Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate

Cutting Edge Secret to Prevent Stroke and Heart Disease Naturally!

heart-disease - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate

Click here to learn the cutting edge secret your doctor will never want you to know!

1 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate 2 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate 3 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate
What Is The Chinese
Secret To Optimum
Blood Pressure?
Why This Is The
Healthiest Oil On Earth?
Click To Learn More
Bring Your Old
Battery Back To Life!
4 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate 5 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate 6 - Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate
How To Survive In
Bed & Nail Women
Like A Rockstar!
100% of Your
Vital Nutrition In
Just 30 Seconds
How A 2000-Year-Old
Nepalese Secret To Cure
Your Sciatica in 7

Matt Dillahunty Fails to justify his treatment of animals.

Matt Dillahunty Call:
Get VeganGains Apparel:
Support me on Patreon:
Follow me on Facebook:
Shark footage:

Research referenced:
Academy of nutrition and dietetics position on vegan diets:

Animal agriculture and disease:

Agriculture and GHG emissions:

Selective breading of chickens responsible for rapid growth:

Avian osteoporosis:


Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate

Matt Dillahunty Fails to justify his treatment of animals.

Matt Dillahunty Call:
Get VeganGains Apparel:
Support me on Patreon:
Follow me on Facebook:
Shark footage:

Research referenced:
Academy of nutrition and dietetics position on vegan diets:
Animal agriculture and disease:
Agriculture and GHG emissions:
Selective breading of chickens responsible for rapid growth:
Avian osteoporosis:

63 thoughts on “Matt Dillahunty Fails Vegan Debate

    1. Jaeshran Reddy I feel that Vegan Gains and Ask yourself should debate together so Incase one person miss hears or if the opposing doesn’t understand they don’t have to back track and can address the topic at hand rather than having the opposing go all over the place so the debate doesn’t derail and each side can understand each other.

  1. “I’m an omnivore” lmao, your heart attack, being fat and impotence will show you how much of an omnivore you are!

    1. Cat N. Look no one needs a steak that begun with an electrified dildo
      Or cheese that began because a human hand forcefully inseminating a cow so she would give milk.
      And we certainly don’t need chickens that begun life with a dude sucking the semen out of rooster through a straw.
      I don’t care how much grass they have.

    2. Poison Ivy This concept is too hard for their ego to comprehend. It clearly makes sense logically, but when ego and selfishness block the mind, there’s no going forward.

    3. “Something has to die in order for others to live”

      Someone doesn’t though 😉
      They are all exploited, and all killed. Living vegan stands against this. Living nonvegan supports it.

    1. No, just get a better argument. Richard’s argument is based on moral virtue as oppossed to moral obligation. That simple.

  2. Killed it Rich, nice to learn more information about the chicken and egg industry which i never knew about keep digging

  3. People are saying “oh vegan gains lost he should’ve said this and this”
    Look VG couldn’t get angry and call Mat on his bullshit because it is Mats show. You can’t yell at it or tell him his wrong right of the bat If VG treated the debate like Mat did, Mat could easily hang up on him rather then letting the conversation go. Mat made Arbitrary lines, Red Herrings, and strawmans. VG didn’t lose anything. If there was an actual Moderator this debate wouldn’t have been cancerous and Mat would’ve been called out for his contradictions and logical inconsistencies.

    1. MS 92 Mats career is based on crazy people believing in a magical man in the sky to give them guidance on what’s moral or not. So yes he would “waste his time” unless he knows he doesn’t have an actual argument then he will just hang up.

    2. MS 92 you can easily look them up if you don’t know anything about debating. And by your comment of “you’re not superior using argument terms” clearly show you know nothing about it. So I’m done responding and you can say “oh vg lost, you’re delusional, you’re stupid, you don’t know what you’re talking about” good job. Take care

    3. Lol yeah ok, but the problem here is. VG didn’t even have a good argument to begin with. He dishonestly tried to mix words not once, not twice, but three times.

  4. If he isn’t going to acknowledge something as simple as well-being not being exclusively human, then he isn’t going to acknowledge anything else you said bro. But good video.

    1. Mario mario firstly, I did not quote him. So nice try. He says he cares about well-being as a basis of morality, but well-being is not exclusive to humans so he’s using a self-serving overly-narrow definition of well-being. Moreover the well-being of humans is in fact greatly affected by animal product consumption therefore even by this overly-narrow definition he still is not of the moral opinion.

    2. david bouy ” I did not quote him” yes you did. You ascribed beliefs he never made. He never said well being is exclusively human. He has said the opposite

    3. Mario mario you don’t understand the definition of quote therefore I’m not entertaining any kind of serious debate with you, sorry.

    4. david bouy I said you ascribe beliefs to someone they dont hold you dumbass. which is exactly what you did but since you can’t actually argue based on reality and not straw manning Im not interested in what you have to say

  5. Not a single intellectually honest person can disagree with the logic of this video. Vegan or not. Religious or not. If you are being honest with yourself you cannot possibly claim that all the negatives of animal ag discussed in this video are justified for absolutely no necessity.

