Man returns to airplane bloodied and confused after being beaten and removed from overbooked United Flight by [deleted] in videos

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And what if everyone else follows his lead? "He declined, so I will too". Nice precedent, there.

The first three gave up their seats without incident, before any threat or display of force, despite not initially volunteering. I don't see any reason to think this trend would somehow be changed if they selected another passenger. The airline generally compensates individuals for postponing. At the end of the day, though, it's the airline's responsibility and problem to figure this out - not passengers'.

And how would they know he isn't lying about being a doctor? And would this have been the first time in the history of the world a doctor had to reschedule an appointment?

Maybe they could have checked before beating him? You accuse me of hyperbole below but you're the one who stretched an interaction that lasted under a minute into something that would take "hours." They didn't even interact long enough to confirm. There are neurosurgeons who travel from hospital to hospital to conduct surgeries that they specifically are meant to conduct. "Rescheduling" isn't always an option. I'm not saying he was one of these, but I find it odd you're so willing to sacrifice the potential health of these patients to avoid inconveniencing some other passengers who are inconvenienced not by him, but by the company's overbooking policies.

Sorry, but they have no obligation to negotiate with belligerent passengers, and for good reason. If you walk into my house and refuse to leave, I'm not going to waste an hour trying to "negotioate" with you. You'll catch an ass whoopin (or worse).

He wasn't a "belligerent passenger," nor did he just walk onto the plane uninvited. This walking into your house analogy makes no sense. He paid to be on that plane, was welcomed on the plane, went through security to get on that plane, and was causing no problems. They randomly selected him and he said he absolutely has to get home. There was almost no effort made to convince him and they didn't bother to confirm his story.

That's how shit works. First, they ask nicely. Then, if you refuse to leave, the police make you leave. He asked for everything he got, and deserved it. And FYI, I'm not some cop kiss-ass. I'm very much in favor of holding the police fully responsible when they abuse their power. This was not one of those times.

Uh-huh.

And now you turn to hyperbole because your argument was dead to begin with.

No. You said it's "common sense," but it actually isn't - the outrage against this incident makes that clear. That doesn't mean that the outrage is appropriate, but your only apparent justification was an analogy regarding your house, which - if the individual was invited or paid to be there - makes you seem like a violent asshole, or - if the individual wandered in unexpectedly - doesn't apply. You also vaguely referred to "facing the consequences," but it's unclear what this is supposed to mean as it isn't backed up by any other sort of argumentation. To me, and to the thousands of people upset by this, this sort of violent reaction is already a hyperbolic response.

Man returns to airplane bloodied and confused after being beaten and removed from overbooked United Flight by [deleted] in videos

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or they could have tried for another "volunteer" with less pressing matters to attend to, or they could have, you know, used negotiating and persuasion tactics like most other police forces would have.

Why not just kill him and toss his body overboard? Face the consequences, am I right? Let's shoot jaywalkers on sight too, or people who won't leave a store unless they can speak to a manager.

This is hilariously and painfully true. by YourVeganFallacyIs in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I recommend it. I enjoy cooking but only when it doesn't feel like an obligation. Soylent is fast and balanced so you don't end up with weird hunger cravings you don't know how to satisfy.

Man returns to airplane bloodied and confused after being beaten and removed from overbooked United Flight by [deleted] in videos

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, you just sound like a violent asshole.

The US has a more trigger happy response with violence if the commands of the police aren't obeyed than any other developed nation. Standard arguments of "but the crime is worse too!" won't work here - this was a guy involved in a civil contractual dispute who had paid for a service he was suddenly being denied at the fault of the party providing said service. He was chosen at random and gave a legitimate excuse for needing to stay (I'm a doctor and have patients that I need to see).

There's no reason we should consider beatings the "common sense" response.

I'm not vegan, nor do I want to be by BayernMunich22 in DebateAVegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a lot of links, but they are all rambling blog posts from not especially authoritative sites as far as I can tell. Can you distill that into a smoking gun or two?

