Are The Trolls Of The Vegetarian

What do I do if the boy I like is a vegetarian?

You should probably throw a fit, complete with lying face-first on the ground, fist pounding, and screaming. Alternatively, you could hide in your closet for the next week, cowering in your boots. The boy you like doesn’t eat meat?! Whaaaaaat? That’s pretty scary. I mean, vegetarian is a five syllable word. That’s extreme. And the fact that he cares enough about animals not to eat them? Probably the sign of a crazy dog guy (as opposed to a crazy cat lady… I dunno what you’d call a man with the same issue). Jeebers, he’s probably compassionate towards people as well. I dunno, he seems dangerous. Maybe mentally unhinged.Yes, I’m a troll��� :) It’s great he’s vegetarian! (Why wouldn’t it be?). And if you ask him politely about it, chances are it will be a great conversation starter.

Who are the more intelligent people, the vegetarians or the non-vegetarians?

For the same amount spent, one who eat meat will be more intelligent and healthy as a meat based diet is cheaper. You will have to spend a lot more to get the same amount of nutrients if you follow a plant based diet.If the amount spent is not a consideration but the nutritional value of food consumed, then there will not be any difference in the level of intelligence between the two groups, considering all other factors the same (education, cultural, social).

Meat production is inefficient. Will we all end up vegetarian/vegan eventually?

Meat production is indeed inefficient. Anyone can find the research on Google but roughly meat/beef production is 100x less efficient in term feed/calorie ratio and 25x less efficient in terms of feed/protein ratio. Other meats are somewhat more efficient but still inefficient. It’s really physics: animals use up energy while they’re alive and the edible meat from them is a relatively small part of their bodies.If we have a well-functioning economy that priced in the actual cost of meat including the environmental damage, then meat would become very expensive and people would just eat less meat. Quite a bit less and many people would just become vegetarians or vegans. But there would still be some meat consumption.Some have argued that meat/beef can still be raised with no corn feeding and by grazing on land unsuitable for other uses. While this is true, meat production in that manner is much less productive. That kind of grazing could never produce meat in the quantities produced now. In such a grazing scenario, meat would be very expensive.Unless the world population is reduced dramatically or we develop factories that can grow meat protein without the rest of the animal, the reality is that more and more people will have to eat a plant-based diet, and only eating meat on special occasions.I hope this can happen peacefully and smoothly but I’m not optimistic.

What do vegans and vegetarians think of Jainism?

As a vegetarian, I love Jainism. The propaganda used for veganism and those name-callers who call Jains inconsistent with ahimsa - they use a LOT of existential quantifiers; but they should also note that even thousands of random limited existential quantifiers do not make a universal quantifier, which is necessary to prove that all forms of milk are unethical, even when cows are considered to be equivalent to humans in rights. As long as neither cows nor their calves show objection, milk should be fine, even from an abolitionist perspecive. To claim what is natural and what isn't, regarding this, should be invalid, because they already chose to be deviant from nature, by not eating meat.Those who refuse to believe that there is at least one form of vegetarianism such that it is ethical are white supremacists or those who have an otherwise false morally higher perception (inconsistent idiots and therefore they are contrary to the purpose of "abolitionism" in its core); these people simply cannot digest the fact that this non-violence and sentiocentrism have already been in place somewhere in India, in a small community; they want to look original, therefore call Jain theories inconsistent. Jains are not obliged to care about things that are not sentient; the core of Jainism is based on sentiocentrism and given that something is not sentient, they are not required to 'not to harm' them. Also, asserting that Jains consume unethical dairy and assuming homogenous nature of milk, not accounting for neither intentions nor consequences of it is false, too.BTW, there is a Buddhist, who apparently trolls such topics with opinions than facts. Killing the bacteria or plants - it is different because bacteria or plants do not object, nor are capable of it. Why shouldn't he kill and eat humans, as well? It works both ways - the only difference with primary wants like wanting to continue to exist is the same between human and animals - except the fact that we, as humans, are more powerful. It can work the other way around, too - like we can just easily justify infanticide, slavery, rape as they are just as natural and ancient. Even considering his argument or whatsoever regarding it, eating meat causes more plants and bacteria to die.>Humans die of malnourishmentThis is a convincing case of quack studies, as if meat eaters are never malnourished. I would like to see a citation of a large-scale study regarding this.