Donald trumps Sons hunting photos

Originally posted by joejj

Of course you can eat what you will; If you want to eat healthy, you eat a plant-based, whole-foods diet.

I eat VERY healthily, thanks. Not so much as a single cavity, and NO doctor visits for anything other than mechanical injuries in 50 years. Not bad for a guy who isn't "eating healthy". Part of that health has been maintained by strenuous activity - like hunting.

"Whole foods" as long as it's only the plant part of the whole? Seems pretty selective to me, rather than "whole".

If you want to talk about ethics, if you don't know the difference between a vegetable and a live animal, you may have an issue, or ignorance.

That sounds pretty selective, too - i.e. "selective ethics". Bottom line - are plants alive, or are they not? What is the difference between taking a life to eat, and taking a life to eat?

Explain to me the difference you think there is between taking a life and taking a life, THEN explain to me all about ignorance and issues.

Originally posted by joejj

There is nothing ignorant about you looking into why you need to consume something for your health that is obviously unhealthy. Pulling the entire reply quote is not "cherry picking", just responding. I have a good grip, thank you.

Oh shocking - - "Know it all" - - must have a magic mirror into my body and health issues.

Yes your response was ignorant - - - and "Cherry Picking".

Originally posted by joejj

Salt is unhealthy. :-)

You will DIE without salt intake. it's an essential electrolyte for the function of animals. that's why "salt licks" were good ambush spots for animals back in the day. Even "dumb animals" know they need salt.

Culling is not the answer, nor is "killing" by humans (Murdering, depending on how you look at other animal species)

What is then? In regard to the "murder" issue - YOU were carrying on about "law" 150 years ago. the definition I gve for murder is right out of Oran's Dictionary of the Law. look it up. Mere killing is not "murder". Even "homicide" is not necessarily "murder".

Humans check ourselves through wars? Wow. Now why we invaded Iraq makes sense. :-) That may be the most absurd statement ever.

Yup, that's one of the ways nature gets 'er done.

Sort of like driving overpopulated lemmings over a cliff.

Nature is impartial. She does not care what you think is absurd, or what you think will "work". She will kill you dead if you disrespect her, and not even blink. She's just that kind of gal.

reply to post by LErickson


again i brought that up to bring up the point and reinforce what others have allready said in this thread people are only pissed off cuz rich little trumps went hunting but dont seem to have a problem with tv shows dedicated solely to catching and capturing live game (swamp people,deadliest catch hog men etc)and to call you out on the fact that you said it takes no skill to catch and kill an alligator i corrected you. get all mad and upset about something some one said on the internet all you want .you probably wont change my mind and i dobut ill change yours but at least i offerd a bit of information as opposed to name calling have a good day im off to sight in my muzzle loader so i can use it when deer season starts

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by joejj

Of course you can eat what you will; If you want to eat healthy, you eat a plant-based, whole-foods diet.

I eat VERY healthily, thanks. Not so much as a single cavity, and NO doctor visits for anything other than mechanical injuries in 50 years. Not bad for a guy who isn't "eating healthy". Part of that health has been maintained by strenuous activity - like hunting.

"Whole foods" as long as it's only the plant part of the whole? Seems pretty selective to me, rather than "whole".

If you want to talk about ethics, if you don't know the difference between a vegetable and a live animal, you may have an issue, or ignorance.

That sounds pretty selective, too - i.e. "selective ethics". Bottom line - are plants alive, or are they not? What is the difference between taking a life to eat, and taking a life to eat?

Explain to me the difference you think there is between taking a life and taking a life, THEN explain to me all about ignorance and issues.

That's great to hear you are healthy; hopefully you can stay that way.
But using yourself as an example of health by eating meat is a moot point. George Burns lived to 100 and he smoked stogies every day; that doesn't mean smoking is healthy because his particular body can tolerate it. The body has amazing abilities to tolerate less than optimal substances being consumed. Unrefined Plant-based foods are whole foods, that's not being very "selective". Meat is not "food" to me.
Once again, if you don't know the difference between a mobile living organism and one that is non-mobile and emits oxygen, I would suggest reading up on biology, then maybe reassess your spiritual beliefs as far as the similarities and diferences between humans and vegetation, then take it a step farther with the differences and similarities with animals and vegetation. Then you may come to an updated conclusion on the differences between taking different forms of lives. (And if you really are concerned about all forms of life and don't want to kill plants in any way, you can follow the Jain tradition of eating seeds and fruits of plants that do not kill the actual plant.)
Then we can have a true discussion all about ignorance and issues.

