Is killing inherently "evil"? And vegetarianism.

[an anarchist]

Is killing inherently "bad" or "evil"?

The Allies killing Nazis in WW2: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing in self defense: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing animals for food: "not bad" is the general consensus

I want to focus on the last point about the animals.

For many of us more privileged humans, we don't have to eat meat. We are omnivores, and can choose to be vegetarians. Should we be vegetarian?

I don't assume slaughterhouses are fun for animals. Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat? Or does the suffering of animals matter little?

I think many will agree that killing Nazis in WW2 and killing in self defense is a-okay. But I feel that carnivorism is less defensible.

An animal's suffering is industrialized due to us being meat eaters. Is this ok with you?

I love meat, but I do aspire to one day be vegetarian. I feel guilty whenever I eat meat. An animal suffered and died for my meal.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

WTF does killing Nazis to liberate the camps have in common with killing beef for food? The former was in many cases righteous and responsible, while the second is in many cases optional and questionable.

 

[Stevicus]

Is killing inherently "bad" or "evil"?

The Allies killing Nazis in WW2: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing in self defense: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing animals for food: "not bad" is the general consensus

I want to focus on the last point about the animals.

For many of us more privileged humans, we don't have to eat meat. We are omnivores, and can choose to be vegetarians. Should we be vegetarian?

I don't assume slaughterhouses are fun for animals. Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat? Or does the suffering of animals matter little?

I think many will agree that killing Nazis in WW2 and killing in self defense is a-okay. But I feel that carnivorism is less defensible.

An animal's suffering is industrialized due to us being meat eaters. Is this ok with you?

I love meat, but I do aspire to one day be vegetarian. I feel guilty whenever I eat meat. An animal suffered and died for my meal.

I suppose killing an enemy-aggressor in wartime might be in the same category as self-defense. But then, after the war, some were executed for their crimes. Capital punishment is another form of killing which isn't exactly self-defense. Some states still practice it, while others do not. We've evolved somewhat in that regard, considering that they once had public hangings. Now, they have executions in private, with lethal injection, which had been originally touted as humane and painless, but in a few recent incidents, that didn't turn out to be the case.

Humans may be omnivores and could conceivably survive as vegetarians, but there are a lot of meat-eaters out there who wouldn't go for it. I've visited some of my relatives' farms when they were raising hogs. They also had cows and chickens. A couple cousins of mine had dairy farms. But it wasn't industrialized; just regular family farms. But I don't suppose it would be too fun for the animals in any case.

I came across an article a while back (or maybe someone posted a thread on it) about cloned beef, where beef could be grown in some kind of cloning vat and be the same as real meat. So, there might be ethical ways for people to be able to continue to eat meat without killing animals.

 

[Heyo]

I love meat, but I do aspire to one day be vegetarian. I feel guilty whenever I eat meat. An animal suffered and died for my meal.

I was a vegetarian for some time, and I will be again if I win the lottery. Turns out that having a diverse, healthy and tasty diet is much more expensive when you don't include some dead animals.
I don't think that killing animals for meat, especial when done in industrial dimensions, is moral, but "erst kommt das Fressen dann die Moral" - Berthold Brecht (First comes a full stomach, then comes ethics.)

 

[Yerda]

Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat?

Yes.

 

[Absolutely Frank]

Is killing inherently "bad" or "evil"?

Well, it certainly isn't nice.

 

[Secret Chief]

I love meat, but I do aspire to one day be vegetarian.

Finally, a thread where one can legitimately offer the claim that Hitler was a vegetarian.

"one day" ? Not buying meat when you do food shopping isn't something requiring a lot of effort! Start with baby steps - go and buy a loaf...

 

[bobhikes]

Is killing inherently "bad" or "evil"?

The Allies killing Nazis in WW2: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing in self defense: "not bad" is the general consensus
Killing animals for food: "not bad" is the general consensus

I want to focus on the last point about the animals.

For many of us more privileged humans, we don't have to eat meat. We are omnivores, and can choose to be vegetarians. Should we be vegetarian?

I don't assume slaughterhouses are fun for animals. Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat? Or does the suffering of animals matter little?

I think many will agree that killing Nazis in WW2 and killing in self defense is a-okay. But I feel that carnivorism is less defensible.

An animal's suffering is industrialized due to us being meat eaters. Is this ok with you?

I love meat, but I do aspire to one day be vegetarian. I feel guilty whenever I eat meat. An animal suffered and died for my meal.

Plants are alive and not all the parts of plants we eat are meant to be eaten for example root plants and leaf plants. They are valuable sources of gathering food for the plants themselves. Yet no one feels guilty when they kill the plant.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Should we be vegetarian?

I should, because it's my dharma. I won't make decisions for anyone else, as they are responsible for their own karma.

I don't assume slaughterhouses are fun for animals. Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat? Or does the suffering of animals matter little?

It's wrong for me. Again, I won't speak to whether or not contributing to animal suffering is wrong for them.

An animal's suffering is industrialized due to us being meat eaters. Is this ok with you?

No.

For many of us more privileged humans, we don't have to eat meat.

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "more privileged humans?" Do you mean humans as a whole are privileged, or that there is a segment humans that are privileged enough to be vegetarian?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yet no one feels guilty when they kill the plant.

Please don't speak for me.

 

[mangalavara]

I don't assume slaughterhouses are fun for animals. Is it wrong for us as consumers to contribute to this mass suffering of animals by buying and eating meat? Or does the suffering of animals matter little?