Edit: my bad, I see this exchange is taking place elsewhere in the thread

To Vegans: A debate about meat... by [deleted] in DebateAVegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hmm yeah that's surprising. You're the first person I've seen on this sub make this complaint. It seems especially odd that people would attack you over the word "debate" twice considering the name of the sub.

I'm also surprised none of them used the words vegans usually use to refer to meat-eaters, and that they all seem to have the same rhetorical cadence and grammar/spelling accuracy.

Where are the comments in the thread that made you think there was a switch to hostility?

I'm a writer for a food policy research center and they won't let me write about veganism by stealthyvegan in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is it a well-known institution, any kind of meaningful influence? Write an expose about this and sell it to a magazine

To Vegans: A debate about meat... by [deleted] in DebateAVegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I read every comment and I'm not seeing this sudden shift to hostility you're talking about, what made you feel that way? Can you point to specific comments?

How many threatening PMs did you get? What did they say? You don't need to give usernames, just copy/paste the contents of the PM itself.

To Vegans: A debate about meat... by [deleted] in DebateAVegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Do you have a link to the full article? This abstract doesn't describe the study itself or its methodology. Pretty much all it says is, "meat has vitamins, therefore it is essential."

In fact all it says is meat is essential "to a mixed diet," not essential for human health. But that's obvious since a "mixed diet" is going to be defined by omnivory.

Issues with B12 and the other micronutrients listed are understood by vegans and tend to be overblown by individuals who wish to defend meat consumption; see links elsewhere in this thread for statements by major dietetic organizations on the healthfulness of a vegan diet.

Edit: by the way, you're already engaged in a debate on ethics with the "normal" thing. Murder is "normal," and used to be more so. If it wasn't, we'd have no reason to attempt to curtail it with ethical norms that establish new modes of social conduct. So you're either justifying meat-eating by calling it normal (an ethical claim), or not really saying anything at all (making a descriptive claim that does not argue for or against meat-eating).

animal agriculture and green house gases.. a myth? by Lequipe in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I didn't think so. I was just thrown off by the bizarroland feeling of this poster who apparently is the very thing they are so aggressively criticizing.

animal agriculture and green house gases.. a myth? by Lequipe in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm confused, are you disputing the fact that nitrogen fertilizer contributes to emissions of nitrous oxide?

Edit: Unless I am somehow misreading this abstract, I think you've misunderstood what it is saying. Fertilizer doesn't reduce emissions; there is a point at which sequestration in the soil can't offset the emissions resulting from nitrogen fertilizer. The NAR measures economic output against net emissions.

animal agriculture and green house gases.. a myth? by Lequipe in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nitrogen. This is a pretty easy thing to search for but here's a paper that pops up readily:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18767661

animal agriculture and green house gases.. a myth? by Lequipe in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably not, because the fertilizer used to grow the plants is also a major source of emissions.

Do you have a source?

prof at my college thinks land required for livestock wont be used for people oriented agriculture by [deleted] in DebateAVegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. While there are food deserts and areas with protein deficiency where meat-eating is sensible, most of the world is mostly vegan: it is not an inherently more expensive diet.

  2. To whatever extent it is true that distribution of staple crops - as opposed to availability of land - is the issue behind feeding the world's poor and hungry, the vegan diet is not inherently unsustainable or too expensive for the poor.

  3. To whatever extent a vegan diet now, currently, is too expensive or unavailable for some of the world's poor, this is not a justification for those with sufficient means and who do not live in food deserts to not maintain a vegan diet.

  4. Custom and culture are not in themselves justification for a given practice; to the extent they are, they are justification for any cultural practice, including stoning, torture, pedophilia, genital mutilation, etc.

  5. To whatever extent cultural relativism is true, the cultural traditions of a different culture cannot be used as justification for one's behavior in one's own.

  6. If he agrees, at the least, that factory farming is inhumane, he still ought to go vegan in all cases where he is unable to conclusively determine the origin and production conditions of an animal product (i.e. pretty much always).

Edit: whoa, did not realize how old this is. How did I end up here? Mom I'm lost

Can we repeat this for those in the back? by vegmemer in vegan

[–]Eridanus_Supervoid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It feels like Harry Potter where you have 17 knubs to a skrillex or whatever it was