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

[Revoltingest]

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

Did you see this post, @Dan From Smithville?

 

[Secret Chief]

Many people, including many meat eaters, agree that there are many thoroughly documented abusive, inhumane, and environmentally unsustainable practices in industrial meat farming, such as mistreatment of animals, keeping them in extremely tight spaces, killing them in ways that prolong suffering, and destroying forests to make more room for farmlands.

If you are a meat eater, do you believe that reducing but not eliminating meat consumption for food would be a more ethical choice than eating meat without worrying about the details of how it was produced? For example, if someone eats meat four or five days a week, do you think it is more ethical for them to reduce that to two or three days if they find out that their main meat supplier, such as their local supermarket, buys from industrial farms?

Some of the poll options, given it is aimed at meat eaters, seem a little... odd....

 

[Debater Slayer]

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.

1) Lightly stir-fry an onion, three or four cardamom pods, and two or three pieces of mastic in ghee for 30 seconds to a minute.

2) Add the rabbit to the mixture and fry it there for about two minutes.

3) Add boiled water until the rabbit is completely submerged. Boil the rabbit until it is tender and well-cooked.

4) Take out the rabbit and fry it either in ghee or oil (sunflower or corn oil works best if you opt for oil rather than ghee).

If you want to make use of the rabbit soup, you can stir-fry an onion and orzo pasta in a pot until both become golden and then add the rabbit soup to the mix. Let it boil until the orzo becomes tender.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Some of the poll options, given it is aimed at meat eaters, seem a little... odd....

I added poll options for vegans and vegetarians too, although the thread is mainly intended for meat eaters.

 

[Secret Chief]

I have been meaning to become vegetarian for quite some time, but I would be significantly inconvenienced by becoming one and it wouldn't make much of a difference on the large scale of things.

Why would you be inconvenienced? Poor options where you live?

As to scale, that could be said to be a self-fulfilling prophesy. Perhaps there's a billion people who don't give up meat because one mouth does not make much difference.

 

[Secret Chief]

I added poll options for vegans and vegetarians too, although the thread is mainly intended for meat eaters.

Ok I'll vote to mess up your stats!

 

[Secret Chief]

we all get eaten in the end

News to me!

 

[Secret Chief]

As has been alluded to elsewhere many times on this forum, one can "stay properly healthy" without consuming flesh.

Should Humans Eat Meat? Biology, Nutrition, and Culture

There's heated debate on both sides concerning whether humans are supposed to eat meat. This article examines the evolutionary, biological, nutritional, and cultural approaches to the topic of eating meat.

www.healthline.com

You've got more chance of persuading a bahai to quit with the disrespect.

 

[Debater Slayer]

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

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 wouldn't be able to kill animals for my own meat, and I know many meat eaters who are the same way. I agree that if we all had to kill the animals ourselves, there would be more vegetarians and vegans.

That said, I also think there are other products that most people wouldn't be able to work on themselves but still use, and understandably so. For example, antibiotics, vaccines, and many other necessary medical products whether for humans or other animals wouldn't exist without animal testing, but I know I wouldn't be able to carry out medical animal testing myself. I wouldn't be able to handle that kind of work and maintain my mental health. This doesn't mean that I think less of the people who can carry out that (currently) necessary work, although I believe that researching viable alternatives to said testing should be heavily prioritized and that minimizing animal suffering in the meantime through regulations is crucial.

Another example that comes to mind is that many people wouldn't be able to participate in war even in self-defense without sustaining extensive trauma, but I don't think personal inability to participate necessarily says anything about the ethics of the act itself.

 

[Secret Chief]

Farmland is required for growing plants also.

"If we combine global grazing land with the amount of cropland used for animal feed, livestock accounts for 80% of agricultural land use. The vast majority of the world’s agricultural land is used to raise livestock for meat and dairy.

Crops for humans account for 16%. And non-food crops for biofuels and textiles come to 4%.

Despite the vast amount of land used for livestock animals, they contribute quite a small share of the global calorie and protein supply. Meat, dairy, and farmed fish provide just 17% of the world’s calories, and 38% of its protein."

- Half of the world’s habitable land is used for agriculture

 

[Alien826]

Added.

Why do you eat meat if you believe its production should be banned? (I know people who agree with vegetarian arguments but still eat meat, and I understand that there are many possible and different reasons for that. I'm just wondering what the reasons are in your case, if you don't mind sharing.)

I checked this box, and the question is validly applicable to me, so I'll answer.

