Didn’t Jesus eat fish?
Yes, He did. He also drank wine. What's your point exactly? Eating a plant-based diet isn't more "righteous." I simply eat this way to avoid a lot of health problems that are so common in our society, and I happen to be helping the environment. Yay! Christ lived in the Mid-eastern desert so His diet probably consisted of a lot of bread, olives, figs, corn, and fish because that's all there was to eat. Besides, the only part in the scriptures that records Him eating fish is after he is resurrected - what harm could a fish do to His health at that point? Also did you know President Nelson abstains from foods that lead to heart disease? I don't say that to imply any diet is more righteous than the other, I share that information so members don't criticize me.
But didn’t God make animals for the “benefit and use of man”? And don't we have dominion over animals?
My iPad was made for the benefit and use man too; it doesn't mean I have to eat it. Animals are here for us, but not solely for eating them. Also, "dominion" doesn't equate to "license to exterminate." Don't you also have dominion over your children?
Doesn't the Word of Wisdom say to eat meat?
Regarding consuming meat, the Lord says in verse 13 "only in times of winter or famine." I used to make the assumption the Lord said that because He was concerned about our meat preservation techniques, and since now we have refrigerators we can disregard that verse. But in verse 15 the Lord repeats Himself about when to eat animals, "only in times of famine and excess of hunger." Nothing about seasons here. There could be a famine in the summer, and people in pre-refrigerator days would still have meat as their only option. Thus, the refrigeration technology argument is a "moo" point.
Consider this doctrine: when the Lord reveals something to the entire church, that revelation is still valid throughout that dispensation until a prophet receives further revelation on that topic. Since the revelation about only eating animals in times of famine, there hasn't been a revelation to change that.
Another assumption we make is we think we only have to follow the part of section 89 that's required for a temple recommend and still be entitled to all the blessings at the end of section 89 without following more than half of the laws upon which those blessings are predicated in that section.
Isn't there a verse that says something about not being ordained of God if you forbid eating meat?
Section 49 is probably what you're thinking of, "Whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats...is not ordained of God." Don't be fooled by the double negative. I abstain from meats; whoso forbids that behavior is not ordained of God.
Just for help in understanding, let's pretend one of the negatives was a positive; it would give the verse opposite meaning. For example if the verse said, "Whoso [encourageth] to abstain from meats..." THEN that would be referring to me. I encourage people to abstain from meats, but this is saying the opposite. What if it said, "Whoso forbiddeth to [eat] meat..." then that sounds closer to me (even though I'm not forbidding). The definition of vegetarianism is "abstaining from meats" so "whoso forbids people from abstaining from meat" is the same as saying "whoso forbids vegetarianism." The person forbidding the vegan/vegetarian is the one not ordained of God.
Still not convinced? Consider the context of the revelation. There were some former Quakers who had recently converted to the church, and as part of their old religion they were vegetarian. After their conversion they continued abstaining from meat, and the other members forbade them from abstaining from eating meat because they thought it was a wicked tradition, so the Lord revealed section 49 which part of it includes Him rebuking the members forbidding the recent converts from continuing their vegetarian habits. Not only does He chastise them for forbidding the Quaker converts from abstaining from meat, but he also encourages the forbidders the following:"that man should not eat the same"? What food could He be referring to?
Do you think you might be misinterpreting the scriptures?
The Lord is very clear about His recommendation of only eating meat in times of famine - there's no "interpreting." It's plain and clear. Same for the verse in section 49. If I were to use my own noggin and do some self-interpreting, it might sound like this, "If the Lord says to only eat meat in times of winter, famine, and excess of hunger, regardless of the technology, what could be the reason why? What do these times have in common? Crops have trouble growing in these times. Maybe the Lord is saying we should have plants as our main source of food, and during times crops have trouble growing we should eat meat as a spare food, hence "sparingly." Then if that were the case, it would basically mean we should only eat meat in order to save our lives from starvation. But there's no scripture that says that. Or is there? Check out JST Genesis 9:11, "And surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat to save your lives, and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands."
Isn't it fascinating that people will switch to a plant-based diet and consequently be cured from their heart disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, exhaustion, erectile dysfunction, obesity, etc...? The Book of Mormon teaches about "the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases (Alma 46:40)."
If people are significantly improving their health by eating mainly plants, wouldn't the Lord be happy with that? Wouldn't He recommend it? Why would He want us to eat a diet heavy in meat if it's leading to all the aforementioned health problems?
Is breast milk approved?
Yes, duh. What are breasts for anyway? Breast milk is made for baby humans. Dairy milk is made for baby cows. Can you imagine if aliens looked at our society and how grossed-out they would be that we consume the secretions from other lactating animals, not for survival, but because we like it?
Aren't there some animal products that are healthy?