Thank you and good day.

Hmmmm....

- Plants are meant to be eaten, do you know why a seed is covered in "flesh"? and can withstand high dose iof digestive acid? like HCl?

- Plants don't have brain, nerves, blood circulation which involves antibodies, does not have emotion, communicate or show any signs of being "alive".

- When you harvest a plant for eating, you actually doing what the plant wants you to do,. It attracts you with its colourful fruit, which is sweet and has nutrients, you eat the flesh and dispose the seeds, then it grows again.

I never seen an animal grow from its bones lol

I went through the vegetarian stage. I studied all the right ways to do it - - what to eat - - supplements to take - etc.

I got sick - it threw my blood sugar off - - which results in Bi-Polar behavior. After 40 years trial and error - - I found a toned down Atkins diet is the only thing that works for MY body. It is the only thing that keeps my body stable.

I am not saying vegan is wrong for everyone. But - its like the Bible - - its not a one fits all. And the "holier then thou" - - that try to shove it are just as annoying as the Westboro Church.

This is kind of an extreme example - - - but it does point out Kwashiorkor - - - a condition from lack of protein.

Kwashiorkor - Protein malnutritio

Protein-calorie malnutrition; Malignant malnutrition Last reviewed: February 1, 2012. Kwashiorkor is a form of malnutrition that occurs when there is not enough protein in the diet.

Kwashiorkor is very rare in children in the United States. There are only isolated cases. However, one government estimate suggests that as many as 50% of elderly people in nursing homes in the United States do not get enough protein in their diet.www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Originally posted by luciddream
Hmmmm....

- Plants are meant to be eaten, do you know why a seed is covered in "flesh"? and can withstand high dose iof digestive acid? like HCl?

- Plants don't have brain, nerves, blood circulation which involves antibodies, does not have emotion, communicate or show any signs of being "alive".

- When you harvest a plant for eating, you actually doing what the plant wants you to do,. It attracts you with its colourful fruit, which is sweet and has nutrients, you eat the flesh and dispose the seeds, then it grows again.

I never seen an animal grow from its bones lol

Could you please back up your points with facts and links?

And many Christians believe God put animals on this planet for the soul purpose of feeding man.

Originally posted by joejj

I can bet I have a better skin tone, better muscle tone, no gut and will run circles around you in any athletic endeavor. I'm a lot older than 30, and haven't eaten animal flesh in over 15 years.

I'll take that bet. What would you like to plunk down on it? I'm over 50, never had a gut, and have eaten masses of meat every day of my life that I have eaten at all. You're probably younger than I, since you specified that you are "over 30", so you've probably got an edge on me there. Exploit it, prove that bet.

My main shortcoming is that I smoke - those damned plants! They're KILLING me! Still, I'm willing to take that bet, and compare strength, endurance, or flexibility, in spite of my smoking. I still think I can take it - carnivory gives me that edge.

Please don't go into the physical characteristics of comparing junk food vegetarians who live on french fries and Peanut Chews to meat eating. That's just silly. It's doesn't take rocket science, or supplementation to eat well regardess of eating meat or not. Though there is nothing in meat or animal products that is essential for health that can't be found in a plant source, but plenty reasons to not eat meat for optimal health. And meat in any form is definitely not part of a healthy diet. just like white flour, white sugar, and salt.

You prefer green flour, sugar, and salt? pick the bugs out first - they're not plant matter, they're animals. personally, I could give a crap what color my flour, sugar, and salt are. I don't eat enough of them to matter. Well,, except for the salt. I love me some salt. Again, none of those, nor massive infusions of meat, have hurt my health so far, and I'm better than half way to the end already.

I did not mention "peanut chews" or "french fries". While those probably are vegetable matter of some sort, I never saw her eat one.

I DID see her eat chicken and fish, though. "Meatless" chicken and fish, I reckon. they probably came from planting chicken and fish seeds.

Lack of protein? Where do you think a 400 pound vegetarian gorilla who will crush you with their thumb get protein for their body mass? That is the most uneducated statement to make, and a bad reflection on you. Please deny ignorance.