The answer will vary based on who you ask because people have different answers based on their worldviews or philosophies. Some people might justify slaughterhouses by citing a belief about God giving human beings dominion over land and animals. Other people might have other ways of justifying slaughterhouses. When it comes to whether or not you personally should contribute to the existence of slaughterhouses, you have to decide that for yourself. Does the human caused suffering of animals matter? That is for you to decide. Your worldview or philosophy will play a major role in how you decide those things.

 

[an anarchist]

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "more privileged humans?" Do you mean humans as a whole are privileged, or that there is a segment humans that are privileged enough to be vegetarian?

I mean people who have the economic option to be vegetarian. I understand that not everyone can be vegetarian. Perhaps meat is widely available to eat for cheap while other foods may not. So when I say "privileged" I'm thinking more middle and upper class citizens who can afford options.

I don't mean any offense. I think it's an important distinction, as I believe if your only other option to eating meat is starving instead, then I don't think carnivorism is immoral in that context.

Would you eat meat if it was the only economically viable option for you?

 

[an anarchist]

WTF does killing Nazis to liberate the camps have in common with killing beef for food? The former was in many cases righteous and responsible, while the second is in many cases optional and questionable.

"killing"
"Killing" is the topic.

 

[mangalavara]

I mean people who have the economic option to be vegetarian. I understand that not everyone can be vegetarian. Perhaps meat is widely available to eat for cheap while other foods may not. So when I say "privileged" I'm thinking more middle and upper class citizens who can afford options.

I don’t know about you, but I find that produce, rice, beans, potatoes, and the like are inexpensive. It is the heavily processed vegetarian-friendly products that cost more.

 

[an anarchist]

Plants are alive and not all the parts of plants we eat are meant to be eaten for example root plants and leaf plants. They are valuable sources of gathering food for the plants themselves. Yet no one feels guilty when they kill the plant.

I suppose because they aren't "conscious"? Though I think someone on this site has told me otherwise, though I am unsure how "conscious" plants really are. Said plants feel pain or something of the sort.

I suppose there is a subjective line/threshold that has to be crossed in the context of intelligence/consciousness for all beings to decide their worth. Humans are fully conscious, so we typically view killing humans as wrong. Animals are quite conscious, experiencing a full range of emotions, so there is a significant subset of people who are vegetarian because they feel guilty if they eat meat. Plants, do they have emotion? It is not readily visible if they do, so most people assume that plants are rather unconscious. So, people don't feel guilty eating plants.

 

[an anarchist]

I don’t know about you, but I find that produce, rice, beans, potatoes, and the like are inexpensive. It is the heavily processed vegetarian-friendly products that cost more.

I love potatoes

 

[an anarchist]

"one day" ? Not buying meat when you do food shopping isn't something requiring a lot of effort!

The effort comes in when I need self control to resist eating a rack of delicious BBQ ribs when I'm hungry.

Perhaps my morals are less valuable to me than self satisfaction.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I mean people who have the economic option to be vegetarian. I understand that not everyone can be vegetarian. Perhaps meat is widely available to eat for cheap while other foods may not. So when I say "privileged" I'm thinking more middle and upper class citizens who can afford options.

I don't mean any offense. I think it's an important distinction, as I believe if your only other option to eating meat is starving instead, then I don't think carnivorism is immoral in that context.

Would you eat meat if it was the only economically viable option for you?

In my experience, economic viability has nothing to do with whether or not one is vegetarian. I find this to be little more than an excuse to continue eating meat.

I spend on average of $20 a week on food with the majority of my diet being curries and porridges comprised primarily of rice and lentils (which combined, incidentally, is a complete protein) and fresh cheeses.

There is no need to spend money on expensive fake meats to maintain a vegetarian diet.

 

[wellwisher]

I suppose killing an enemy-aggressor in wartime might be in the same category as self-defense. But then, after the war, some were executed for their crimes. Capital punishment is another form of killing which isn't exactly self-defense. Some states still practice it, while others do not. We've evolved somewhat in that regard, considering that they once had public hangings. Now, they have executions in private, with lethal injection, which had been originally touted as humane and painless, but in a few recent incidents, that didn't turn out to be the case.

Humans may be omnivores and could conceivably survive as vegetarians, but there are a lot of meat-eaters out there who wouldn't go for it. I've visited some of my relatives' farms when they were raising hogs. They also had cows and chickens. A couple cousins of mine had dairy farms. But it wasn't industrialized; just regular family farms. But I don't suppose it would be too fun for the animals in any case.

I came across an article a while back (or maybe someone posted a thread on it) about cloned beef, where beef could be grown in some kind of cloning vat and be the same as real meat. So, there might be ethical ways for people to be able to continue to eat meat without killing animals.

There are certain food animals like cows, chickens, pigs, etc., that are not afraid of human, even though humans kill zillions every year. If the chickens see a fox or a hawk, they are afraid. But they are not afraid of humans, since we have a relationship and a deal. We tend to their needs when young and they provide food when older. The next generation is happy with that.

If you considered hunted animals like deer, they are wary of humans, since hunters are seen as predators and not partners. The deer are not a sitting duck, and but often can out fox the humans. On the other hand, if you own property and feed the deer, they will become friendly and would be a sitting duck. Baiting is not allowed during hunting season, to help keep the deer on their best defense.

 

[an anarchist]

First comes a full stomach, then comes ethics.

Oof. Too true