moral dilema!!! film is beautiful, but...

Forum covering all aspects of small gauge cinematography! This is the main discussion forum.

Moderator: Andreas Wideroe

Locked
Guest

Post by Guest »

Just too tempting....had to do this......
Anonymous wrote: "Crims... Are your going out of your way to stir up trouble? Seems to be that way with your posts."
crimsonson wrote: "I can easily say that under the Christian flag millions have died"
Is there an alternative to aspirin because my religion does think it’s a moral medicine?“ Do you say Tylenol or do you say “Well, you are misguided to even believe aspirin is immoral…”
special note for those who don't know: People have died from taking aspirin.
crimsonson wrote:.....Like I said, is Jesus the real “Messiah”? Is God real?.....– Is this an opening to give the logic and proof God does not exist? Or worst yet, apply your reasoning AND his belief, I have the right call him a hypocrite........Trying to question his logic is no better than me trying to convince a Christian the benefits of Satanic Worship..........“There is no moral dilemma.”..............It value judgment thus no point..............“ There is no point in arguing the logic of moral standing since it’s a value judgment. In the end, no matter how much logic you apply, you questioned his belief system [“misguided values”].
Anonymous wrote:Now I understand, Crimsonson is an Atheist. I'm relieved! All along I'd assumed his prejudices came from being buggered by a priest somewhere along the line.
Anonymous wrote: "...umm.....done..... fini"
User avatar
MovieStuff
Posts: 6135
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:07 am
Real name: Roger Evans
Location: Kerrville, Texas
Contact:

Post by MovieStuff »

crimsonson wrote: Roger wrote:“Letting people continue to believe something false is not what friends do, not matter how sincere that belief may be.”

Do you see the danger of what you are proposing? This means its open season for anything and anytime in this board, Super 8 or not.
So what's new? ;)
crimsonson wrote: There is no point in arguing the logic of moral standing since it’s a value judgment.
Agreed. So why are you arguing against my value judgment or the right to express it? In my opinion, shooting film is more natural than shooting video. I would never have posted that opinion in the context of being "morally right or wrong" if Chris had not posted his question in a moral context. He did so I did.

I do not question his belief system. I question how he can make a connection where there is none. If his belief is based on faulty information, then why shouldn't I offer some valid information that helps him make an informed decision? He doesn't have to listen to me but he did post his question in a moral context because his current belief prevented him from doing WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. Remember, a "belief" is not a supported fact. It is a "feeling" that is subject to change over time, based on additional information. Hence the term "belief".
crimsonson wrote: In the end, no matter how much logic you apply, you questioned his belief system.
And no matter how much you encourage his belief, you do so while admitting my point of view is logical. So who's doing Chris the biggest disservice?

Roger
Chris Lynch
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 5:46 am
Location: Boston
Contact:

Post by Chris Lynch »

Hi Roger,

Thanks for clearing up your points, I do appreciate the dialog, and I have a few things to add. I swear I'm trying to wrap this up and get out of the way!

When I brought up how this topic ties in with the product you sell, I only meant that my views will keep me from buying a work printer as I won't be shooting film anymore. As for your transfer service, my family has many very old home movies that we might want to transfer to video, so depending on what they want to do with it, I'll still be a customer. I can draw the line at working with film that's already been shot; I just won't buy any more.

You said, "...NOT shooting film will do nothing to protect the cows you fret over..."
and "Thinking that cows will be saved if you don't shoot film is short sighted."

Overlooking your unnecessary "short sighted" comment, this is very useful to the conversation, because it shows that you've made an incorrect assumption about what I believe. I know full well that avoiding film won't save cows, and while it's a bit insulting of you to attribute that thinking to me, I won't take it personally. Partly because I know you to be a decent, well-meaning guy, and partly because of the very many misconceptions I'm confronted with, I know that there isn't enough information in circulation to dispel these common myths. I simply believe that it's wrong for me to benefit from the suffering of animals, and it doesn't matter to me that making film was not the direct cause of death. There are more complexities to the issue than we can or should try to cover in a film discussion, so I'll leave it at that. We disagree on this point, and that's OK. What's not OK is for you to say, "Chris should not feel guilty about shooting film." That is not your choice to make. We've both made our choices, we disagree, and that's OK.

You also said, "...the question at hand should not be framed as a "moral" issue since it isn't a moral issue at all and trying to make it one imposes the beliefs of Chris on everyone that wants to offer advice."

