Meat Eaters = Selfish (Steve & Bill)

[Me Myself]

I actually do but I'm trying to finish this sandwich and I am a bit sleepy so I'll retire and we'll continue this tomorrow

:bow: Enjoy it then. Indeed we may

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Seriously. Be mature.

I'm being as mature as you are...

Read what I wrote and stop deliberately misinterpreting things.

I did. You said I should take it all the way and say you eat babies. Maybe you should read my post, I didn't say anything that is in relation to that at all...

 

[Drolefille]

I would think at least most people. According to ADA (American Dietary Association)

"It is the position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada that appropriately planned vegetarian diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases."

Elsevier

ETA because I deleted it accidentally: A planned vegetarian diet is one thing. Most people don't have the education or time to create a healthy vegetarian or vegan diet and this education and time decreases sharply with socioeconomic status.

This is all that you need. Instead of eating meat because it tastes yummy in your mouth, think on the animal that died just for you to feel a little pleasure.

I'm well aware that my steak is a cow. It died for me to eat it. When I die, my body becomes the grass, the cow eats the grass and the circle of life continues.

Does it really feel equivalent?

Nope. Eating meat does not feel equivalent to animal abuse or slavery. Sorry.

um...
If everyone goes vegetarian will the cost of genuine leather sky rocket?

There could still be a lot of cows to kill for skins, we'd just pitch the meat instead. Or feed it to the lions I suppose.

 

[Me Myself]

ETA because I deleted it accidentally: A planned vegetarian diet is one thing. Most people don't have the education or time to create a healthy vegetarian or vegan diet and this education and time decreases sharply with socioeconomic status.

You are probably unaware of how ease it is . It is cheaper and it is easy, only thing you gotta do is find the advices online or from a vegetarian friend. I agree if you don´t have internet nor a vegetarian healthy friend or a trustworthy doctor, it is probably better to not change diets drastically (as vegetarianism can do). But must people that have all this factos available (and that is a LOT of people) just don´t do it.

As I said, vegetarian diet is cheaper, so it is best for people with less money.

I'm well aware that my steak is a cow. It died for me to eat it. When I die, my body becomes the grass, the cow eats the grass and the circle of life continues.

The difference is that you are indirectly killing the cow, and that you don´t need it the way the cow needs grass. You are just accepting cow suffering because it tastes good on your tongue.

Nope. Eating meat does not feel equivalent to animal abuse or slavery. Sorry.

You are clearly uninformed.

The % of meat that doesn´t come from great suffering and torture of the animal is low.

 

[Drolefille]

You are probably unaware of how ease it is . It is cheaper and it is easy, only thing you gotta do is find the advices online or from a vegetarian friend. I agree if you don´t have internet nor a vegetarian healthy friend or a trustworthy doctor, it is probably better to not change diets drastically (as vegetarianism can do). But must people that have all this factos available (and that is a LOT of people) just don´t do it.

I work with people who get nothing but a LINK card and have GEDs if they're lucky. No they don't really have the resources. The ones who are doing better have both in the couple working and they don't have the time or energy to cook after working 12 hour days with one parent on the night shift.
It's a privilege to be able to choose your food sources and to have the money to pay your power bill to cook them. None of them have vegetarian friends and they mostly use the internet to do job hunting.

As I said, vegetarian diet is cheaper, so it is best for people with less money.

Less education counteracts that. Cultures that inherently eat primarily vegetarian will have even the uneducated eating that way. It's not going to happen here.

The difference is that you are indirectly killing the cow, and that you don´t need it the way the cow needs grass. You are just accepting cow suffering because it tastes good on your tongue.

I'm accepting cow death because it's a prey animal and I'm an omnivore. I am in favor of reducing cow suffering in the lead up to the death.

You are clearly uninformed.

Completely informed, just disagreeing with your conclusion.

The % of meat that doesn´t come from great suffering and torture of the animal is low.

But it exists. Not that it always ends up on my plate, but I make an effort. I support improving the standards of animal care and slaughter even if that means an increase in meat prices. But I won't support groups like PETA that are inherently dishonest.

Do you care if the animal has a higher level nervous system? Mollusks and crustaceans have much different nervous systems than our own, is it ok to eat them because they can't suffer the way we do? Is stabbing a lobster through the head more acceptable than stunning a cow? Are you ok with eating insects - a primary source of protein and a healthy one?

