eating Meat? good or bad

[tarasan]

well lets have your views

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Tarasan in my worldview it's not necessarily good or bad to eat meat itself. Now the slaughter of the animal itself is another matter. You are still killing another living being no matter how you look at it. Tarasan it is best to be a vegetarian if you can handle it. If you believe that God gave the animals life just like he gave the human life, and that the same life within the human is also within the animal, you know oddly enough, Judaism teaches that God originally intended humans to be vegetarians.

 

[Noaidi]

I can't say it's good or bad in an absolute sense. I can say that it isn't necessary if vegetarian alternatives are available.

 

[Revoltingest]

I can't say it's good or bad in an absolute sense. I can say that it isn't necessary if vegetarian alternatives are available.

Bacon is evidence that meat can be moral.

 

[Valjean]

Tastes good, but morally questionable and environmentally problematic.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Now in my religion tarasan there are a lot of vegetarians. Vegetarianism isn't required, but there are still a lot of vegetarians. Certain animals are sacred to certain gods, and when you're the child of that god, you do not eat that god's animal manifestation. That is like eating your own mother or father in a way. Another thing is Kemetics aren't really supposed to eat pork or shellfish, but some in the modern day eat it anyway. The gods try to lead people to vegetarianism. They regard animal life just as sacred as human life. Several in the faith have said their mother or father guided them to be vegetarians.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

So ultimately to conclude- Is it immoral to eat meat? No, but it's certainly not seen as moral where the gods are concerned. The gods allow certain things they would never look highly on.

 

[Madhuri]

Good or bad? It's healthy in moderation but humans are supposed to eat more vegetables and less meat than they tend to. Protein, B12, iron etc. are important, but luckily they can all be found in a number of other sources.

Is it moral? I think that depends on your situation. If you require it to survive then yes, it is moral. If you eat it only because you enjoy the taste then it is so incredibly immoral.

Is a meat eater good or bad? I don't think that a person's diet reflects on that at all.

 

[Willamena]

Meat provides some essential protein. As long as you don't eat too much of it, and be considerate of its source, it's a good thing.

 

[Magic Man]

well lets have your views

It's neutral. We have to eat things that are alive or were formerly alive, even if that's plants. Everything in moderation. The main thing is how you go about eating meat. If you treat the animals well and don't make them suffer, there's nothing wrong with it.

 

[Valjean]

Gods smods -- human carnivory, in most situations, is a PEC violation (principle of equal consideration), pure and simple.

 

[Madhuri]

It's neutral. We have to eat things that are alive or were formerly alive, even if that's plants. Everything in moderation. The main thing is how you go about eating meat. If you treat the animals well and don't make them suffer, there's nothing wrong with it.

I'm pretty sure there is suffering in most murder situations involving animals.

 

[Magic Man]

I'm pretty sure there is suffering in most murder situations involving animals.

Maybe in most, but not in all. You can kill an animal without making it suffer. Also, there is evidence to suggest that plants feel pain, too.

 

[Madhuri]

. Also, there is evidence to suggest that plants feel pain, too.

Yes I've seen this argument many times and think it is rather unfounded. I think Mziser is good at refuting this theory...if I remember correctly.

 

[BelieveMe]

Well, we aren't omnivores. Most of us like meat (with the exception of the vegetarians and vegans). It is one of our survival methods. We need food and meat is one of them. So I think it's safe to say that meat is good.

 

[Valjean]

Meat provides some essential protein. As long as you don't eat too much of it, and be considerate of its source, it's a good thing.

What food doesn't provide essential protein? Broccoli, calorie for calorie, contains more protein than steak, and Americans already consume toxic amounts of protein.
No, "essential" doesn't wash.
"Be considerate of its source" sounds good, but doesn't get around the essential fact that you're breeding animals to kill them, as soon as they reach marketable size.
If a race of anthropophagic aliens from beta Centauri chose Earth as a pasture it wouldn't make much difference to me weather they respected us or not.

 

[Eliot Wild]

If a race of anthropophagic aliens from beta Centauri chose Earth as a pasture it wouldn't make much difference to me weather they respected us or not.

I would suggest they begin feeding right here in the good ole U.S. of A., because we have the fattest, juiciest, tenderest meat samples on the planet. A whole party of Beta Centaurians could make a buffet out of "Celebrity Fit Club" alone.

 

[Magic Man]

Yes I've seen this argument many times and think it is rather unfounded.

It is founded. It may or may not be completely true. But what is the difference? It is without a doubt true that plants and animals live. So, let's say plants can't feel pain. What you're saying is that if something doesn't suffer, even if it's alive, it's OK to eat it?

 

[MSizer]

OK, this thread was started by my invitation, and I agreed to state my case on the matter, so please bear with me on this long post, because it takes a lot of groundwork to establish the argument properly.

First of all, I'm going to treat "good or bad" from a moral perspective exlclusively.

My thesis is that eating meat is immoral except in the rare case that you can obtain it from a wild animal that has died of accidental or natural cause.

Premises:

1. Morality is based on our potential to cause existential harm to other concious beings. For example, we don't consider it immoral to toss a rock into a pond because neither the rock nor the pond have the capacity to suffer either physically nor emotionally. Tossing a baby into a pond is clearly immoral, as the baby would suffer.

2. Moral deliberations consist of emotional components including disgust, contempt and anger, but reason should override such rudimentary justifications using a systematic set of principles and values.

3. Sometimes moral values come into conflict, and in such cases, we must either turn to deontology or utilitinariism to decide which of the two values in conflict overrides the other.

4. Harm is inflicted when you inhibit a sentient being's capability to flourish (flourish meaning to forge a satisfying life). Examples of inhibiting a creature's capacity to flourish would be to inflict significant physical pain, to inhibit it's necessary physical territory, to inhibit it from participating in their natural social environments (if it applies to the given species in question), to inhibit a humans from participating in culture and recreation (it's not that likely that other creatures need those things, but humans need them) and there are many other examples.

5. All concious beings have the capacity to suffer at least physically, and many of them emotionally.

6. To act in a morally impermissible way is to unnecessarily inflict harm on a being.

7. Killing an animal abruptly inhibits its capability to forge a satisfying life, as well as often induces physical and emotional pain during the killing process.

8. Humans are omnivores, therefore humans are able to choose a vetarian diet. Since plants don't have the necessary neural structures to feel pain much less experience emotion, eating plants is morally permissible.

9. Since humans can choose non-sentient beings for their diet, it is immoral to choose otherwise.

Just to be pre-emptive, a common argument is that it is natural to eat meat. This may be so, but this does not make it morally permissible. It is also natural to fight, but it's still immoral to do so (except of course in certain exceptional cases). Also, the fact that other creatures eat meat is also not an argument in favour of humans doing so, since some other animals don't have a healthy alternative to meat eating, nor do they posess the mental capacities necessary for understanding the effects of their actions on their prey. We do however understand, so we are responsible for our actions.

Sorry for the long post, but it was necessary to substantiate my claim.

 

[Magic Man]

If a race of anthropophagic aliens from beta Centauri chose Earth as a pasture it wouldn't make much difference to me weather they respected us or not.

So, you would rather suffer every day for years before being killed, rather than be treated well, live a decent life into adulthood, and then be killed without even knowing it?