No, it is a moral question for ME; I'm only referring to the way I define morality FOR MYSELF. I never said or implied otherwise. I'm not suggesting that anyone change what they're doing, just talking about what I'm doing in an attempt to get information on the subject, which I now have, thank you very much for the replies. You're going on the offensive to defend against an attack that was never launched.

Here's a few of your points I'd like to comment on:

"D) Plastic is a product of the petroleum industry
and
E) Petroleum comes from fossil fuels
and
F) Fossil fuels come from billions of dead animals (many of which were vegetarians!)"

I don't know of a single vegan that cares about that connection. Speaking for myself, a large part of what I care about is the conditions of factory farms (anyone is free to research that on their own, this is not the place and I've already posted links). You're talking about animals that killed each other or died of natural causes, NOT animals that we kill for our own convenience.

There is of course the larger issue of environmental harm, and believe me, as soon as fuel cell cars are safe and available, I'll be in line to buy one. Same goes for car tires without animal by-products. There are instances where I don't have a choice, so I just do the best I can. One place I do have a choice is in buying shampoos and other cleaners that aren't petroleum based. As for plastics, I do what I can. My computer has much higher metal content than plastic, and rather than buying a whole new system to upgrade, I use my old case and other parts and upgrade the internal parts. That's also more cost effective. The plastic items I buy and use are long-term use items. I don't buy plastic cups, for example, or other throwaway items wherever possible. And while it's true that plastics harm the environment, it's as dangerous to us as animal life so I feel there's some balance there. Everyone has to draw his or her own lines, and where I draw mine is up to me and my conscience.

"1) Man is a carnivore by nature and a herbivore by choice"
and, "...forcing himself to be a vegetarian"

There is evidence that would tend to suggest otherwise. Have you ever compared our teeth with those of true carnivores? We have far less enamel and weaker jaws. Our "K-9" teeth are a pathetic joke compared to real meat eaters like those of lions and tigers. Our digestive system lacks the necessary acid level to fully break down animal fats. That is why Humans suffer so much heart disease due to our diets. We are certainly capable of surviving on meat, but we weren't designed from the ground up to live on it with complete success.

"Man HAS to eat but man doesn't HAVE to have a computer"

Man sure can eat meat, but doesn't have to. Read what the American Dietetic Association has to say about it *IF* you're interested: http://www.eatright.com/adap1197.html

David M. Leugers: Thanks so much for using words like "hypocrisy" and "misguided" about me, I really enjoy your confrontational style of communication. OK, I actually don't enjoy it at all, and I find your tone insulting. I never implied that you are a religious nut, only that you weren't being very nice with your comments, and that they didn't seem to line up with any religion that I'm familiar with. Any religion you choose is your right and no concern of mine, but I'm well within my rights to complain if you're a jerk to me. Here are some religious and other quotes you might find interesting, but maybe not. I don't even know what your religion is. So, please take no offense, I'm simply showing that other people through history have similar ideas:

"...there is something so very dreadful, so satanic in tormenting those who have never harmed us, and who cannot defend themselves, who are utterly in our power, who have weapons neither of offence nor defense, that none but very hardened persons can endure the thought of it"
--Cardinal John Henry Newman

"Cruelty to animals is as if humans did not love God."
--Cardinal John Henry Newman

"You who are innocent, what have you done worthy of death?"
--Richard of Wyche Bishop of Chichester 1197-1253

"...To shut your mind, heart and imagination from the sufferings of others is to begin slowly, but inexorably, to die. Those Christians who close their minds and hearts to the cause of animal welfare, and the evils it seeks to combat, are ignoring the Fundamental spiritual teachings of Christ himself"
--John Baker, Bishop of Salisbury

"Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet."
--Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

OK, when we're done discussing how I live my life, I'll go back to post a film projector question, I promise.
Guest

Post by Guest »

I have a brilliant, yet fairly wacky friend who gave me his slant on the whole subject of ourselves and the cows, pigs and chickens we eat. He said "We provide them shelter, food and protection from predators and in exchange they provide us food and material to make things. It is a classic example of symbiosis. Do you think there would be anywhere near the number of chickens in the world if mankind didn't domesticate the species, do have any idea how stupid a chicken is?"