Who are you talking to? where did I mention "protein" or lack thereof? I think a gorilla might crush me with his thumb same as an elephant might, just for fun - unless I kill it and eat it first...

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by joejj

Salt is unhealthy. :-)

You will DIE without salt intake. it's an essential electrolyte for the function of animals. that's why "salt licks" were good ambush spotsd for animals back in the day. Even "dumb animals" know they need salt.

Culling is not the answer, nor is "killing" by humans (Murdering, depending on how you look at other animal species)

What is then? In regard to the "murder" issue - YOU were carrying on about "law" 150 years ago. the definition I gve for murder is right out of Oran's Dictionary of the Law. look it up. Mere killing is not "murder". Even "homicide" is not necessarily "murder".

Humans check ourselves through wars? Wow. Now why we invaded Iraq makes sense. :-) That may be the most absurd statement ever.

Yup, that's one of the ways nature gets 'er done.

Sort of like driving overpopulated lemmings over a cliff.

Nature is impartial. She does not care what you think is absurd, or what you think will "work". She will kill you dead if you disrespect her, and not even blink. She's just that kind of gal.

EXCESS salt, apologies for the lack of clarification. How much salt do you take in? If it's over 200mg a day, it's unhealthy. And that's not much more than one shake of the salt shaker.

The definition of "murder" is subjective. If you look at humans, and other species on a spiritual level as all containing a life force or spirit, or whatever you want to call it, we are all life energies in different bodies. Therefore, with that perspective, the term "murder" applies regardless of what species you are killing, human or not. And since we are not inherently carnivores by body design (simple science), and only by choice, that is where ethics come into play.

You can't kill something "respectfully" if it's being done unnecessarily or even "legally". Is it necessary to kill something if it threatens your life? Sure, it's for survival. But that is not what this thread is in relation to, or any one of my posts.

Mother nature is quite powerful, that's why respect for her and all inhabitants is essential for human existence to continue. Which is the whole point of every single post I've made.

Originally posted by joejj

Once again, if you don't know the difference between a mobile living organism and one that is non-mobile and emits oxygen, I would suggest reading up on biology, then maybe reassess your spiritual beliefs as far as the similarities and diferences between humans and vegetation, then take it a step farther with the differences and similarities with animals and vegetation. Then you may come to an updated conclusion on the differences between taking different forms of lives. (And if you really are concerned about all forms of life and don't want to kill plants in any way, you can follow the Jain tradition of eating seeds and fruits of plants that do not kill the actual plant.)
Then we can have a true discussion all about ignorance and issues.

Life is life. I don't differentiate "good" life from "killable" life. It's ALL life. It's not a matter of me being "concerned for all forms of life", it's a matter of not making artificial divisions to soothe some misgiuded notion that I can eat without taking a life.

Seeds and fruits are also life - they are plants in embryo.

Bottom line is that you are going to kill to eat the same as I am. You just seem to think some killing is ok while other killing is not, based solely upon your preferred diet, and whether or not your victim is capable of escape.


.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by joejj

I can bet I have a better skin tone, better muscle tone, no gut and will run circles around you in any athletic endeavor. I'm a lot older than 30, and haven't eaten animal flesh in over 15 years.

I'll take that bet. What would you like to plunk down on it? I'm over 50, never had a gut, and have eaten masses of meat every day of my life that I have eaten at all. You're probably younger than I, since you specified that you are "over 30", so you've probably got an edge on me there. Exploit it, prove that bet.

My main shortcoming is that I smoke - those damned plants! They're KILLING me! Still, I'm willing to take that bet, and compare strength, endurance, or flexibility, in spite of my smoking. I still think I can take it - carnivory gives me that edge.

Please don't go into the physical characteristics of comparing junk food vegetarians who live on french fries and Peanut Chews to meat eating. That's just silly. It's doesn't take rocket science, or supplementation to eat well regardess of eating meat or not. Though there is nothing in meat or animal products that is essential for health that can't be found in a plant source, but plenty reasons to not eat meat for optimal health. And meat in any form is definitely not part of a healthy diet. just like white flour, white sugar, and salt.

You prefer green flour, sugar, and salt? pick the bugs out first - they're not plant matter, they're animals. personally, I could give a crap what color my flour, sugar, and salt are. I don't eat enough of them to matter. Well,, except for the salt. I love me some salt. Again, none of those, nor massive infusions of meat, have hurt my health so far, and I'm better than half way to the end already.

I did not mention "peanut chews" or "french fries". While those probably are vegetable matter of some sort, I never saw her eat one.

I DID see her eat chicken and fish, though. "Meatless" chicken and fish, I reckon. they probably came from planting chicken and fish seeds.

Lack of protein? Where do you think a 400 pound vegetarian gorilla who will crush you with their thumb get protein for their body mass? That is the most uneducated statement to make, and a bad reflection on you. Please deny ignorance.

Who are you talking to? where did I mention "protein" or lack thereof? I think a gorilla might crush me with his thumb same as an elephant might, just for fun - unless I kill it and eat it first...

That's great you are in good physical shape. But smoking doesn't help as you aknowledged; meat sin't any better. I can guarantee that. And don't count your chickens before they hatch, respectfully.
And I enjoy physical challenges.

I don't prefer flour, sugar or salt in any any color. If you don't understand the fundamentals of nutrition, it's ok, but please don't try to ridicule basic factual knowledge any person with a medical nutrition degree is well aware of.

So you would eat a gorilla (over 98% similar DNA to humans)? Sounds like cannibalism to me. So there's the truth- you'd eat humans, if it was legal!
:-)

Makes sense now why you so feverishy defend eating animals, if you'd eat your own species.
Supposedly it tastes like chicken, though I would never want to find out...

Originally posted by nenothtu

Seeds and fruits are also life - they are plants in embryo.


.

But seed don't get destroyed by humans or animals, they are passed thru digestive tract. Comsumers are actually spreading the seeds and making it multiply in other areas thus helping them survive.

I don't see leaving animals bones in places eventually creates animals from it.

I'm Not a vegan or anything, i eat meat, i ate it for lunch today, as a scientist(i guess, im a microbiologist), i dont agree eating plants is actually a negative thing compared to eating an animal.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by joejj

Once again, if you don't know the difference between a mobile living organism and one that is non-mobile and emits oxygen, I would suggest reading up on biology, then maybe reassess your spiritual beliefs as far as the similarities and diferences between humans and vegetation, then take it a step farther with the differences and similarities with animals and vegetation. Then you may come to an updated conclusion on the differences between taking different forms of lives. (And if you really are concerned about all forms of life and don't want to kill plants in any way, you can follow the Jain tradition of eating seeds and fruits of plants that do not kill the actual plant.)
Then we can have a true discussion all about ignorance and issues.

Life is life. I don't differentiate "good" life from "killable" life. It's ALL life. It's not a matter of me being "concerned for all forms of life", it's a matter of not making artificial divisions to soothe some misgiuded notion that I can eat without taking a life.

Seeds and fruits are also life - they are plants in embryo.

Bottom line is that you are going to kill to eat the same as I am. You just seem to think some killing is ok while other killing is not, based solely upon your preferred diet, and whether or not your victim is capable of escape.


.

As you stated in your other post, you'd eat a gorilla if you could. Which sounds like you'd eat a human if you could, too. Until you heed the advice in my other post about reassessing how you view plants, humans, and animals (especially if you'd eat a human), no one can have a real discussion on what humans are designed to eat and what they shouldn't.
If you don't know the fundamental differences between and apple and a rabbit, well that says something. Even a toddler knows the difference between the two...

Originally posted by luciddream

- Plants don't have brain, nerves, blood circulation which involves antibodies, does not have emotion, communicate or show any signs of being "alive".

Actually, they Do have cognates for nerves, circulation, etc. They carry out biological processes, which are a sure sign of life. They have different "antibodies", usually alkaloid poisons, geared towards a different threat than animals.

As far as brains,emotion, and communication go, just because you don't recognize them doesn't mean they are not there. Nor does it mean that they necessarily are. There are studies ongoing into that, and some degree of communication has been found. They just don't speak or bark to do it.

- When you harvest a plant for eating, you actually doing what the plant wants you to do,. It attracts you with its colourful fruit, which is sweet and has nutrients, you eat the flesh and dispose the seeds, then it grows again.

Have you ever asked one what it wants? Did you recognize the answer? Did it recognize the question? Maybe plants think YOU cant think, because they don't understand the way you do so. A plant can't "want" anything at all unless it can think to want something.

I never seen an animal grow from its bones lol

Indeed, it DOES seem that animals are more severely limited in their ability to live and grow, doesn't it? maybe animals are not alive... even rocks can roll, eh?

