japan's Tsunami, etc) we are defenseless. our deflector shields have failed. our weapons, offline. we are now exposed to the very world we seek so hard to stay away from. we are now on the 'other side' of the food chain, prey, weak, dead! many do die in such events proving nature's true superiority over us. not ours to it.

3. But does not religion give superiority to humans?
this argument by far is the hardest to argue for it is based entirely against logic. i do not myself believe in God anymore, for i have seen no proof we can use to support any existance of a higher power. as far as i am concerned God is just a fairy tale made up by people over centuries who are trying to explain the unexplained, to find some justification for death, to explain it, or to ease grief-stricken folks who have lost someone they care about and refuse to accept it. But other than that, i lose it. God may be nice if used to do the latter, to find meaning in something as awful as death, but when it goes so far to infiltrate our justice system, to promote mass death to animals or mislabel our species as 'superior' or the 'master of all creation' i am lost. i have seen nothing of our species that resembles even remotely superiority in the most true form. we commit acts of barbarism that even the most vicious carnivore would never do to their prey. we commit this for no logical reason--we do NOT need meat. pure and simple. it is completely un-natural to drink milk after infancy or from another species. for a species which loves to say how high and mighty they are, i can only agree if they are discussing how destructive our species has become. the meat and dairy industries are the #2 contributor to Global Havoc, which i use as a more accurate term than the largely misleading 'Global Warming' (because many who are now freezing where it was once warm are the ones who are largely in denial over the whole thing, i do not agree with using the latter term). so long as we continue to live life as we are now, we will never see an end to the destruction, or war, or hate. humans love to brag how 'evolved' we are, despite how they never know the meaning of the word, but refuse to go any farther. they want to stick in this rut they created for themselves, never caring at all about the world around them that is collapsing as we speak. one day, we may see our infrastructure fail, and then survival of the fittest will once again re-establish itself, and we will finally see who is truly, the superior species...

"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives, i rather believe time is a companion, who goes along with us on the journey. teaching us to cherish every moment, for it will never come again. after all, Number One, we are only mortal!"

--Captain Picard, Star Trek: Generations

Animal Rights: The Final Frontier

The fight for animal rights is a voyage in and of itself. as one of many captains in the fleet, i have found it is not an easy task. especially when your ship is alone in a very harsh territory. taking inspiration from Star Trek: Voyager, a show about a ship alone in a far away quadrant full of a multitude of unknown dangers and struggling to survive, i can relate well. as a lone activist in Owensboro, KY, i have found that activism is seriously lacking. i am the proverbial Captain Janeway. Owensboro the Delta Quadrant. struggling not to just get home, but survive and help the animals to as well. unfortunately, i am up against enemies of my own. hunters, meat lover alike share many common grounds. the least of which is religion, feelings of superiority over non-humanoid life, and a desire to fear and destroy that which they fail to understand...

I know it is not just a coincidence in Star Trek: Voyager that they decided to show hunters in the episodes known as 'The Killing Game' 'Flesh and Blood parts 1-2' and 'Prey'. they really made them look true-to-life despite efforts here in the 21st Century to whitewash the majority to believe hunters are doing some public service. in Voyager, however, they showed the true mentality. that of killing purely for sport. you see, hunting has not been a survival method for centuries. today, it is as obsolete as, shall we say, a Class 1 Shuttle. or a rotary telephone. no one uses those, so why hold to hunting? how many times have we been told 'hunting has been around since the dawn of time?' 'humans would not have survived without it!' well i cannot change history. it would also be a violation of the Temporal Prime Directive to attempt it. however, i can change the future. hunting is obsolete. archaic. if we love to hold to one form of obsolescence, why not go all the way? why not use horses and buggies? oil lamps? why not use telegraphs instead of Facebook? certainly hunters are not too stubborn to upgrade to the newest version of Microsoft Windows when they inevitably issue a new version, so why is it so hard for them to even consider 'upgrading' to vegan?

The Borg. another inspiration and relation to reality courtesy of Gene Roddenberry. the reason we hold to such archaic past acts is due to the very nature of assimilation--otherwise known as indoctrinization. brainwashing. fearing being an individual, we are driven to assimilate into a collective mentality. that of one mind, one force, no independent thought. our government is akin to the Borg. where the only law is 'resistance is futile' and i am not kidding. if anyone does try to break the iron grip of our Borg Queen, we are put away. the AETA, Hunter Harrassment Law, and many other limits to our freedom to speak for the rights to life of animals is not uncommon. and we have not begun to see the last of it. the battle is going on as we speak. and we shall never give in to the whims of the Borg. we must never allow them to assimilate us into their culture. for if we do, we will be destroyed

But it is not as fun and easy to watch as Star Trek. in real life, we have real criminals. and this is no show. this is life. hunting is no fantasy on some holodeck we can simply say 'Computer! End Program!' and have it whisk away. this is a real war. fought by real people. and sadly, if it is anything akin to the Battle of Wolf 359, it is us who are outnumbered. we must never give into the whims of welfare, 'humane hunting' or 'humane slaughter' the problem is this thing called religion, indoctrinization, and lies. we do not need to kill. and there is simply no LOGIC in being threatened by a life that does not bring death to others. i am surprised no one is jealous of us, as there is nothing to be shameful of in a lifestyle that does not kill others to live. one day i will find the reason people feel threatened. one day i will find the real reason humans hate deer and feel superior to animals. as they say, find the cause, cure the disease. we must stop chasing symptoms of a much larger problem. we have to find the cause if we are to cure it. and pardon my cliche'd exit, but Helmsman, Set a course......for home!

"What you are doing is not in self-defense! it is the exploitation of another species for your  own benefit. my people decided long ago that was unacceptable, even in the name of scientific progress!"

--Captain Katryn Janeway. Star Trek: Voyager 'Scientific Method'

Common excuses for hunters and meat lovers supporting their acts

Many excuses exist for those defending a lifestyle both archaic and obsolete, whether it is generally meat eating or otherwise. hunters, i claim are more dangerous than a general blind meat eater in that they can harm animals and witness what would make many go vegan at the sight of it. but regardless, i find many who, even on our side, support their arguments. some claim again that humans who are 'wild' have a right to kill animals for food, completely ignoring that we are not omnivores and share much of our anatomy with herbivores.

1. Hunting is more ethical/sustainable/healthy than beef/factory farms/slaughter
This argument is used mainly by both Animal Activists (mainly welfare who pose as 'rights') and hunters alike. they usually seem to agree that hunting is not full of the hormones, the level of industrialization that is factory farming. and in that essence, they are correct. however, what they are incorrect in is that hunting involves far more suffering (bowhunting has a wounding rate of over 65%, while animals on factory farms are lucky to live for 15 minutes after being slit in the throat; a deer embedded with arrrows can suffer for weeks and starve) and hunting requires a mentality of the consumer that is relative to a serial killer. one who buys meat from the store (and of course from factory farms mainly) would not be shown the amount of harsh cruelty done to the animals. hunters, in contrast, can kill animals directly and see everything. hunting then, is like a wall-less slaughterhouse. what would make any average meat eater consider going vegan over would not likely phase a hunter, who can see all the gore and still eat his/her kill.

2. Hunting helps control populations where predators are no longer in sufficient numbers or are extinct.
I know the argument of who killed all the predators off seems to mean nothing to those on both sides now the fact is that it is exactly why there are 'too many deer' as hunters claim. and no, hunting does not help control populations at all. in fact it does more harm, in that humans lack the instincts of a true predator who only hunts animals by hand and is only able to 'cull' the weak and sick animals (healthy ones are too fast/experienced), thus ensuring a naturally strong gene pool. since humans need weapons and other tools to even remotely hunt animals. their being sick or strong has no merit, and the most favored animals are the strong ones. hunters claim that sick animals can make humans sick or cause food poisoning. this is true. however, NO true predator gets sick even if consuming a deer with CWD. like Bovine BSE, CWD IS possible in humans, but it takes a decade to show symptoms. and sadly, by then, it is too late. no cure exists for either disease once symptoms show up.

