Meat is Murder, Dairy is Rape.

[michel]

As far as meat goes, I really don't care if someone eats meat... if the animal was treated in a humane manner. Americans do eat too much meat and reduction would be good for the health of the country at large. As it has already been stated, we are not herbivores, and a healthy vegan diet is simply inaccessible to the populous at large. We are animals with big brains. Eatting another animal is no worse than a wolf eatting a bunny, perhaps even better since we have the ability to reduce the cruelty of the process.

That's the trouble, though, as far as I am concerned. the whole ethics of raising an animal whose sole purpose in life is to end up on a plate is wrong. Now don't ask me what the alternative is, because I don't know.

Whether the animal is brought up in luxury otr not matters little (any animal should be treated with the respect any living being should get).

Now I think we all know that, at the end of the day, it is our fault that the animals are raised in poor living conditions (cramped, not enough excercise etc), because we the purchasers of meat will always be tempted to get the meat at the lower price. The retailer who sells the meat is therefore going to buy it from the farmer who can produce it cheaply. It stands to reason; the blood is on our hands.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

"He started it" is not an acceptable excuse for violating RF rules.

No more personal attacks in this thread.

That's true. I didn't see the MOD posts. AE reverts back to his innocent, non-violent, RF abiding self. :162:

Perhaps we can discuss this over veggie burgers and beer at my place.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That's the trouble, though, as far as I am concerned. the whole ethics of raising an animal whose sole purpose in life is to end up on a plate is wrong. Now don't ask me what the alternative is, because I don't know.

Whether the animal is brought up in luxury otr not matters little (any animal should be treated with the respect any living being should get).

Now I think we all know that, at the end of the day, it is our fault that the animals are raised in poor living conditions (cramped, not enough excercise etc), because we the purchasers of meat will always be tempted to get the meat at the lower price. The retailer who sells the meat is therefore going to buy it from the farmer who can produce it cheaply. It stands to reason; the blood is on our hands.

Thank God that most reasonable people can tell the difference between animals and humans. Otherwise, we wouldn't have any ethics, and we could treat one another like animals. The difference is our ability to reason, and philosophers from Aristotle to those today recognize that. Because human beings are special, we treat humans differently than animals, and we are stewards of the world.

We have to treat animals ethically only because of how it affects human relationships. Eating animals is no less ethical than a wolf eating a deer, and raising them for slaughter is no less ethical than a lion following herds of prey.

 

[Mike182]

AE reverts back to his innocent, non-violent, RF abiding self. :162:

Perhaps we can discuss this over veggie burgers and beer at my place.

:biglaugh: sure

we buy our meat from a local butcher, he says the animals are well cared for, and he would not buy from somewhere that did not care for them. call me naive, but i trust his word - and it tastes delicious!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

:biglaugh: sure

we buy our meat from a local butcher, he says the animals are well cared for, and he would not buy from somewhere that did not care for them. call me naive, but i trust his word - and it tastes delicious!

AE can think of a whole host of practical jokes... :bounce

 

[angellous_evangellous]

:biglaugh: sure

we buy our meat from a local butcher, he says the animals are well cared for, and he would not buy from somewhere that did not care for them. call me naive, but i trust his word - and it tastes delicious!

My neighborhood butcher says the same thing. I think he's a weirdo, with cutting dead carcasses all day and all. But I trust him because I eat his sausage.

 

[Jaymes]

Thank God that most reasonable people can tell the difference between animals and humans. Otherwise, we wouldn't have any ethics, and we could treat one another like animals.

I do treat people like animals. I don't kill them, I don't kick them, I don't abuse them. The same way I treat animals.

We have to treat animals ethically only because of how it affects human relationships.

Perhaps you do. I do because I can't in good conscious know that I paid for the torture (for what other word can be used to describe the conditions of battery hens?) and killing of an animal just because I think it's yummy.

 

[Mike182]

some food for thought, what if the pig actually wants to be eaten

is it wrong to breed animals just to eat them? well, it saves having to hunt them - surely that would be more immoral than keeping them safe and well, and then killing them in a not-so painful manor.

 

[Jaymes]

is it wrong to breed animals just to eat them? well, it saves having to hunt them - surely that would be more immoral than keeping them safe and well, and then killing them in a not-so painful manor.

I'd agree if the majority of the meat on the market was allowed to see sunlight regularly and wasn't fed antibiotics to keep them from becoming sick from the conditions they're kept in.

 

[michel]

Thank God that most reasonable people can tell the difference between animals and humans. Otherwise, we wouldn't have any ethics, and we could treat one another like animals. The difference is our ability to reason, and philosophers from Aristotle to those today recognize that. Because human beings are special, we treat humans differently than animals, and we are stewards of the world.

We have to treat animals ethically only because of how it affects human relationships. Eating animals is no less ethical than a wolf eating a deer, and raising them for slaughter is no less ethical than a lion following herds of prey.

I am so pleased that you regard yourself so much better than animals; it speaks volumes for your humility.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I am so pleased that you regard yourself so much better than animals; it speaks volumes for your humility.

