Is Reducing but Not Eliminating Meat Consumption More Ethical than Not Reducing It?

[metis]

I'm no officially a vegetarian. But I eat only small amounts of meat - probably 4 ounces / month of bison. Chicken maybe once a week.

Ditto here. I have gone lengths of time going fully vegetarian, but my wife is more the meat eater. [no pun intended]

 

[Debater Slayer]

It is simply a personal or sometimes even medical choice. Eating or not eating meat doesn't make anyone morally or environmentally superior or inferior.

If someone is fully aware of the abuses that occur in an industrial farm but still buys meat from it, do you think their decision is not any more or less moral than that of a person who refuses to do so?

We can extend this beyond the issue of meat production: if someone makes a decision that directly contributes to abuse of animals or environmental destruction (e.g., deforestation) while being fully aware of these consequences, is their decision no more or less moral or environmentally sound than that of someone who refuses to do so?

For clarity, I don't tend to rank people as "morally or environmentally superior or inferior" when it comes to such things, nor do I see much value in doing so. However, I think the impact of decisions can be weighed against specific goals, like reduction of suffering and environmental damage. I think it's possible to assess decisions without necessarily judging or ranking the perceived morality of the person making them—the latter would be a much more complicated and, in my opinion, usually unproductive endeavor.

I believe the animals should be treated better and killed as quickly as possible. Sustaining crops also destroys wild lands too. I've been discovering that every conservation solution isn't perfect and brings with it, its own little sets of problems.

I agree. As I said in my previous post, though, farming crops has an overall much smaller environmental impact than meat farming, so my questions in the OP are partially to examine whether people believe we can or should try to balance out plant and meat consumption even if we don't completely stop either.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I know your questions in the OP and poll were directed at meat eaters, but the title question wasn't so I'll respond to that. Besides, I doubt many meat eaters would be able to select options 4 and 5 in the poll.

While I personally think that anyone that is not willing to kill an animal and butcher their own should be eating that meat, I'm also a realist and realize that that's not a realistic expectation give today's societal ethics.

I think quality of life (and death) of an animal is an important consideration when it comes to ethics. There is also evidence that free range-meat is superior in quality over traditional husbandry practices. But sadly, this comes at an additional cost to the consumer and many weigh the decision to sacrifice quality over cost and go with the less ethical choice.

Yes, I mainly aimed the question at meat eaters (I still eat meat, myself, despite my attempt to go vegetarian, but that's for a different thread), but vegans and vegetarians are certainly welcome to give input too!

Regarding the poll, I see that you voted that meat production should be banned, and I have two questions about that:

1) Does your vote concern an ideal scenario or ethical aspiration, or does it imply that meat production should be banned today?

2) I'm aware that your libertarian views tend to be highly skeptical of bans in general, so what do you think warrants such a strong measure in this case? For comparison, cruise ships cause significant damage to marine life and have a vastly outsized environmental footprint; should they be banned on those grounds?

Also, please note that my questions are not meant to debate but to explore each member's views further. I'm not trying to argue with anyone in this thread.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Meat is worth it to me.

Realistically, more and more people will also demand meat, so how do you think the demand could be satisfied without causing extreme loss of ecological diversity and significantly contributing to climate change? And if it couldn't be, why wouldn't it be desirable to reduce the demand?

I understand your perspective, since I find meat the tastiest food by far as well as a particularly convenient one in many cases (especially in societies whose cuisines largely revolve around meat, which means, among other things, that a lot of social situations will involve meat too). The issues I listed in the OP prompted my questions concerning a possible balance between meat consumption and other considerations, though.

 

[metis]

If someone is fully aware of the abuses that occur in an industrial farm but still buys meat from it, do you think their decision is not any more or less moral than that of a person who refuses to do so?

If everyone had to kill and dress their own meat, I think there'd be a great many more vegetarians.

