The Instigator
DrStrangeLuv
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Dazedinday
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Moral veganism/vegitarianism achieves nothing morally.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/23/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 992 times Debate No: 14474
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

DrStrangeLuv

Pro

For this debate, Moral Veganism/Vegetarianism will be defined as: Limiting the ingestion of animal products for the animal's benefit. In order to preserve the health of our fingers, we may abbreviate it as MVV.

I hold that MVV is essentially pointless for the following reasons:

1) MVV adherents consume animal products despite having not ingested them, negating their philosophy.
2) MVV does not directly stop animals suffering; rather its true purpose is to give the adherent peace of mind.

thanks to whoever accepts
Dazedinday

Con

I accept your debate, and I will say that MVV is meaningful because

1) There are people who adhere to their philosophy who consume only non-animal products, and the fact that they are not intentionally consuming meat, but the act itself is meaningful to them.

2) There may be no way to absolutely stop animals suffering. But the fact that their philosophy, and their action to not take part in animal suffering itself is a novelty. That in itself makes it meaningful to them.

3) May I also state, philosophically, no point of view is the same, and thus having point and being pointless is very objective. If it weren't meaningful, and full of points for them, they wouldn't be compelled to be moral veganists.

4) Why would it make veganism pointless if it does indeed have a purpose to give the adherent peace of mind? In our modern society, many need the peace of mind our society refuses to give. That itself is a great point. I don't see why then veganism would be pointless.

Debate Round No. 1
DrStrangeLuv

Pro

DrStrangeLuv forfeited this round.
Dazedinday

Con

Dazedinday forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
DrStrangeLuv

Pro

DrStrangeLuv forfeited this round.
Dazedinday

Con

Dazedinday forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Dazedinday 6 years ago
Dazedinday
Just FYI. I'm not a vegan.
Posted by Sky_ace25 6 years ago
Sky_ace25
"1) MVV adherents consume animal products despite having not ingested them, negating their philosophy."

M8 you might want to double check this one, I personally know a vegan who goes out of their way to not use anything that has had an animal involved. Don't underestimate the cult that is veganism.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
DrStrangeLuvDazedindayTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: FAIL DEBATE, as both sides dropped out... (checking the voting period debates, from Least To Most votes. By giving this one, it won't be prioritized in the system anymore.)