 

[Me Myself]

I work with people who get nothing but a LINK card and have GEDs if they're lucky. No they don't really have the resources. The ones who are doing better have both in the couple working and they don't have the time or energy to cook after working 12 hour days with one parent on the night shift.
It's a privilege to be able to choose your food sources and to have the money to pay your power bill to cook them. None of them have vegetarian friends and they mostly use the internet to do job hunting.

A privilege that most non vegetarians have. If this people that can become vegetarian would do so more people would be vegetarian and the level of education would rise about it.

The culture changes when people change. Propaganda helps to that. I honestly don´t see how is it imposible

I'm accepting cow death because it's a prey animal and I'm an omnivore.

You are biologicaly capable of eating the product of unnesesary suffering and killing and say "yummy!"... yeah, we are biologicaly capable of doing multiple things that bring suffering to sentient beings for our own plasure.

It is still more compassionate to not promote such acting though.

I am in favor of reducing cow suffering in the lead up to the death.

But cow´s death is absolutely unnecesary in the first place.

You just like the taste.

Do you care if the animal has a higher level nervous system? Mollusks and crustaceans have much different nervous systems than our own, is it ok to eat them because they can't suffer the way we do? Is stabbing a lobster through the head more acceptable than stunning a cow? Are you ok with eating insects - a primary source of protein and a healthy one?

None of what I eat is a dead animal. I don´t eat bugs, I don´t know how much they suffer. Is therea point in here?

 

[Drolefille]

A privilege that most non vegetarians have. If this people that can become vegetarian would do so more people would be vegetarian and the level of education would rise about it.

The culture changes when people change. Propaganda helps to that. I honestly don´t see how is it imposible

Not impossible, improbable. Highly so.

You are biologicaly capable of eating the product of unnesesary suffering and killing and say "yummy!"... yeah, we are biologicaly capable of doing multiple things that bring suffering to sentient beings for our own plasure.

I don't see the killing of a prey animal as morally bad or lacking compassion. It is the nature of a prey animal to be killed and eaten by things with bigger teeth or better tools. We sit comfortably on the top of the food chain because of it. It's no more immoral for us to eat a cow than it is for a lion to eat a deer. Particularly when the cow only exists because of mankind.

It is still more compassionate to not promote such acting though.

Compassion isn't involved. Preventing suffering is one thing, eating is another.

But cow´s death is absolutely unnecesary in the first place.

The cow's life is unnecessary. There are no wild domestic cattle.

Another question, would you support the one time eradication of all predators to prevent the suffering of all prey animals such as deer, rabbits and the like?

You just like the taste.

No, I also like the taste.

None of what I eat is a dead animal. I don´t eat bugs, I don´t know how much they suffer. Is therea point in here?

So your objection isn't just to suffering then, it's to eating any sort of moving creature regardless of Kingdom or Phylum? I'm trying to find the root of your purpose here. And I assure you that you've eaten bugs without realizing it.

Similarly what is your opinion on the deaths of animals by modern agriculture? Do you know how many animals are killed by the equipment that harvests those soybeans?

 

[Madhuri]

I don't see the killing of a prey animal as morally bad or lacking compassion. It is the nature of a prey animal to be killed and eaten by things with bigger teeth or better tools. We sit comfortably on the top of the food chain because of it. It's no more immoral for us to eat a cow than it is for a lion to eat a deer. Particularly when the cow only exists because of mankind.

This is highly subjective. There's no reason, in my opinion, to consider it moral to kill an animal on the basis that it is a 'prey' animal. What a completely crap reality is it to be born for the sake of being someone's food. Especially horrible for those entities like calves and lambs who are killed before they even get to live. What a depressing world we live in where this is the reality!

I wonder, do you think that cows owe us their life because we farm them? That is a bit of strange logic.

The cow's life is unnecessary. There are no wild domestic cattle.

What makes a life necessary?

Similarly what is your opinion on the deaths of animals by modern agriculture? Do you know how many animals are killed by the equipment that harvests those soybeans?

It's awful. Humans make little effort to prevent suffering. They care not to destroy the those forests where even humans live so of course they don't care for the animals.

 

[Madhuri]

I don't see the killing of a prey animal as morally bad or lacking compassion. It is the nature of a prey animal to be killed and eaten by things with bigger teeth or better tools. We sit comfortably on the top of the food chain because of it. It's no more immoral for us to eat a cow than it is for a lion to eat a deer.