 

[Revoltingest]

Realistically, more and more people will also demand meat, so how do you think the demand could be satisfied without causing extreme loss of ecological diversity and significantly contributing to climate change?

I prefer that there not be more & more people.
There should be fewer than there are to that
sacrifices in quality of life wouldn't be needed,
eg, less meat, spendier housing, loss of natural
environment.
But my preference won't be addressed until the
problem becomes both compelling & obvious
to all. That will happen long after I'm gone.

And if it couldn't be, why wouldn't it be desirable to reduce the demand?

Loaded question.
I don't oppose lessening demand for meat.
But neither do I believe in lessening it.
Public policy regarding meat will be what it
will be, & I've neither the interest nor power
to influence it.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Regarding the poll, I see that you voted that meat production should be banned, and I have two questions about that:

1) Does your vote concern an ideal scenario or ethical aspiration, or does it imply that meat production should be banned today?

While ideally, I think people who eat meat should hunt or raise their own, as I mentioned above, I understand this isn't a realistic ideal.

However, I feel that commercial animal husbandry practices as they stand today with their current regulations and inhumane practices should be banned.

2) I'm aware that your libertarian views tend to be highly skeptical of bans in general, so what do you think warrants such a strong measure in this case? For comparison, cruise ships cause significant damage to marine life and have a vastly outsized environmental footprint; should they be banned on those grounds?

As indicated above, current animal husbandry practices for meat production are inhumane. These practices should be banned until humane regulations are put in place and effectively enforced.

 

[Rival]

I eat meat and believe we should ban factory farms and only have pre-industrial style farming.

Price of meat would go up but we can supplement with fish, eat more veg, etc.

Like it was for centuries.

Allow folks to hunt game, eat rabbits etc. Introduce more kinds of meat to the diet.

 

[Revoltingest]

Consider that the factory farm of the future
might very well be an actual factory, with
meat cells being grown in vats. No animals
involved at all. It's already happening, but
the scale is small because the price is high.
Or the price is high because the scale is small
because it's new tech. Yeah...the 2nd one.

 

[Debater Slayer]

While ideally, I think people who eat meat should hunt or raise their own, as I mentioned above, I understand this isn't a realistic ideal.

However, I feel that commercial animal husbandry practices as they stand today with their current regulations and inhumane practices should be banned.


As indicated above, current animal husbandry practices for meat production are inhumane. These practices should be banned until humane regulations are put in place and effectively enforced.

Thanks for elaborating!

In your view, could the widespread demand for meat we see today be ethically met? For example, could it be met considering that the animals currently farmed in tight spaces would then need to be kept in far larger spaces, thereby requiring more land (inevitably leading to more deforestation to make room for the same amount of production existing today)?

Also, given your response above, would it be correct to say that you believe there could be a humane way to produce meat if proper regulations were implemented? That is, do you believe the act of killing an animal to consume its meat could be humane or ethical at all?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I eat meat and believe we should ban factory farms and only have pre-industrial style farming.

The amount of meat produced would be significantly reduced in that case, requiring people to eat less of it. Would it be accurate to say that this view is aligned with option #1 in the poll and therefore supports reducing the amount of meat one eats even if they don't go vegan or vegetarian?

Price of meat would go up but we can supplement with fish, eat more veg, etc.

Like it was for centuries.

Allow folks to hunt game, eat rabbits etc. Introduce more kinds of meat to the diet.

Thanks for elaborating!

Rabbits are commonly eaten where I live. Are they not eaten much over there?

 

[SalixIncendium]

In your view, could the widespread demand for meat we see today be ethically met? For example, could it be met considering that the animals currently farmed in tight spaces would then need to be kept in far larger spaces, thereby requiring more land (inevitably leading to more deforestation to make room for the same amount of production existing today)?

No. Because of the demand for more space, better conditions, and revisions on how animals are slaughtered, fewer animals would likely be farmed, and the cost of meat would increase significantly as a result of supply and demand, resulting in people reducing meat consumption and seeking alternative food choices.

