inspiciatis mens mea

  1. innerchrist:

    kenjamink replied to your post: kenjamink replied to your post: tranquil-chaos…

    This doesn’t quite make sense, though. You’re using limited, generalized definitions of these words. You suggest a pragmatic ideology for vegetarians/vegans is good, yet say ideology is a bad reason to be vegetarian or vegan.

    I’m using the words as they refer to this situation. In practice, pragmatism favors facts and verifiable results, whereas ‘ideologies’ are often opposed to, or at the very least indifferent to, facts and verifiable results. I don’t understand what you keep going on about. You want to be vegan? Great. Be vegan. Now stop whining. 

    Again, the terms ideology and pragmatism are not mutually exclusive in all contexts. Ideology as “Visionary speculation, esp. of an unrealistic or idealistic nature” would not be pragmatic in that pragmatism aims for the realistic whereas ideology in this context is a mere unrealistic speculation, but in nearly all other contexts they mesh quite well. After sifting through the generalizations, it seems that all you’re saying is that unrealistic vegans, such as those who think eating meat is inherently evil and that the whole world is compelled to become vegan or vegetarian, are bad. The problem is, though, you’re talking about the subject much more generally than that. Instead of referring specifically to those vegans/vegetarians, you keep referring to veganism or vegetarianism, which include literally millions of other people who don’t believe such nonsense, who are real, sensible, compassionate people. That is why I am so disgusted and appalled by your posts on this subject. You are making too many generalizations and condemning the whole (maybe you don’t intend to, but that’s what your words and your followers who you’ve agreed with have said) rather than seeking that mutual edification and trying to educate those few with unrealistic beliefs. I mean, I agreed with you earlier and you still just ran right over the top of my words and told me how I was wrong for not agreeing with you. That’s not a demonstration of an open mind who actually cares about the opinions of others and I’m not whining. I’m trying to seek the mutual understanding, that edification that unites our opinions again. I’ve otherwise enjoyed your blog and love your message of love and compassion, which I share, but I don’t want to have to just leave because you have a perverted view of vegans, of me. I am not some ignorant fool who has no regard for the nutrition of other people. If people need to eat meat to survive and be healthy where they live and at their income level, then let them. If there are really no options allowing them to reduce the demand they create for the torture and abuse of animals, then I don’t expect them to embrace malnutrition. I don’t even judge the meat eaters who outright refuse to do anything about it as it’s their decision to make, not mine. I’m just compelled to get people to contemplate their actions as they relate to their relationship with God. If there is no torture and abuse of animals where you get your meat, then you don’t have the same ethical dilemma and can eat meat in proper faith. If there is and you can support such a horrendous system in faith because you must in order to properly nourish you family, and you aren’t just making silly excuses out of laziness, then it is obviously not sin according to scripture. If that person turns around and makes hurtful statements towards vegans everywhere, though, it is still sin. They should be teaching the few vegans who have hurtful words for them that they are able to eat meat in faith and aren’t being evil. They should back themselves up with scripture in defense, not attack their lifestyle with the same scripture when that same scripture also defends their veganism. They shouldn’t be creating unnecessary conflict with the people they actually agree with concerning unrealistic vegans/vegetarians, they should be seeking that mutual edification.  There are two ways to go about this and the compassionate route doesn’t include generalizations and hurtful words. All I’d like is for those generalizations and hurtful words on you blog to be replaced with the truthful, logical statements that will achieve mutual edification and agreement. “All these vegans” are not saying “eating meat is evil.”

    (via innerchrist-deactivated20120826)

  2. innerchrist:

    kenjamink replied to your post: tranquil-chaos replied to your post: holybat…

    This is a fallacious generalization. Not all ideological vegetarians assert such ridiculous ideals and ideological vegetarianism is not, as a whole, without concern for individual nutritional needs as you erroneously claim. This is not edification.

    There is a good reason to be vegetarian or vegan: pragmatism, that is, a belief rooted in facts and with regard to the body as a whole.

    There is a bad reason to be vegetarian or vegan: ideology. I am addressing only the latter. No one made any generalizations of vegans, only ideological veganism. 

    i·de·ol·o·gy

    noun /ˌīdēˈäləjē/  /ˌidē-/ 
    ideologies, plural

    1. A system of ideas and ideals, esp. one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy
      • - the ideology of republicanism
    2. The ideas and manner of thinking characteristic of a group, social class, or individual
      • - a critique of bourgeois ideology
    3. Visionary speculation, esp. of an unrealistic or idealistic nature
    4. The science of ideas; the study of their origin and nature


    prag·ma·tism

    noun /ˈpragməˌtizəm/ 

    1. A pragmatic attitude or policy
      • - ideology was tempered with pragmatism
    2. An approach that assesses the truth of meaning of theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application

    Since when are these two mutually exclusive? Also, “ideological veganism” is as far as I can find, something you’ve come up with yourself and isn’t an actual movement within the vegan community.

    (via innerchrist-deactivated20120826)

  3. innerchrist:

    kenjamink replied to your post: You know all of these Vegans who are all “Don’t eat meat it’s murder you are evil if you do so”. When ever I have ever heard the hypothetical question about what would happen if everyone took to not eating meat tomorrow with ranchers or someone related to ranchers, I always got the answer that they would take most of their animals and kill them because they can’t afford to feed them and themselves if they don’t. Also if this were to happen people in food desserts would starve to death.

    Yes, just keeping telling yourselves the fact that that people would starve if the whole world went vegan, that all vegans think eating meat is evil, and that they’re therefore obviously wrong. Forget Romans 14:3 already? How about 14:19? Come on…

    Stop with your crusade. If the whole world went vegan, millions of people would starve. That you deny this demonstrates how little you have seen of this world, particularly of the third world, and how little you understand agriculture in places within India or Africa. 

    No one said all vegans think eating meat is evil. They don’t. I address only those that do. If you’re not one of them, I’m not talking about you. 

    And no, I haven’t forgotten the Bible, a text featuring an incarnation of God that probably ate lamb and definitely ate fish. 

    Namaste. 

    You’re the crusader! I AGREED with you about people starving if the whole world went vegan, hence my calling it a fact. Your failure to recognize even my agreement with you merely demonstrates how caught up you are in fighting veganism rather than following Romans 4:19.

    “You know all of these Vegans who are all ‘Don’t eat meat it’s murder you are evil if you do so’.” Are you guys really only refuting those vegans who think that, because as an onlooker it didn’t sound so innocent. Regardless, fallacious generalizations are never valid reasons to refute and ideology because then you’re only refuting the actions of a few “adherents” rather than the ideology. 

    Yes you have forgotten the Bible. If you hadn’t, you would be seeking peace and mutual edification as it states in the scripture rather than incessantly attacking your vegan followers’ lifestyle choices and ideologies. What you are doing right now is not peaceful or mutually edifying!

    (via innerchrist-deactivated20120826)

  4. boughtwithhisblood:

    kenjamink replied to your post: Random kid from choir who skipped the last three weeks of class and never showed up to the concert is at Cafe D and keeps staring at me.

    You should ask him where the heck he was!!! Employ social consequence. Especially if he’s staring at you. Staring is rude too!

    Bitter much Ken? lol 

    Oh, I didn’t mean to be bitter. I was being sarcastic and facetious after the part about asking him where he was.

    (Source: truthsstrippedofpoetsgloss)

  5. I made a vegan blog!!!

    (Source: kenjamink)

  6. I made a vegan blog!!!

designed by Vintage Soul, powered by tumblr