Now, if you think how little individuals matter in nature (example, everything dies to clear out obsolete genes and allow evolution to proceed ) Doesn't it make sense for Bossy and Henrietta to become steak and Colonel Sanders? (and film too.....) so their species can multiply in the millions?

It's also is really ironic that if the diet of mankind ever did become truly Vegan the only logical outcome for these species would be total slaughter. They're too domesticated and stupid to be reurned to the wild.
Guest

Post by Guest »

Well there we are. All you people normally get on so well in this forum and help each other out, but as soon as 'belief' or 'religion' is brought into it, you start fighting. Sound familiar?
Guest

Post by Guest »

Well there we are. All you people normally get on so well in this forum and help each other out, but as soon as 'belief' or 'religion' is brought into it, you start fighting. Sound familiar?
Guest

Post by Guest »

Sorry about the double post, my internet connection went down and I refreshed the page.
Guest

Post by Guest »

Do you think there would be anywhere near the number of chickens in the world if mankind didn't domesticate the species.
What about the old saying "Quality, not quantity" Thet don't all have a great life though do they? I'm sure we've all seen the battery farms on documentaries.
do have any idea how stupid a chicken is?"
Well, they don't go to war, destroy their own planet, murder each other, fight over who's right about god and the meaning of life even though nobody at all knows, but yeah, I guess they're pretty stupid. :wink:
David M. Leugers
Posts: 1632
Joined: Thu May 02, 2002 12:42 am
Contact:

Chickens

Post by David M. Leugers »

Guest said : chickens ... don't murder each other

Now come on, really give me a break. Have you any knowledge what-so-ever about real chickens? Not only do they kill each other, they can be ferocious cannibals! Think not? Check it out for yourself. Me, I'm tired of it all. I think I'll go grab a burger or maybe a chicken salad...

Chris and Crimsonson: WHO CARES? Neither one of you have shown that you are capable of logic thought or even capable of following a line of thought. You attack me because I expressed my honest opinion on the matter (personally I think your "dilema" is silly, but you have the right to YOUR opinion). So you don't care for my blunt manner. I apologize. There, feel better?

Signing off this absurd topic,

David M. Leugers
Guest

Post by Guest »

Anonymous wrote:
Do you think there would be anywhere near the number of chickens in the world if mankind didn't domesticate the species.
Obviously there would not be as many chickens. Avian disease and predation would keep them in check. Avian disease is actually more widespread due to mankind. It is simply controlled within farms through quarantine procedures. Nature has it's own way of dealing with avian disease through population control.
What about the old saying "Quality, not quantity" Thet don't all have a great life though do they? I'm sure we've all seen the battery farms on documentaries.
We've all seen concentration camps and refugee camps. Being at the top of the food chain doesn't always bode well for mankind. Not all people have a great life. Go visit china to learn about quality versus quantity.
do have any idea how stupid a chicken is?"
........as compared to this thread?
Well, they don't go to war, destroy their own planet, murder each other, fight over who's right about god and the meaning of life even though nobody at all knows, but yeah, I guess they're pretty stupid. :wink:
Chickens do fight and kill each other. Too many chickens will destroy their habitat just like too many people will destroy the environment around them. Only the dead chickens really know about god. :lol:
User avatar
MovieStuff
Posts: 6135
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:07 am
Real name: Roger Evans
Location: Kerrville, Texas
Contact:

Post by MovieStuff »

Chris Lynch wrote: I know full well that avoiding film won't save cows.... I simply believe that it's wrong for me to benefit from the suffering of animals, and it doesn't matter to me that making film was not the direct cause of death.

Here's a few of your points I'd like to comment on:

"D) Plastic is a product of the petroleum industry
and
E) Petroleum comes from fossil fuels
and
F) Fossil fuels come from billions of dead animals (many of which were vegetarians!)"

I don't know of a single vegan that cares about that connection.
Respectfully, I see no difference. You either benefit from the death of the animals or you don't. If you support the plastics/petroleum industry by buying a video camera or a computer, you are benefiting from the death of thousands of animals. If you buy film you are benefiting from the deaths of thousands of cattle. I know you take into account the supposed suffering of the cattle as part of your decision making process, but I'm fairly certain that all the dead animals that make up our fossil fuel supply suffered greatly and, quite possibly, more so than the cattle in question. Cattle live a pretty pampered life up until slaughter time and the end comes much quicker than in nature.