Also, given your response above, would it be correct to say that you believe there could be a humane way to produce meat if proper regulations were implemented? That is, do you believe the act of killing an animal to consume its meat could be humane or ethical at all?

I don't believe killing animals for food is ethical period, which is why I'm vegetarian. But for people who insist upon having meat as a part of their diet, there are certainly more humane ways to do so than are currently practiced.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I prefer that there not be more & more people.
There should be fewer than there are to that
sacrifices in quality of life wouldn't be needed,
eg, less meat, spendier housing, loss of natural
environment.
But my preference won't be addressed until the
problem becomes both compelling & obvious
to all. That will happen long after I'm gone.

I see. Thanks for clarifying!

Loaded question.
I don't oppose lessening demand for meat.
But neither do I believe in lessening it.
Public policy regarding meat will be what it
will be, & I've neither the interest or power
to influence it.

I didn't mean to imply that you opposed lessening demand for meat; sorry the question came across that way.

Would it be accurate to say that your position is largely indifferent given the lack of interest or power to influence it that you cited above?

 

[Rival]

The amount of meat produced would be significantly reduced in that case, requiring people to eat less of it. Would it be accurate to say that this view is aligned with option #1 in the poll and therefore supports reducing the amount of meat one eats even if they don't go vegan or vegetarian?



Thanks for elaborating!

Rabbits are commonly eaten where I live. Are they not eaten much over there?

It would reduce meat consumption, which is not something I care much about one way or the other.

Folks here are disgusted by eating rabbit, horse or other such meats beyond the limited range supermarkets sell. It's frustrating because meat would be much cheaper if we ate rabbits, pheasants, pigeons and other such animals again as they are abundant.

 

[metis]

Rabbits are commonly eaten where I live. Are they not eaten much over there?

I like rabbit and I've noticed that I can jump higher after eating them. However, even though my Sicilian wife grew up eating rabbit occasionally, she doesn't like the taste, so I'm grounded.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It would reduce meat consumption, which is not something I care much about one way or the other.

Folks here are disgusted by eating rabbit, horse or other such meats beyond the limited range supermarkets sell. It's frustrating because meat would be much cheaper if we ate rabbits, pheasants, pigeons and other such animals again as they are abundant.

Interesting. I have had pigeons, rabbits, quails, and geese, among others. Rabbit tastes like a combination of chicken and pigeon!

 

[metis]

Interesting. I have had pigeons, rabbits, quails, and geese, among others. Rabbit tastes like a combination of chicken and pigeon!

How do you prepare it? In my wife's family is was cut up, lightly browned in olive oil, and the simmered in a thin marinera sauce with quite a bit of garlic mixed with some spices.

 

[Revoltingest]

Would it be accurate to say that your position is largely indifferent given the lack of interest or power to influence it that you cited above?

Largely indifferent to curbing meat eating.
Market forces will likely have the effect of reducing it.
Check out post# 29 too.
And meat just might become vegetarian.

You’ve tried plant-based meat, but here come meat-based plants

Researchers in South Korea injected grains of rice with cow muscle and fat cells to create something being called beef rice. This pink-colored substance could offer a cheaper and more sustainable protein source than standalone meat.

www.engadget.com

I won't take a firm stand on an issue that is
so complex & evolving. I will say that I favor
minimizing cruelty to animals.

 

[Rival]

Interesting. I have had pigeons, rabbits, quails, and geese, among others. Rabbit tastes like a combination of chicken and pigeon!

Yes, I've had both rabbit and pheasant. Preferred the rabbit. It's served at French restaurants here, too.

I like duck best; still hard to come by except in foreign cuisine.

 

[metis]

I like duck best; still hard to come by except in foreign cuisine.

Some 50 or so years ago, one of my uncles barbequed a duck and blew the bbq top into the next yard, and then he put the flaming duck out with a garden hose.

It didn't get eaten.