It has nothing to do with humility. It is how philosophers and ethicists have epistomologically defined humans. It's anthopology. It's not how I view myself, but how philosophers, ethicists, and other thinkers view humanity as a whole. It's why we cannot call killing an animal murder no matter what the circumstances are, and we don't have similar laws for animal and human killing.

If a person can't tell the difference between animals and humans, s/he is completely disqualified to talk about ethics or philosophy, and trust me, we don't want them to. That's how we get genocide... tyrants view humans on the same level as insects, rats, and other pests.

 

[Fade]

I saw this documentary once when I was a kid where a lion was eating a springbok. I decided that I wanted to be a lion so i asked my mum to make me a lion using some face paint. I've enjoyed meat ever since.
I particularly like rare rump/fillet steak. mmm mmm good! *licks chops* grrrrooowlllll.

or unck unck depending on whether I'm communicating with my pride.

I also get a kick out of roaming the serengeti (no idea how to spell that) marking my territory.

 

[Jaymes]

It has nothing to do with humility. It is how philosophers and ethicists have epistomologically defined humans. It's anthopology.

If a person can't tell the difference between animals and humans, s/he is completely disqualified to talk about ethics or philosophy, and trust me, we don't want them to. That's how we get genocide... tyrants view humans on the same level as insects, rats, and other pests.

It depends on how you view it. There's the "oh, humans are just like chickens. I can exterminate them" and the "oh god, all that seperates us from chickens is a few hundred genes! I shouldn't treat them inhumanely anymore." Obviously that's oversimiplified and there are other views, but I think that gets the point across.

If there's anything that makes me more special and worthy of life than a cow or eagle or dog, I don't want it. We're all alive, we all feel pain, we're all part of the earth. We need to stick together and not torture each other.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It depends on how you view it. There's the "oh, humans are just like chickens. I can exterminate them" and the "oh god, all that seperates us from chickens is a few hundred genes! I shouldn't treat them inhumanely anymore." Obviously that's oversimiplified and there are other views, but I think that gets the point across.

If there's anything that makes me more special and worthy of life than a cow or eagle or dog, I don't want it. We're all alive, we all feel pain, we're all part of the earth. We need to stick together and not torture each other.

No it doesn't. Philosophers have a thing about being consistent. That's inconsistency.

We have to have a consistent ethic in order for it to be functional, otherwise, our crimes will be defensible.

 

[jeffrey]

I guess this shoots the idea down that meat makes you aggressive... Maybe it's bean sprouts. Mike, please pass the steak sauce.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I guess this shoots the idea down that meat makes you aggressive... Maybe it's bean sprouts. Mike, please pass the steak sauce.

Meat makes me agressive, especially when I eat it raw.:149:

 

[Jaymes]

No it doesn't. Philosophers have a thing about being consistent. That's inconsistency.

Depends on your ethics, then, I suppose. If you view animals as something inferior to humans that can be put in cages their entire lives where they can't even stand or turn around, as something not even worth the trouble to take steps to keep the thousands upon thousands of others their with to keep from biting and kicking them, then yes, there's nothing inconsistent about it.

I must admit I'm not a philosopher. I didn't think one had to be, though, to look and go "that's wrong" when you see male chicks that have just hatched being thrown into a grinder and turned into fertilizer just because they can't lay eggs or chicks that have fallen off a conveyor belt being stepped on and left to die a slow death.

 

[Krie]

that is just messed up

 

[michel]

It has nothing to do with humility. It is how philosophers and ethicists have epistomologically defined humans. It's anthopology. It's not how I view myself, but how philosophers, ethicists, and other thinkers view humanity as a whole. It's why we cannot call killing an animal murder no matter what the circumstances are, and we don't have similar laws for animal and human killing.

If a person can't tell the difference between animals and humans, s/he is completely disqualified to talk about ethics or philosophy, and trust me, we don't want them to. That's how we get genocide... tyrants view humans on the same level as insects, rats, and other pests.

I think you'll find that ants are far more well disciplined than humans. Pests? well, they do have a purpose in life, as does every other creature. Now, if you wish to see yourself above them all...............

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Depends on your ethics, then, I suppose. If you view animals as something inferior to humans that can be put in cages their entire lives where they can't even stand or turn around, as something not even worth the trouble to take steps to keep the thousands upon thousands of others their with to keep from biting and kicking them, then yes, there's nothing inconsistent about it.

I must admit I'm not a philosopher. I didn't think one had to be, though, to look and go "that's wrong" when you see male chicks that have just hatched being thrown into a grinder and turned into fertilizer just because they can't lay eggs or chicks that have fallen off a conveyor belt being stepped on and left to die a slow death.

When scholars fight about ethics, inconsistency is death. We do know that how a person treats animals is how they will most likely treat other people, which is daunting when we apply this to our slaughter-houses. However, over time, we have constructed slaughterhouses in a way that is constructive to humanity. The humane treatment of animals is productive for human relationships, even in the slaughterhouse...

It's ok... equating humanity to animals is something of a pet peeve of mine, and I know how it has brought destruction to ethics...