Any Vegetarians/Vegans?

[barkomatic]

I don't believe in causing unnecessary suffering for any animal--even food animals. However, a vegetarian/vegan diet is just not viable for a growing world population. It sucks that cows and chickens will often suffer as a result of industrial meat production--but its necessary. If we can reduce that suffering without raising the price of meat, then of course conditions should be improved.

That being said, if cultured meat became economically viable I'd fully support switching the industry away from raising animals for meat--as it would be much better for the environment if we did so.

 

[AustinIllini]

Nicely shifted goalposts.

First it's claim that domesticated animals can't survive on their own.

Then when that is refuted you switch the argument to "if all the cattle that was raised specifically to feed humans was somehow set free, nearly every ecosystem in which cattle are involved would be severely damaged" which is an entirely different argument altogether.

Is that what you'd like to switch the argument to now?

Then you assume "I don't think you understand how many cattle are born and raised specifically for human consumption".

What's that assumption based on?

It has nothing to do with my last post citing evidence of feral animals having the capacity to survive on their own.

I think you're reaching here. Shifting and reaching.

You made a silly argument and outlandish claim. I shifted it to something sensible. Yes, cattle could survive on their own, but if most cattle these days are born to feed humans, they could not survive on their own. There are too many of them.

 

[citizenzen]

You made a silly argument and outlandish claim.

I can guess that the human clone argument was the silly argument ... and obviously it was a stretch, though I think it helps to refute the notion that simply because something is brought into being that gives one dominion over its existence. I'd hope there was more moral justification beyond simply, "I build you, so I can destroy you."

But what was the outlandish claim?

Please clarify.

 

[EricNau]

I don't believe in causing unnecessary suffering for any animal--even food animals. However, a vegetarian/vegan diet is just not viable for a growing world population. It sucks that cows and chickens will often suffer as a result of industrial meat production--but its necessary.

What gives humans the moral right to populate at the expense of other species, I wonder.

 

[barkomatic]

What gives humans the moral right to populate at the expense of other species, I wonder.

That's a larger question of course -- but I could take it a few ways. If you are referring to our ever increasing numbers that end up destroying wild habitats, cause widespread pollution and which will eventually result in mass extinctions of other animals I would say we have no moral right. Humanity is a run away train right now.

However, if the world was more balanced in terms of human population and food distribution then I would argue that our "right" to eat other animals is biology. The animal kingdom is full of meat eating predators and we are one of them.

 

[AustinIllini]

What gives humans the moral right to populate at the expense of other species, I wonder.

If other species had the capacity to do it, they would, too.

 

[Shrink]

What gives humans the moral right to populate at the expense of other species, I wonder.

Don't all species live at the expense of other species?

Some animals eat animals...some fish eat fish...and so on.

I have no axe to grind either way, and I am in no way defending humans mistreating animals for our food...but animals in the wild eat other animals, and not in a kindly manner.

There is no sarcasm intended in this post...just an honest question.

 

[citizenzen]

If other species had the capacity to do it, they would, too.

That's an interesting answer, as most people point to human intelligence and our superiority over animals as a reason why we can morally exercise dominion over them.

You seem to be arguing just the opposite. You appear to be justifying it based on the fact that since other animals don't live according to the standards of higher human intelligence, then we are morally justified to use those relatively unintelligent standards to base our rationale.

Is that accurate?

Don't all species live at the expense of other species?

Some animals eat animals...some fish eat fish...and so on.

I have no axe to grind either way, and I am in no way defending humans mistreating animals for our food...but animals in the wild eat other animals, and not in a kindly manner.

There is no sarcasm intended in this post...just an honest question.

Here's another example of since other animals do it, why can't we?

First, I'm not saying you can't do it as well.

But I'm questioning your rationale. We usually go to great lengths to no think on the level of animals.

So I'm not sure why you see this as some standard to measure our choices by.

 

[Renzatic]

Here's another example of since other animals do it, why can't we?

First, I'm not saying you can't do it as well.

But I'm questioning your rationale. We usually go to great lengths to no think on the level of animals.

So I'm not sure why you see this as some standard to measure our choices by.

Not that I'm 100% agreeing with you, but I think the better philosophical question would to be to ask why we continue eating other animals, now that we've got the intelligence and capabilities to remove ourselves from that system entirely.

A lion has to eat a gazelle in order to survive. It has no other choice. It's either kill or die. On the other hand, we humans have the technology to create a thousand synthetic protein supplements we could use to sustain ourselves without killing a single thing.

 

[oldhifi]

I'm cooking hamburgers ....

 

[MyMac1976]

Is there a good reason to eat a corpse other than it's tastes good?

 

[citizenzen]

Is there a good reason to eat a corpse other than it's tastes good?

It provides nourishment that helps one sustain their life.