Let's define "healthy." If there are two different foods in front of you, both containing potassium, are they equally healthy? Well, are there any bad properties in the foods? If you can get potassium from one food source without getting any harmful properties, that's the healthier option than the food with potassium and harmful properties.
Smokers are breathing in oxygen as well as tobacco and nicotine when they have a cigarette. As a result you could argue cigarettes are healthy because they 're a great source of oxygen. Why not get the oxygen without the poisons?
For protein, why choose an egg when you can have plenty of other high-protein plant foods? One single egg has more cholesterol than two Big Macs! Did you know it's illegal to advertise eggs as "healthy" or "nutritious"? You can't tell me eggs are good for you if it's illegal to market them as healthy or nutritious and that they jack up your cholesterol.
What if we compare two foods high in protein instead of potassium? Protein is good right? Not all protein is created equal. Casein is the main protein in dairy and is the most efficient cancer food that exists among all other ingredients on the planet. Just google "casein cancer" and see all the dozens and dozens of articles about it.
Do you eat sugar?
Sugar . . . the dandruff of angels! No.
Do you eat chocolate?
Not milk chocolate. I eat dairy-free chocolate and some of my dessert recipes call for cocoa powder.
Would you eat meat if you’re stranded on an island with just a cow and no plant food?
How likely is this scenario? And what is the cow eating? And how did the cow get there? How did I get there? Luckily, I won't ever take a boat ride with a cow across an ocean so I'll never have to be in this position. But this does sound like a time of famine, so of course, as a human I will do what I can to survive.
Are you ever full?
Yes, starchy foods fill me up quick (rice, potatoes, beans, etc.) - I'll expound later.
Are you sure you’re getting all your nutrients?
Yes. I can't help but laugh at this question. Have you ever wondered how some of the largest animals on earth, that also happen to eat mostly plants (buffalo, elephant, giraffe, rhino, hippo, kangaroo, gorilla, etc.) get their nutrients?
How are your bowel movements?
Incredible.
Don’t cows die if you stop milking them?
Cows do need to be milked. If left with their mothers, calves would do this for them and it would be perfectly normal and healthy for the mama cow when the calf eventually stops - just like other mammals. I will let you do your own research to find out why cows die when the dairy industry is done milking them. If you honestly think the dairy industry is some enormous animal rights organization which seeks to ease the suffering of lactating cows, you are very confused.
Would you kiss a girl after she ate a cheese burger?
If she’s my sweetheart I’ll kiss her anytime.
Are you going to make your future wife and kids eat this healthy?
I get this question a lot. The word "make" sounds like I'm forcing them to take bites of their kale salad against their will between sobs. "Eat it, Timmy! Or it's back in the basement dungeon for you!" Will you make your kids attend your religion, vote, help take the widow's trash to the curb next door? Obviously I want the best health for my loved ones, but it’s completely their choice.
Is it okay to eat a little bit of meat from a local, reliable, untreated, trustworthy, home-grown source?
That’s a much better option than McDonald’s “meat”, unfortunately every animal, regardless of where it came from and how it got on your plate, will have 2 things you don’t want: (1) cholesterol (the bad kind) and (2) specific animal proteins that promote cancer growth. I know that's not a popular answer, but that's the truth.
But isn’t some cholesterol good for you?
Yes. HDL is the healthy kind and LDL is the lethal kind. The human body is such a perfect, intricate machine; it makes all healthy cholesterol it needs all on its own. Eating meat (home-grown or not) puts extra (LDL) cholesterol into your body, which is when plaque build-up starts to occur (once it reaches about 142 ml), so there is no need to eat meat to make sure you are getting enough cholesterol.
If you are not bothered by a little plaque build-up in your arteries, then go ahead and have meat from whatever source you want. Just know this fun fact: a study was conducted, analyzing 65,396 patients in 344 hospitals; a staggering 75% of heart attack patients had cholesterol levels within the "normal" recommended amount. Even further, half of them had cholesterol levels that were “optimal”! Are you willing to risk it? I’m not. I would like a “no heart-attack” guarantee, so I eat plant-based. Read this article by Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn about preventing and reversing heart disease for more info.
Doesn’t your diet consist of a lot of carbs? Aren’t carbs bad?
Some people put donuts and rice in the same "bad carbs" category. Fat is 9 calories per gram, while carbs are only 4. By cutting out carbs you are only eating high-calorie, (and high-fat) foods. In addition, carbs and other plant foods have tons of fiber which hold water, making you fuller sooner, preventing you from overeating.
Furthermore, carbohydrates provide our bodies with the best type of fuel. Healthy carbs are converted into glycogen which give lasting, powerful effects on our muscle cells. You wouldn't put unleaded gas in a diesel would you? This is why athletes perform faster, have increased endurance, and have quicker recovery between workouts when they switch to a plant=-based diet.
No comments:
Post a Comment