@Holly: Sorry I'm not a Christian, I just found it to be a convenient quote! I don't subscribe to religion for probably the same reasons as you (righteous eating notwithstanding). ;) Anyway, whether you think it's ridiculous or not to compare orthodox eating to religion, maybe you can tell me how these groups are different from religions with their dietary dogma, vague rules for living and sectarian culture?
And I'm sure you believe organic food tastes better -- I mean you invested strongly in that belief, so why wouldn't it? I hear pepper makes food taste better, too. Maybe you've heard of it?
I have no problem with eating healthily, and I'm glad people do; heck, I try to myself. It's when people exercise their lifestyle dogma under the aegis of healthy eating that wrankles me. Yes, you can eat fresh food, you can enjoy organic food if it's what you prefer, but don't act like you're somehow doing the "right" thing just because you decided to martyr yourself in the most token way possible.
That's the illogic I'm talking about. You're thinking with your heart and not with your stomach.
Why can't one find the middle ground without resorting to such an orthodox eating regimen? Why put yourself up on a cross when you sit down to dinner? Maybe one can simply, humbly, eat well without turning it into some kind of crusade, and stop looking for approval and belonging in this quixotic quest for so-called righteous eating.
@Steven: Yes, you're correct -- they aren't logical. I kind of made my point about it being a new-age stand-in for religion with their preposterous dietary regimen. It's a set of beliefs, a community to belong to, and they tell you what to do. I don't know what source would help that fact to sink in more. Well, maybe more examples would help?
Like what about eating organic food when its only differences, apart from the price, are negligible? Or only food that doesn't involve animals? Or excluding genetically modified crops? Why use such circuitous logic just to adhere to an orthodox diet in the first place? When eating disorders like freeganism may be a feel-good 'righteous' way of eating, they do nothing to solve the problems they claim to fight against, just as being vegan does nothing substantial to actually stop animal cruelty. Or how drinking bottled water isn't exactly healthier, either. Ethos Water may create more pollution and garbage and not actually be any better for you, but they donate a fraction of a dollar to charity for you, so *hugs*, right?
In short these are nothing more than belief systems that don't actually require affecting any meaningful change. But damn if they don't make one feel superior. Because that was the goal all along.
All this talk of religion reminds me of a quote, in fact:
What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’ -Matthew 15:10-20
And people who make a point you disagree with aren't necessarily trolls. Are curious minds sated, or do they need something more to chew on?
Or more accurately, with its vaguely-defined rules for living, ill-gotten sense of righteousness, and parochial community it goes by another term: a religion.
What a wacky collection of tiny pictures without explanation. Finally a site that dares to repeatedly ask, "I don't know what this license plate means, dur... do you?"
And I'm sure you believe organic food tastes better -- I mean you invested strongly in that belief, so why wouldn't it? I hear pepper makes food taste better, too. Maybe you've heard of it?
I have no problem with eating healthily, and I'm glad people do; heck, I try to myself. It's when people exercise their lifestyle dogma under the aegis of healthy eating that wrankles me. Yes, you can eat fresh food, you can enjoy organic food if it's what you prefer, but don't act like you're somehow doing the "right" thing just because you decided to martyr yourself in the most token way possible.
That's the illogic I'm talking about. You're thinking with your heart and not with your stomach.
Why can't one find the middle ground without resorting to such an orthodox eating regimen? Why put yourself up on a cross when you sit down to dinner? Maybe one can simply, humbly, eat well without turning it into some kind of crusade, and stop looking for approval and belonging in this quixotic quest for so-called righteous eating.
Why not just shut up and eat?
Like what about eating organic food when its only differences, apart from the price, are negligible? Or only food that doesn't involve animals? Or excluding genetically modified crops? Why use such circuitous logic just to adhere to an orthodox diet in the first place? When eating disorders like freeganism may be a feel-good 'righteous' way of eating, they do nothing to solve the problems they claim to fight against, just as being vegan does nothing substantial to actually stop animal cruelty. Or how drinking bottled water isn't exactly healthier, either. Ethos Water may create more pollution and garbage and not actually be any better for you, but they donate a fraction of a dollar to charity for you, so *hugs*, right?
In short these are nothing more than belief systems that don't actually require affecting any meaningful change. But damn if they don't make one feel superior. Because that was the goal all along.
All this talk of religion reminds me of a quote, in fact:
What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’
-Matthew 15:10-20
And people who make a point you disagree with aren't necessarily trolls. Are curious minds sated, or do they need something more to chew on?
Or more accurately, with its vaguely-defined rules for living, ill-gotten sense of righteousness, and parochial community it goes by another term: a religion.
...yes, which you can see from the picture. Any info why?