3. Humans hunting deer is more 'humane' than a wolf doing the same
Leaving the lack of logic in this argument aside, i will argue it. what IS 'humane' to anyone? is it naturally eating meat due to a physiological need and having an anatomy that ensures a quick kill and fast consumption or is it the feelings of which is savage and which is civil? do we claim that wolves, animals with a need for meat, who are able to rip animals to shreds is more cruel than a human who claims to end lives with one shot more humane? or is the definition of humane to mean that those who do not need to kill should not? humans, do not need meat. there is plenty of evidence and many who live as vegetarian or vegan who can prove that point, so is the killing of meat really about how it is killed or that it has to be killed at all? if we do not need meat, then the  deaths for it is certainly unnecessary, wasteful, and in that respect, cruel and inhumane.

4. Humans have the right to choose/it is my choice of a diet/don't force your opinion on me
One of two last resort tactics used by humans who hunt and eat meat both. that we have the right to choose and that meat is legal and available makes it wrong to 'force a change on them'. but do murderers have a right to choose? are we forcing our opinions on those who buy guns legally and then shoot humans? pets? no! do we have a right to choose to rape a woman or child even if sexual enhancement drugs are legal to buy? no! are we forcing our opinion on those who destroy buildings and human lives in terrorism by imprisonment? NO! there is no 'right to choose' if it involves a wasteful destruction of an innocent life for something one does not need. while i will not argue against lethal force used in self-defense, the point is hunting is NOT legally self defense nor necessary. it is simply wasteful.

5. God gave us animals to eat/use/for us to benefit from
I really despise arguing religion as it is so illogical. the Bible of many religions contradicts one another. the Koran says it is ok to kill 'infidels'. our Bible claims that homosexuals should be 'put to death' (read the Leviticus chapters). but it also makes many errors. for a supposedly superior being who 'knows all' would it seem rather dumb of Him to claim that Earth itself is a 'disk' or that rabbits 'chew the cud' or that bats 'are birds?' i find that a bit funny really...

...but getting to the argument itself. it always cites 'animals' are here for us to [yada yada yada]. if so, then why are dogs, cats, pets, exempt and even protected by law? aren't they animals too? i do not recall the phrase which is cited (which does not exist in any Bible of any kind from any religion by the way) being in favor of 'wild' animals or 'farm' animals. so in essense, since humans, pets and  wildlife are ALL ANIMALS by that standard they use they should not have any compunctions against killing anyone for food or trophy, including us.

                                          "Hunting a species to extinction, is not logical"

                                         --Spock, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

Why do humans hate deer in particular?

                                                    ME? Taste 'Good?'


It would appear that the human race has it out for deer. oh, don't believe me? try this experiment. go to Google search, and type in just the word 'deer' and hit Search. look at what comes up. hunting this, venison that, bowhunting this, hunting license that. now type in Dog, or even Turkey and Cow. 

Try it many ways. 'Cow Lover' 'Dog Lover' 'Deer Lover' what does that last one show? yep, hunting again. it's as if deer are only known to our species as meat, trophies, or targets. no other animal that i am aware of has such a ridiculous reputation.


There is always an answer to any thing we do. whether it is pre-meditated murder, rape, or simple larceny. there is a reason hunters choose deer the most. the problem is, until i know for sure, i cannot fix the problem. even a doctor, despite my abhorrence to them, has to know the underlying cause of a disease in order to treat the problem. if he just uses general therapy to treat the disease, masking symptoms, while it appears the problem is resolved, he has simply treated the symptom and not the problem.


There is a reason. the deer have a worse reputation than a cockroach. they are the only animal with whom the first thought which comes to our minds is 'hunting'. they are the only animals who are hated by us. even non-hunters will claim hunting as a valid means to reduce deer population, not even counting that they are only one out of billions of species that have populations. so why always deer? since i have yet to find the answer for sure, i can only speculate. the reasons are listed below, despite how ridiculous some of them appear, remember, i am only coming to these conclusions based on how many of a certain response i hear from hunters:

                                         So you kill me for just reminding you of vegan?




