• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Vegetarianism integral to a moral life.

nameless

The Creator
Not sure, but i find something wrong in saying that humans are ominvorous,

I believe there must always have been few number of vegetarians among humans since his evolution. And also humans evolved out of monkeys, they have vegetarians as majority.

So, since his beginning, there have been vegetarians among them,so is it a right decision by scientists to classify entire humans under omnivorous?

You can say bear to be omnivore, since all bear takes meat and herbs, but this is not the same as in the case of humans as some of them naturally dont feel to take meat.
 
Last edited:

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
nameless,

We--H. sapiens--have all the physical characteristics of an omnivorous species. We have none of the characteristics of an obligate herbivorous species. That's why biologically, we are characterized as omnivores.

It's not an individual title, it's a species description.
 

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
Don't get so caught up with the omnivore label ^_^

Accept that it's merely a way to identify a species, and let it go

There's no problem with being a vegetarian omnivore, as "vegetarian" is a behavioural label, not a biological label. (the biological label, being "herbivore" ;))
 

nameless

The Creator
nameless,

We--H. sapiens--have all the physical characteristics of an omnivorous species. We have none of the characteristics of an obligate herbivorous species. That's why biologically, we are characterized as omnivores.

It's not an individual title, it's a species description.

so classifications are based upon physical characterisitcs, and not the food they eat, right?
 
Last edited:

methylatedghosts

Can't brain. Has dumb.
So, Omnivorous cannot be defined as the species which consume both plants and meat, right?

Infact, they are the species with certain physical characteristics.

Anything wrong in that?

They are classed as species with the physical characteristics that allow them to eat both plants and meat.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Human canines are a joke. Utterly useless. can't grab, can't grind.
Now baboons have proper canines -- but they're largely veggie.
And how do you explain the huge, saber-toothed canines of some deer?

Our morality isn't dictated by our phylogeny. We have to decide what general principles underlie our conceptions of right and wrong.
Personally, I reject both expediency and the ever-popular might-makes-right principles. My vegetarianism is largely a product of a commitment to be kind and to cause no suffering.
 

Eddy Daze

whirling dervish
If you were sdtranded on an Island full of different animals, and fish available but no vegetation suitable for human consumption how would you choose which to eat for survival?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
How can you have a diverse and thriving animal population without a vetetarian foundation supporting the system?
 
Top