Originally posted by joejj

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by joejj

I can bet I have a better skin tone, better muscle tone, no gut and will run circles around you in any athletic endeavor. I'm a lot older than 30, and haven't eaten animal flesh in over 15 years.

I'll take that bet. What would you like to plunk down on it? I'm over 50, never had a gut, and have eaten masses of meat every day of my life that I have eaten at all. You're probably younger than I, since you specified that you are "over 30", so you've probably got an edge on me there. Exploit it, prove that bet.

My main shortcoming is that I smoke - those damned plants! They're KILLING me! Still, I'm willing to take that bet, and compare strength, endurance, or flexibility, in spite of my smoking. I still think I can take it - carnivory gives me that edge.

Please don't go into the physical characteristics of comparing junk food vegetarians who live on french fries and Peanut Chews to meat eating. That's just silly. It's doesn't take rocket science, or supplementation to eat well regardess of eating meat or not. Though there is nothing in meat or animal products that is essential for health that can't be found in a plant source, but plenty reasons to not eat meat for optimal health. And meat in any form is definitely not part of a healthy diet. just like white flour, white sugar, and salt.

You prefer green flour, sugar, and salt? pick the bugs out first - they're not plant matter, they're animals. personally, I could give a crap what color my flour, sugar, and salt are. I don't eat enough of them to matter. Well,, except for the salt. I love me some salt. Again, none of those, nor massive infusions of meat, have hurt my health so far, and I'm better than half way to the end already.

I did not mention "peanut chews" or "french fries". While those probably are vegetable matter of some sort, I never saw her eat one.

I DID see her eat chicken and fish, though. "Meatless" chicken and fish, I reckon. they probably came from planting chicken and fish seeds.

Lack of protein? Where do you think a 400 pound vegetarian gorilla who will crush you with their thumb get protein for their body mass? That is the most uneducated statement to make, and a bad reflection on you. Please deny ignorance.

Who are you talking to? where did I mention "protein" or lack thereof? I think a gorilla might crush me with his thumb same as an elephant might, just for fun - unless I kill it and eat it first...

That's great you are in good physical shape. But smoking doesn't help as you aknowledged; meat sin't any better. I can guarantee that. And don't count your chickens before they hatch, respectfully.
And I enjoy physical challenges.

I don't prefer flour, sugar or salt in any any color. If you don't understand the fundamentals of nutrition, it's ok, but please don't try to ridicule basic factual knowledge any person with a medical nutrition degree is well aware of.

So you would eat a gorilla (over 98% similar DNA to humans)? Sounds like cannibalism to me. So there's the truth- you'd eat humans, if it was legal!
:-)

Makes sense now why you so feverishy defend eating animals, if you'd eat your own species.
Supposedly it tastes like chicken, though I would never want to find out...

And about your quote about a gorilla or elephant crushing you for fun. ???? What are you talking about?? Are you serious? I hope that was a joke. Have you ever been around those species? They would only attack if they felt threatened. Species like that don't attack humans "for fun". You get more and more absurd.

Deny ignorance.

once again, Good day to eveyone.

Originally posted by joejj

EXCESS salt, apologies for the lack of clarification. How much salt do you take in? If it's over 200mg a day, it's unhealthy. And that's not much more than one shake of the salt shaker.

Oh, I agree with that, up to a point. I believe anything to excess is bad for you. 200mg is an arbitrary guide - the actual requirements will vary with activity from person to person. Some more, some less.

The definition of "murder" is subjective.

All definitions are subjective, tied to whichever language and usage they are applied to.

If you look at humans, and other species on a spiritual level as all containing a life force or spirit, or whatever you want to call it, we are all life energies in different bodies. Therefore, with that perspective, the term "murder" applies regardless of what species you are killing, human or not. And since we are not inherently carnivores by body design (simple science), and only by choice, that is where ethics come into play.

By that definition killing plants to eat them is no less "murder" than killing animals and eating them. Life force, life energy, in different bodies.

The notion that we are not carnivores is also subjective - but true. Technically, humans are "omnivores", capable of eating anything that is not poisonous. Have you ever tried to eat grass? How did your herbivorously engineered body handle all that cellulose? It's not poisonous, but not much value to eat, either.

