食早餐麥片不可能不落牛奶吧。

「我們是否可以退後想想，我們 (尤其是成年人)是否真的需要喝牛奶？」
人當然不是「需要」喝牛奶，因為不喝牛奶不會死。
不過，我覺得也不必是「需要」才去喝，飲食從來都是個人喜好，喜歡飲就飲吧

But has anyone thought about the suffering that we're directly causing to other beings simply because we can't give up tasting 美味 things everyday?? (and vegan meals can also be very 美味)

Here is a PETA article about dairy farms. This is mostly centered around dairy farms in the U.S. but what they are describing is a reality for most dairy farms around the world (just do a little research online) and a lot dairy products we get in hk these days - cheese, bookies, cakes, milk, soyamilk [even vitasoy - "wai ta lai" - has milk in it!!!] uses milk from the US:
http://www.goveg.com/factoryFarming_Cows_Dairy.asp

As for chickens:
http://www.goveg.com/factoryFarming_chickens.asp

I see so many people on here screaming and crying about the violation on human rights - the lack of rights to speak freely, assemble freely, or even the right to vote. But how many of us think, as you're putting a piece of corpse into your mouth at lunch or dinner, that this very act of yours is contributing to the the everyday reality that other beings don't even have the right to LIVE! Why aren't you guys screaming and crying about that??

比牛奶更美味，也更合乎環保。而且可以自家製。
家父生前在雀巢工作，我飲免費牛奶飲到十八歲。三十歲以後才知道牛奶的害處。非常後悔。現正造自家豆漿，自家飲，也與隣居分享。

I read that killing animal with minimum pain actually makes the meat taste better. Free range chicken also more tender than factory chicken. As a meat lover, I won't object humane treatment for animal. But the reason is not about them per se, it's about their meat.

回梁寶﹕
若果是當水飲﹐豆漿比牛奶好飲。不過如果用來放在其他食物或飲料﹐要牛奶才有香味。最好要2%。不過始終食cornflick一定要落牛奶﹐用豆漿唔夠滑。我實驗試過用不飲品撈cornflick﹐水﹐豆漿﹐橙汁﹐可樂等等﹐最後都係要用牛奶先好食。

回 hevangel

"Rights is 100% human concept, it's by human and for human."

But ok let's say rights are created by humans - does that mean it's 100% for humans?? It's created by adult humans with normal mental capcity, but most (i imagine incld. you) would agree that human children as well as the mentally challenaged human deserve some degree of human rights

"若果用“需要”去衡量飲食﹐大慨絕大部份餐廳同街市超市都可以報笠。"

sure, and i'm not saying we shouldn't consume anything we don't NEED (需要). If it's something we don't need and the damage done by consuming it is relatively minimal, then why not? But if something is going to cause so much suffering to other sentient/consicous beings though we don't need it at all, what reason do we have to justifuy doing it?

回 Ken Ho

"what a lot of people don't realize is that a lot of the farm animals simply would not exist (would not be bred at all) if there weren't demand for human consumption. So talks about their right to live is really kind of a moot point."

So if it is a joint decision to have a child of ours by my husband and I, once the baby is born, does that mean it does not have the right to live if my husband and I decide it shouldn't live (let's say we decide to eat the baby)??

Just because these animals would not exist without our deliberate efforts to bring about their existence does not automatically mean that once they do come into existence, they have no actual "right" to exist (given that we accpet "rights" exist)

REGARDING "Humane" "Treatment"(Killing)"

Pigs have been found to have the intelligence eqivalent of a normal 4-5 year-old human (although I have read some accounts saying 3). Some severely mentally challenged humans also have the intelligence eqivalent a normal 3-5 year-old human. If we had a farm where we deliberately breed these serverly mentally challenged human beings and we raise them until they're around 20 to 30 years old (most animals raised for food are killed at a very early stage of their lives because it's simply not economically to keep them alive for any longer than the time necessary for them to become big enough adults to be sold for meat). We then kill these 20-30 year-old mentally challenged humans (who only have the intelligence of 3-year-olds) for food, but we do it humanely. It is totally painless - not even "with minimum pain". Would you guys find that acceptable?

"So if it is a joint decision to have a child of ours by my husband and I, once the baby is born, does that mean it does not have the right to live if my husband and I decide it shouldn't live (let's say we decide to eat the baby)??"
If you bred your child as a commodity... purely for his/her economic value and as a food source.... then the answer would be yes? (sorry... ridiculous question deserve ridiculous answer :-P)

That's not the point anyway (that they have no right because of "deliberate efforts") ... the point is, those animal would've have existed in the first place if no one wanted to eat them, thus the _right to live_ is not an issue because they are bred to be consumed. I don't conceive a child to be consumed.

"breed these serverly mentally challenged human beings... Would you guys find that acceptable?"
I don't find eating human being acceptable so no, it wouldn't be acceptable no matter how you breed them... or how intelligent or unintelligent they are.

I suppose you will put forth some arguments about how human beings are equal to all other animals in every possible way... but I wait for that before replying further.

On lives brought into existence deliberately for food
"If you bred your child as a commodity... purely for his/her economic value and as a food source.... then the answer would be yes? (sorry... ridiculous question deserve ridiculous answer :-P)

That's not the point anyway (that they have no right because of "deliberate efforts") ... the point is, those animal would've have existed in the first place if no one wanted to eat them, thus the _right to live_ is not an issue because they are bred to be consumed. I don't conceive a child to be consumed.

So you don't. But what if I did? What if I deliberately concieved a child to be consumed as food (which means the child would never come into existence if hadn't planned to concieve it to be consumed as food anyway), do you think that child has no right to life??

On animals vs. severely mentally challenged humans
"I don't find eating human being acceptable so no, it wouldn't be acceptable no matter how you breed them... or how intelligent or unintelligent they are."
why don't you find eating human beings acceptable? I mean - can you actually provide a moral argument against it or you simply don't accept it?

So you don't. But what if I did?
Then it would be you who don't believe the child has the right to live no? I guess the next logical question would be... what should I or the society do about it. Should I prevent the child from being bred for food in the first place or should I let the child born and then argue about his/her right to live?

Or, a different line of thought, should the child being bred for food has the same right to life as the child who's not bred for food? (assuming child farming is acceptable.)

I haven't studied philosophy (wanted to but never did) but I think hev's response/link adequately articulated why cannibalism is not acceptable to me. Although I don't quite agree that animal has no inherent value... but that's probably because I don't know what that terms mean in the context of "moral arguments". I thought animal has some value in the ecosystem as part of a food chain but I have a feeling that's not what inherent value is about. Hey hev, what is inherent value?

Surely the concept of intrinsic (inherent) value has been around for much longer than Tom Regan has, no??

and no, did not become vegan for religious reasons
only went vegan a couple of years ago - i just thought whatever enjoyment i get out of consuming animal products couldn't justify all the suffering/ destroyed future potentials for enjoyment my consumption of animal products cause.
nothing to do with religion at all. I was a christian and nearly a mormon (!) when i was very young but i knew nothing about vegetarianism/veganism then and i am soooooo far away from all that religious stuff now

will write more later! g2g for now