decaff Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 In the same way stalin could call himself a humanitarian, you mean? where does stalin come into a vegetarianism debate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decaff Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 So, decaff. What you are, is a wind-up artist? a wind up artist for arguing that people should be allowed to decide what to call themselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decaff Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 your argument is essentially like saying women can call themselves men, yes they can but they are in fact wrong. This is one for a different day. A woman can call herself a man while remaining biologically a woman. Take a look at the law on transexuals. They are still biologically men or women but choose to be recognised as the opposite sex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinyl Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 If a person wishes to call themselves vegetarian and eat fish at the same time we can't really stop them. Getting wound up about it and turning it into a debate isn't going to stop them is it? I fully agree. There is no ownership of the word vegetarian. Some folks call themselves a vegetarian and eat eggs and milk. Others might eat fish. It is a personal choice pretty much like calling one's self a healthy eater. The vegetarian society might have their deffinition but that doesn't give them ownership of the word or for that matter mean that they are right. I prefer the definition from the urban dictionary. 1. vegetarian A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats. The vegetarian was forced to subsist on slower prey, such as the broccoli and carrot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 I fully agree. There is no ownership of the word vegetarian. Some folks call themselves a vegetarian and eat eggs and milk. Others might eat fish. It is a personal choice pretty much like calling one's self a healthy eater. The vegetarian society might have their deffinition but that doesn't give them ownership of the word or for that matter mean that they are right. I prefer the definition from the urban dictionary. 1. vegetarian A bad hunter. Someone who survives by consuming not food, but the stuff that food eats. The vegetarian was forced to subsist on slower prey, such as the broccoli and carrot. eschewing eggs and milk (and other dairy like cheese and butter) would be more Veganism than veggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decaff Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 eschewing eggs and milk (and other dairy like cheese and butter) would be more Veganism than veggie. Here again a person can call themselves vegetarian and not eat eggs and milk, they don't have to call themselves a vegan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Here again a person can call themselves vegetarian and not eat eggs and milk, they don't have to call themselves a vegan they can call themselves aliens, they can call themselves cows, they can call themselves what they want but they will be factually inaccurate if they use the wrong word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 This is one for a different day. A woman can call herself a man while remaining biologically a woman. Take a look at the law on transexuals. They are still biologically men or women but choose to be recognised as the opposite sex It's nothing to do with transexuals either. I could call myself a man but I would be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decaff Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Got to love people on their high horse telling people right from wrong. Just because a person doesn't fit with your definition of something does not make them wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Got to love people on their high horse telling people right from wrong. Just because a person doesn't fit with your definition of something does not make them wrong. :huh:are you against the english language in general. How do you communicate with people if you refuse to use the correct words? By the way by being confused about what vegetarianism is you are proving that people should use the correct definitions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.