I wrote:
"1) Man is a carnivore by nature and a herbivore by choice" and, "...forcing himself to be a vegetarian"
Chris Lynch wrote: Our digestive system lacks the necessary acid level to fully break down animal fats. That is why Humans suffer so much heart disease due to our diets. We are certainly capable of surviving on meat, but we weren't designed from the ground up to live on it with complete success.
We'll just have to disagree on this totally. An early part of my career was as a medical illustrator working at the local Med Center here in Houston. To a man, all the doctors I ever spoke with about this agree that man is a carnivore that suppliments his diet with leafy greens. Modern man has a hard time dealing with meat IF he does not get enough excercise; something that primative man had plenty of.

So the total equation is that if you get plenty of excercise, your body actually expects the protein found in meat, which is why doctors recommend that vegatarians supplement their diet with protein or suffer serious (and permanent) damage to the muscle tissue in their hearts. Again, I used to be a vegatarian so I'm very much aware of the arguments regarding the vegan lifestyle.

Anyway, I'm sorry you feel guilty about shooting film but I still don't think that video is the lessor of the two evils.

My best,

Roger
marc
Senior member
Posts: 1931
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 12:01 am
Real name: Marc
Contact:

Post by marc »

Does anybody remember where that 8 mm film shooting forum went to? I could have sworn that it had the same URL as this one
Guest

Post by Guest »

Do you think there would be anywhere near the number of chickens in the world if mankind didn't domesticate the species.
I replied:
What about the old saying "Quality, not quantity" Thet don't all have a great life though do they? I'm sure we've all seen the battery farms on documentaries.
Guest replied:
We've all seen concentration camps and refugee camps. Being at the top of the food chain doesn't always bode well for mankind. Not all people have a great life. Go visit china to learn about quality versus quantity.
:?: My mind is trying to equate this reply to the original quote above and my reply to it. Sorry, I don't see any?
Chris Lynch
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 5:46 am
Location: Boston
Contact:

The End

Post by Chris Lynch »

I have replies aplenty, and could go on arguing this with all of you for the rest of my life if I was trying to convert you, but I'm not. I've tried to defend myself from attacks, and even accusations that I'VE been attacking (completely ridiculous, just re-read my posts), and no one is listening to each other, so it's time for this to end, and I'm happy to end it. I have work to do, after all.

If you'd like to continue this thread by pointing out my logical deficiencies or limited life-span due to my weak heart (even though the average vegan lives 15 years longer than the average meat eater), go right ahead, and have fun talking to a brick wall because I'm not coming back to this thread. It was interesting for a while, but there seems to be very little interest (apart from a couple of exceptions) in paying attention to the information I've posted that soundly deals with the newest batch of posts that follow my information. It fails to be a debate if the information isn't being considered on both sides, so this thread is dead to me now. Every bit as dead as the peanuts I murdered for my sandwich today. :D

I'm going back to the main board to ask a film projector question. I hope to see you there.
User avatar
MovieStuff
Posts: 6135
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:07 am
Real name: Roger Evans
Location: Kerrville, Texas
Contact:

Re: The End

Post by MovieStuff »

Chris Lynch wrote: If you'd like to continue this thread by pointing out my logical deficiencies or limited life-span due to my weak heart (even though the average vegan lives 15 years longer than the average meat eater)
Again, I respectfully submit that you are leaving out excercise to create a "worst case scenario". People that get plenty of exercise not only digest meat just fine but have better muscle tone due the higher protein intake and (according the studies I've read) often live longer than vegetarians due to the reasons I've already outlined.

Again, I am not questioning your principles or your lifestyle but, rather, the connections you make where I see none. As in the dilemma you presented regarding where film comes from, the assumptions you have presented regarding meat+veggie diet vs all veggie diet are erroneous and fly in the face of supported medical fact in every medical journal I've ever read.
Chris Lynch wrote: this thread is dead to me now. Every bit as dead as the peanuts I murdered for my sandwich today. :D
A perfect example: Peanut butter has just as much protein as a steak but a far higher fat concentration as well as a higher carb count. Again, no conversion attempted on my part. Just trying to give you accurate information to base your decision process on, as I was regarding your desire to shoot film.

BTW: The name of this thread starts with capital letters that read: "Moral Dilemma". Either people recognize that moral dilemma or they don't. If they don't (and most won't) then what sort of advice did you really expect from a bunch of savage film shooters? ;)

Sincerely,
Roger
Locked