You can't kill something "respectfully" if it's being done unnecessarily or even "legally". Is it necessary to kill something if it threatens your life? Sure, it's for survival. But that is not what this thread is in relation to, or any one of my posts.

I agree. You CAN'T kill anything respectfully if it's done unnecessarily. What this thread is about is whether these killings were "necessary" I say they were, you say they weren't.

Mother nature is quite powerful, that's why respect for her and all inhabitants is essential for human existence to continue. Which is the whole point of every single post I've made.

I agree, nature IS powerful, and she will kill you in a heartbeat. it's not that she's fickle, it's that she just doesn't care. As a matter of fact, that very aloofness is part of her beauty, for me.

Respect for nature does not allow us to let imbalances run unabated and unchecked. Those very imbalances will kill everything you love, animal, vegetable, and mineral, including at some point yourself and the entirety of humanity.

Originally posted by joejj

That's great you are in good physical shape. But smoking doesn't help as you aknowledged; meat sin't any better. I can guarantee that. And don't count your chickens before they hatch, respectfully.
And I enjoy physical challenges.

The comparison between eating meat and smoking is a ridiculous one. Tobacco is a poisonous alkaloid no matter the means of ingestion, meat is not - but I wouldn't recommend trying to roll and smoke it.

In all honesty, I'm pretty sure my continued good health is more a matter of genetics than diet. Males for as far back as I have records in my family have enjoyed good health right up until they drop dead at age 69 - with only two exceptions in the past 9 generations. One died at 34, cause of death unknown, but since it was in 1863, I'm leaning towards mechanical damage from the Civil War, which was hotly contested in that area between soldiers and between civilians alike. The other beat the odds and died at 109 in 1837. In his 92nd year, he didn't think twice about getting up and WALKING 125 miles or so just to get a copy of a land title. Other than those, 69 seems to be about it, so my timer is running. No history of heart disease or blood pressure problems anywhere in the family, despite their horrendous diets (by your standards) I'm 6'2" and 170 pounds soaking wet, which also runs in the family. I've never known but one to go over 200 pounds, up to 220.

So I attribute it to genetics and activity.

I don't prefer flour, sugar or salt in any any color. If you don't understand the fundamentals of nutrition, it's ok, but please don't try to ridicule basic factual knowledge any person with a medical nutrition degree is well aware of.

Flour is flour, sugar is sugar, corn meal is corn meal. Like salt, any taken to excess will do you in.

So you would eat a gorilla (over 98% similar DNA to humans)? Sounds like cannibalism to me. So there's the truth- you'd eat humans, if it was legal!
:-)

Gorillas, beyond a doubt. Humans, not so much. Cannibalism has medical consequences, over and above the cultural taboo. Other than people, yeah I'll eat pretty much anything that doesn't eat me first, as I said above. There are a number of things I don't like, but that doesn't prevent me from eating them all the same.

Makes sense now why you so feverishy defend eating animals, if you'd eat your own species.
Supposedly it tastes like chicken, though I would never want to find out...

According to the cannibals in Papua New Guinea, humans taste like pigs, not chickens. Pigs have become very popular there since cannibalism was outlawed. Pigs are also omnivores, and a frequently used as substitutes for humans in experimentation because of the similarities.

I DO eat pork (both wild and domestic), so you may be on to something there!

Originally posted by luciddream

But seed don't get destroyed by humans or animals, they are passed thru digestive tract. Comsumers are actually spreading the seeds and making it multiply in other areas thus helping them survive.

In those cases they have no nutritive value at all, and cost more energy to eat them than they provide. Why bother? This is why most seeds are softened, cracked, or ground before they are eaten - which kills them.

I don't see leaving animals bones in places eventually creates animals from it.

It doesn't, any more than leaving a tree trunk laying produces another tree. Both were alive, and now are dead. Life does not emerge from death, but dead things can sustain it - not reproduce.

I'm Not a vegan or anything, i eat meat, i ate it for lunch today, as a scientist(i guess, im a microbiologist), i dont agree eating plants is actually a negative thing compared to eating an animal.

Not "negative". It's no better, nor any worse. It's the same thing - killing something and eating it. The only alternative is to wait for something to die naturally, and eat it as carrion.

That tiger is beautiful.

You have to be either a sadist or someone who thinks they're somehow being impressive to kill animals just for fun. There's NOTHING impressive about senselessly killing animals with advanced technology (or in any way for that matter).