1. Deer are a reminder of veganism. Hunters, if you have ever tried even the very mention of the word 'vegan' to them, seem extremely offended. some use anger and insults, even physical threats (word of advice, never ask one about going vegan while they are drunk). the very mention of the peaceful lifestyle garners insults after insult to anyone following it. extreme fury. even acting as if the very thought of caring for a non-human is a violation of humanity itself. but don't laugh at the speculative reason i have chosen. if any one of us has heard the dreaded 'plants have feelings too' argument, to which we all know is ridiculous, we do know those using it do not intend to come off stupid (even if they do in fact seem to have lost some I.Q. points in the process) but they do seem to only eat the meat of plant eaters. deer, cows, sheep, horse, goat, chicken, you name it. those animals all live vegan. aka herbivorous. coincidence? if it were legal would they be eating us as well?


2. Deer are 'attacking' our vehicles. Deer hunters always seem intent, including their supporters even the non-hunting public, on using deer and vehicle collisions as evidence of a overpopulation issue. to which any state government or mayor will believe right out of the blue without even research to how it is no different than any 'at-fault' accident involving a vehicle hitting a child who runs out into the street after a ball, or any other animal at that. it's always deer accidents. I hate to break it to ya, but deer are only one out of many animals, some considerably larger, that hit cars

                                         


Certainly none of us would be hunting horses for hitting cars too? so why attack deer all of the sudden, placing all the blame on them? when they are only ONE out of MANY victims of the unfortunate result of a car accident?

3. Deer ruined my garden! Oh really now? forget that rabbits, foxes, and skunks also do considerable damage? what about Squirrels? oh you have got a repellent for those? you do know deer repellents exist too, right? oh you don't! oh my word! so killing is just 'easier' right? easier than doing real homework?

4. Deer are 'overpopulated'. Ever notice how the dreaded 'they are overpopulated and hunting keeps them from starving to death' always applies to deer? what about rabbits? ducks? turkeys? humans? Also, ever see how illogical it is to save animals from death by killing them? how is one death worse than the other when the result is the same? also, nature has checks and balances as well. disease, natural predation, and starvation, like it or not, are the ways nature ensures the strong survive. with strength comes less disease, less gene pool problems, as well as less mutations which are un-natural. we may not like the grizzly effects, but we have no right to interfere with their natural course of evolution. we are also a part of it as well. humans are no superior species, and killing a tiger for 'eating our kids' is a vengeful act and not much logic within it. hunters seem to not like it when true predators hunt or control our populations, so why would we assume animals want us to interfere any more than the tiger?

My own speculation? I find it that it is a matter of human control. wild animals are beyond human control. there are no boundaries. they are truly free. they are untamed. untrainable. and most likely presumed 'savage'. unfortunately, this is why i think the true goal of hunters is to eliminate all wild animals, leaving pets and livestock and nothing more. it is as if an animal's status as a 'pet', be it deer, cow, or even chicken, gives them rights  that those same animals would not have if they lived wild or on a farm. so my guess is they want to eradicate all wild animals. however, it does not answer my inquiry about why they seem intent on elimination of deer first above all others, does it. the way we use bows and arrows. that takes extreme anger to use such a weapon. but deer are the main target of such weapons. not the only one mind you, but the main one. so where did our hate root from? did deer once eat people before they evolved to a herbivore? did they? was that a possibility? did some big impact that caused extreme anger happen? to whom? and why is it still breeding today?

I am unsure about anyone else, but i will not rest until i find the answer. to treat this 'disease', we must find the underlying cause. treating the symptom and not the problem will have ill effects. and much like a cold remedy, the problem is likely to resurface later on. so without this information, which hunters seem intent on skating around or not answering, hunting will, in fact, never end permanently. so we must find this real cause. lest we fight the same battle over and over again.

"We've lost our way. We've allowed our predatory instincts to dominate us. We disperse ourselves throughout the quadrant sending ships in all directions. We've become a solitary race, isolated. We've spread ourselves too thin. We're no longer a culture; we have no identity."

--Star Trek: Voyager 'The Killing Game'