    1. MS 92 Seriously dude. It’s ok to love Matt for all the work he’s done to promote atheism and fight back against harmful theological ideas that are forced on many children and try to be forced into laws that we all must follow, but on veganism he is completely wrong.

      And Bruce needs to learn that meat and dairy is NOT part of a “balanced nutritional diet”. Once he does the research and accepts the scientific evidence (which if he’s as logical as he says he is, he will do), then he will understand why it is “needless” to kill them.

      You can seriously destroy the entire vegan argument by showing JUST ONE nutrient we REQUIRE that can ONLY be found in meat/dairy. I would take this a step further by saying it also has to be something we can’t synthesize in a supplement form and somehow bypass the animal requirement from it. Because even if you did find something we needed that only came from animals, I would still argue it is immoral to continue the suffering and death of animals if we could use our human intellect to rise above our biological needs and still get our required nutrients without having to take an innocent life.

    2. cobbb11 Animals don’t suffer. They are rendered senseless through electrical stunning before being bled out. Animal suffering is bad and occurs very often in the wild. Luckily human animal products are harvested in the most humane and technologically advanced way possible. This is something as a human you should be proud of, not scared by.

    3. Often they still live after beeing shot in the forehead… then they suffer from beeing cut open… just think about that for one moment.

  6. if he brings up the cannibalism argument and how its immoral, remind him of the soccer team that got stranded in the andes and ate the dead to survive. but then i guess it was immoral for them to want to live so instead they should have just buried the dead in the snow and died

    1. sexyturopita I looked it up it was a Uruguayan rugby team and their friends and family 16 out of 45 lived . There was a movie on it too I think .

    2. +The Free Ride
      It’s Carlitos Paez who says the words (played by [an uncredited] John Malkovitch)…
      “Until you’re actually in a situation like that, you’ve no idea how you’ll behave”.
      Something to bear in mind whenever anyone brings up the “desert island” argument.
      The version of Schubert’s Ave Maria, that plays through the credits (sung by Aaron Neville and Linda Ronstadt) is simply delightful.
      Victor Frankl makes pretty much the same point as well.

    3. Because one was for survival, if you just go and kill someone to eat them that’s different. Even if you didn’t kill them but you had the means to eat yet you wanted to eat human flesh it’s different!!!!

      One is about survival, the other is because you want to.. totally fucking different.

    1. Bean S you just said animals don’t have the same right as us and so because of that I don’t have an obligation to care about an animals well being you acknowledge that there’s a difference in humans and non humans which we take into account, at most you could be morally virtuous to not kill an animal but an i no mean obligated to care yoyr probably say it’s not immoral to kill an insect and yet they have some level of sentience so I could say the same thing about non humans

    2. Nathan Dennis By that i clearly meant rights that have nothing to do with living or not. Rights that only humans comprehend like voting for presidency or purchasing property. With your logic you don’t have an obligation to care for anything with sentience other than your own. Please address my other points. If you are truly consistent with your logic you have no issue with murdering and raping because to you there is 0 obligation to care about another sentient beings well being. It was the rapists choice to commit the action and we have to respect it eventhough there was an innocent sentient being involved correct? But anyway no one is asking you to care. The question is simple. Why pick the choice that causes pain and suffering over a plant based one?. Why would you cause this harm if its unnecessary and completely avoidable in our modern soceity.?

    3. A baby raised on a vegan diet is hospitalised for severe malnutrition
      When an Italian baby was taken to hospital in Milan earlier this month by his grandparents, doctors there were shocked by the baby’s condition. At 14 months old, he weighed only slightly more than a 3-month-old, according to the Local Italy.
      Upon further examination, a more harrowing picture began to take shape. The baby, whose parents allegedly kept him on a vegan diet without providing dietary supplements, was found to be severely malnourished, suffering from dangerously low calcium levels. Complicating matters, the baby had to undergo an emergency operation because of a congenital heart condition, which was aggravated by his low calcium levels

    4. Roberto Turco I read it. Its the parents fault not the diet. If you knew how milk calcium worked youd understand this. The calcium we get from milk essentially all goes to waste. Cow milk is not only too acidic for us but has a lot of toxins our body cant handle. Essentially all the calcium we get from cows milk gets discreted through our urine.
      High calcium foods include broccoli, kale, and oranges just to name a few. Like any diet it can fail if not executed properly. The parents were clearly irresponsible. Babies also require a higher content of fat than adults do. From what it sounded like on the paper is the child had a problem with calcium absorption in the first place. Why aren’t you talking about all the children who die from bacterial infections found in meat? Look at how high the numbers are of children who have died to e.coli outbreaks thanks to livestock. Here is proof by the way of the American Dietetics Association stating that a vegan diet is adequate for all stages of life.

    1. True Darkness how? Gains couldn’t even come up with a good argument without having to resort to dishonest word play.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *