[MrLeftHand]

I hope they are OK with dead animals being used to fuel their cars, made into plastics to pack their stuff, producing the electricity to power their house and all the stuff in it.

Never heard people being offended by killing plants for food, cutting trees grinding them into paper or just to have it as a decoration for holidays.

I do agree, if it's only for aesthetics we could actually leave it out and not kill something for just having clear beer.

In the end everything is made up from the same starstuff as humans, a squirrel, even the rock in the dirt and the dirt itself. Some of it is considered living the others not.

Why do I always feel a bit of hypocrisy when it comes to these topics?

[icebraining]

What hypocrisy? Many vegans object to killing animals but not the use of remains of already dead ones.

Use of isinglass requires killing new fish to extract their swim bladders. Meanwhile, nobody is killing animals to turn them into oil.

Besides, it'd only be hypocrisy if they're judging others. Simply saying "I'd like my beer free from fish bladders" isn't, even if you think the reason is ridiculous.

[MrLeftHand]

First of all it's free from fish bladders, because you're not consuming that. That fish might have been killed to end up on the plate of non-vegans. So the fish was already killed for other reasons in the first place. And following this thought, then vegans can go and wear clothes made out of skin. Cows, pigs, sheep aren't killed for their skin in the first place. It's just a byproduct that is used.

The hypocrisy lies in the valuing lives of certain beings over others.

Or when vegans have carnivorous animals as pets. Feeding them with canned guts and other leftover parts of animals. And whining about fish bladders in beer.

I will state that from an energetic standpoint it would be great, if the whole world would go vegan. I have no objections.

But I don't like people going mental on fish bladder whilst they are still polluting the environment as the others and have to have a rage fit about literally everything.

Oh and lastly, we don't have to drink beer. Alcohol was needed when humanity didn't have clean water and we needed alcohol to disinfect it. Now we have all the water we want. From the tap, or bottled.

You are not required to drink alcohol, at all.

Oh and why aren't they considering the huge impact we have on the environment just by growing crops for beer. A social, useless beverage. Like the fish are the only ones who suffer cause of this.

All and all, I'm fine removing fish bladders from the filtering process, but wont get a hissy fit if they continue to use it.

[icebraining]

It seems you're reading a different article, since I see nobody "going mental" on the one posted, hence there's no point in discussing further.

[MrLeftHand]

It's not just this article. This was triggered way back where vegetarians started to boycott Guinness.

We used this technique for quite a while now and people are shocked.

What about this part: Brewery owner Tim Bosworth, a long-term vegetarian who went vegan two years ago, said he was shocked when he first learned about the ingredient.

Really? A brewery owner finds out how he makes clear beer?

And he is shocked? Just imagine how shocked he will be when he finds out how much damage he makes to the environment by brewing beer.

And this: "It's kind of disgusting to think about, even to people who eat meat, and it's something that's not talked about," he said.

It is not. I for one, think if you kill an animal you might as well utilize all of it. Skin for clothing, meat for eating, bones for tools and jewelry, swim bladder for beer cleaning. That animal shouldn't die for nothing.

But for the third time. I agree to get rid of the fish bladder, because we have substitutes for it, which might be even better. But let's not grab one particular problem with the whole brewing industry and the rising alcohol consumption issue.

I might be wrong, maybe starting the change through our beer will lead us to a balanced natural lifestyle.

[icebraining]

Really? A brewery owner finds out how he makes clear beer?

Nobody said he firstly learned about it after becoming a brewery owner.

The rest of your points are just disagreements, which are certainly valid, but don't point to hypocrisy or "people going mental".

[MrLeftHand]

Yeah, maybe hypocrisy is not the right word here.

I still feel they are making a big problem out of it just because some people have different eating habits.

[dublinclontarf]

Careful when leaving the house, you might step on a bacterium or a spore.

[MrLeftHand]

I won't leave the house until they invent the hoverboard.

[Fricken]

People making no effort to be good are ok. But people who are trying to be good but are less than perfect have giant targets on their backs for some reason.

[MrLeftHand]

Making no effort is not OK. Making effort with little to no insight to things wont help either.

For example that fish bladder comes from fish. That fish was probably killed for it's meat. So even if you're not using fish bladder in the beer clearing procedure, that fish will be killed and that part thrown away. Than you use some kind of substitute which has to be grown, or manufactured. That needs land, energy etc...

In short you will have a bigger impact on the environment, because the fish will be killed anyway. And now you have to produce extra filtering agents for the beer, because you will lose customers who like clear beer.

And all of this for a couple of vegan beer drinkers.

Well done.