First, I believe any reduction in the consumption of meat is a good thing, on the basis of "every little helps".

I simultaneously want meat to be banned and recognize that it would not truly solve the problem as too many people would see it as a threat to their freedom. The most accurate statement would be that I want all meat consumption to cease, by whatever means would work long term.

Why do I eat meat? Bear with me, it's not a simple answer. I was a vegetarian for many years and was and still am a supporter of PETA. Animal welfare is a big deal for me. However. I'm now with someone who thinks that anyone who doesn't eat meat is in danger of death by protein deficiency. Add to that, she does all the cooking and I don't want to impose a dual diet on her. Finally, I'm in my eighties and I'm tired of conflict. If I were to find myself on my own again, I'd be back to it in a minute.

So, I eat meat, feel guilty, and comfort myself that I have done a lot for animals and still continue to do so.

 

[Koldo]

Why would you be inconvenienced? Poor options where you live?

Multiple things: I am a picky eater, for starters. You can pretty much count on how half of all vegatables as being something I wouldn't eat. Second, I also have irritable bowels, and my intestines dislike both a change in diet and many of the vegetables I do enjoy eating. Third, I am really picky while selecting vegetables in the market. They have to look pretty good or else I feel somewhat disturbed about it (I have never been formally diagnosed with OCPD, but it wouldn't surprise me if I were). It drains me mentally. Fourth, preparing meat is generally faster. Fifth, if when cleaning up the vegetable there is any insect or vermin present on/in it (this is more likely to happen to lettuces and eggplants), I will throw the whole of it away.

As to scale, that could be said to be a self-fulfilling prophesy. Perhaps there's a billion people who don't give up meat because one mouth does not make much difference.

And my individual actions will not make a difference towards their mindset. I have never been into individual actions as a tool for social changes.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Many people, including many meat eaters, agree that there are many thoroughly documented abusive, inhumane, and environmentally unsustainable practices in industrial meat farming, such as mistreatment of animals, keeping them in extremely tight spaces, killing them in ways that prolong suffering, and destroying forests to make more room for farmlands.
If you are a meat eater, do you believe that reducing but not eliminating meat consumption for food would be a more ethical choice than eating meat without worrying about the details of how it was produced? For example, if someone eats meat four or five days a week, do you think it is more ethical for them to reduce that to two or three days if they find out that their main meat supplier, such as their local supermarket, buys from industrial farms?

Thankfully we live near enough to a few farms where we know how the animals are fed and cared for.
Once in a blue moon I do pick up some packaged so-called organic hot dogs.
One old time friend gave up meat decades ago and now is very sick with bone problems.
Even suggesting the drinking of bone broth did Not go over well.
I'm finding it harder and harder to get away from frankenstein bread (GMB) genetically modified foods.
The younger generation is being led down that old Primrose Path and I fear they will find out about the thorns.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Voted that a reduction would be preferable. I certainly would prefer more clarity and choice in how the meat I eat has lived and been treated. I'd happily eat less meat and pay a premium if it insured humane treatment, although it's not quite so simple at the moment as making that decision.

One note : lots of people have spoken about the benefits of people only eating meat if they're willing to kill/dress it. I get that this would have major impacts on meat consumption, and would make the meat supply chain better understood and more transparent (good things).
As a non-hunter who has hunted his own meat (as well as fished/spearfished, etc), I would say that hunting wild animals where the skills of the hunter aren't amazing can lead to some distressing moments for the animals. I've done enough to know the reality of it, and also to know it's better for both me and the animal if a pro does the hunting.

 

[Secret Chief]

One old time friend gave up meat decades ago and now is very sick with bone problems.

Connected you infer? I've heard meat eaters can have serious health problems from their diet too.
A healthy diet is possible both with or without meat. An unhealthy diet is possible with or without meat.

 

[Heyo]

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.

There is some benefit in raising animals on farms, namely the manure, which is a natural fertilizer. Holistic farming includes animals, and I could even make an argument for consuming meat to be ethical. By farming animals, we provide for them and keep their line going.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Did you see this post, @Dan From Smithville?

I did see that. I'm not bothered by it. Really rather pleased. Us rabbits are delicious.

 

[icehorse]

News to me!

hmmm... you don't think our bodies end up being worm food?

 

[Revoltingest]

I did see that. I'm not bothered by it. Really rather pleased. Us rabbits are delicious.

"We rabbits are delicious."

 

[Dan From Smithville]

"We rabbits are delicious."

You too. And large ones as well.