I want to point out that if we are talking about what is natural, then we have to acknowledge that anyone bigger and stronger and more resourceful does and can dominate and/or kill those weaker.
What you are saying is that because it is natural to prey on the weaker, that it is therefore not immoral.

By this line of thinking, it is not immoral for humans to invade nations and destroy cultures. It is not immoral for men to dominate women. It is not immoral to take a civilisation and make them your slaves. Cheap labour in poor countries is also not immoral.

Do you see how your line of reasoning doesn't work here? Just because it is natural to dominate the weaker for one's own gain does not mean it is the right thing to do, or that it is moral (or 'not immoral'). Morality is not about what is natural, but what is right. Granted, this is always going to be subjective. But I feel that for the same reason I would wish man would stop destroying other civilisations (which still happens today), I also wish that man would stop abusing animals.

 

[Drolefille]

I want to point out that if we are talking about what is natural, then we have to acknowledge that anyone bigger and stronger and more resourceful does and can dominate and/or kill those weaker.
What you are saying is that because it is natural to prey on the weaker, that it is therefore not immoral.

No I'm mostly drawing a parallel rather than making a justification (because I don't think meat eating needs justification). It is perfectly possible to see a distinct separation between humans and animals and in the rights and responsibilities to each.

By this line of thinking, it is not immoral for humans to invade nations and destroy cultures. It is not immoral for men to dominate women. It is not immoral to take a civilisation and make them your slaves. Cheap labour in poor countries is also not immoral.

All of those involve humans who have what we typically call "human rights." An animal cannot rape another animal, an animal cannot rape a human (I'm leaving apes a bit to the side here as it's possible an argument can be made but they're both the exception to most animal rules and typically not considered food animals.) only a human can rape, or enslave or be a victim of rape* or be enslaved.

*I will grant that animals are "raped" by humans, but while they are being abused, there are none of the connotations of rape or the emotional trauma of rape.

Additionally there is, throughout history just as many "natural" instances of highly functional civilizations. Having our brains means thinking and coming to conclusions on our own, yes, and drawing moral lines, yes, but being against slavery, rape, and colonization doesn't by necessity lead to being a vegetarian by any means.

Do you see how your line of reasoning doesn't work here? Just because it is natural to dominate the weaker for one's own gain does not mean it is the right thing to do, or that it is moral (or 'not immoral'). Morality is not about what is natural, but what is right. Granted, this is always going to be subjective. But I feel that for the same reason I would wish man would stop destroying other civilisations (which still happens today), I also wish that man would stop abusing animals.

[/QUOTE]
I too wish man would stop abusing animals, that is not, to me, the same as stopping eating animals.

 

[Me Myself]

I too wish man would stop abusing animals, that is not, to me, the same as stopping eating animals.

But it is an unnecesary killing of the animal. That we do mostly for flavour and habit.

 

[Drolefille]

But it is an unnecesary killing of the animal. That we do mostly for flavour and habit.

And I find that to be morally neutral.

 

[Father Heathen]

If eating meat is evil then I accept and am at peace with the fact that I'm evil.

 

[Iti oj]

But it is an unnecesary killing of the animal. That we do mostly for flavour and habit.

why are we hunters? why can we consume meat? why was eating meat and fish so important in our evolution.

 

[Viker]

If eating meat is evil then I accept and am at peace with the fact that I'm evil.

I have no choice but to stand with you in hell as we roast like two well basted wild hogs. :drool:

 

[Averroes]

I really haven't seen a good argument on why eating meat is bad

 

[enchanted_one1975]

Every time someone smokes a cigarette they are killing a poor tobacco plant. They don't need to kill that plant. They are doing it because they enjoy smoking. What has this world come to?

 

[Valjean]

I really haven't seen a good argument on why eating meat is bad

Eating meat is hypocritical. It involves a violation of principles we, consciously or unconsciously, accept as moral absolutes.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Eating meat is hypocritical. It involves a violation of principles we, consciously or unconsciously, accept as moral absolutes.

Who is "we"? I don't accept these principles you're speaking of, in fact, I'm not even sure of what they are? Do not presume to say what I may have unconsciously accepted as a moral absolute.

 

[Averroes]

Eating meat is hypocritical. It involves a violation of principles we, consciously or unconsciously, accept as moral absolutes.

Elaborate? We are omnivores so are our ancestors wrong too?