 

[MyMac1976]

It provides nourishment that helps one sustain their life.

and that nourishment can come from other things..

 

[Shrink]

That's an interesting answer, as most people point to human intelligence and our superiority over animals as a reason why we can morally exercise dominion over them.

You seem to be arguing just the opposite. You appear to be justifying it based on the fact that since other animals don't live according to the standards of higher human intelligence, then we are morally justified to use those relatively unintelligent standards to base our rationale.

Is that accurate?



Here's another example of since other animals do it, why can't we?

First, I'm not saying you can't do it as well.

But I'm questioning your rationale. We usually go to great lengths to no think on the level of animals.

So I'm not sure why you see this as some standard to measure our choices by.

Your points are perfectly reasonable, but that's not what my comment was addressing.

As I said, I have no dog in this fight. I was responding to:

What gives humans the moral right to populate at the expense of other species, I wonder.

My comment, undoubtedly poorly stated, was that humans are not the only species that lives at the expense of other species. Admittedly, not a brilliant observation.

It was not intended as a rationale for eating meat, or any other comment on human diet. I am not interested in the argument regarding meat eating vs. non-meat eating. I know it's probably not a great position to take...but I really don't care what people eat. It was just a poorly stated observation, not a position in the argument.

 

[G51989]

and that nourishment can come from other things..

But they don't taste as good

 

[MyMac1976]

But they don't taste as good

Honestly at this point many of the things you find good will make me gag..

 

[G51989]

Honestly at this point many of the things you find good will make me gag..

And vice versa, I can't handle an all veggie or vegan diet. A world without steaks and cheese isn't one I want to live in.

Like, I have tried veggie eateries before, and simply couldn't find anything I really like.

I mean like, Cake! Or dessert things are mostly veggie, but not vegan.

 

[MyMac1976]

And vice versa, I can't handle an all veggie or vegan diet. A world without steaks and cheese isn't one I want to live in.

Like, I have tried veggie eateries before, and simply couldn't find anything I really like.

I mean like, Cake! Or dessert things are mostly veggie, but not vegan.

Which is why I just tell people I don't eat meat and do not say I'm vegetarian. Vegetarian carries with it connotations I don't intend. There is a religion of vegetarianism much like there is a religion of Mac I don't attend the church of either.

 

[G51989]

Which is why I just tell people I don't eat meat and do not say I'm vegetarian. Vegetarian carries with it connotations I don't intend. There is a religion of vegetarianism much like there is a religion of Mac I don't attend the church of either.

I have noticed that around my Vegetarian friends, I NEVER bring it up at dinner, but god forbid I order anything with meat in it, I get the " oh my god, do you know about animals? " speech. I find it rude.

I don't say things like " Do you know about the suffering of those innocent plants your killing? " to people either, because that would also be rude.

 

[EricNau]

However, if the world was more balanced in terms of human population and food distribution then I would argue that our "right" to eat other animals is biology. The animal kingdom is full of meat eating predators and we are one of them.

But that begs the question, doesn't it? I know we are meat-eating predators, but the question is: should we be?

As citizenzen has illuminated, we probably shouldn't use other species to justify our behaviors. We can choose to survive without eating other animals, whereas I don't think the same can be said of them. And arguably, we could survive ever better without eating meat (at least in first-world countries), since raising cattle is more detrimental to the environment than crop farming.

 

[barkomatic]

But that begs the question, doesn't it? I know we are meat-eating predators, but the question is: should we be?

As citizenzen has illuminated, we probably shouldn't use other species to justify our behaviors. We can choose to survive without eating other animals, whereas I don't think the same can be said of them. And arguably, we could survive ever better without eating meat (at least in first-world countries), since raising cattle is more detrimental to the environment than crop farming.

It don't really see it as "should we be" because we didn't get to choose how we evolved. We simply are. As thinking people, we can choose to eat a diet contrary to to what is natural for us--but it will always be artificial.

Whether we could survive better without eating meat is obviously a matter of debate. It's more complicated, though obviously not impossible, to get full nourishment from a vegetarian diet. It's not a feat that even many vegetarians in first world countries can successfully pull off.

As for the damage to the environment -- that's true. However, just about everything we humans do wrecks the environment, including the slash and burn techniques used to create fields for crops and the pesticides we use on them. There are too many of us I think.

 

[citizenzen]

I have noticed that around my Vegetarian friends, I NEVER bring it up at dinner, but god forbid I order anything with meat in it, I get the " oh my god, do you know about animals? " speech. I find it rude.

Truly, if a vegetarian friend can't listen to what you're having for dinner, then they're pretty intolerant of the diverse nature of the people around them.

If you—or anyone else—wants to eat meat, that's your decision, and I'm okay with you deciding what to put in your mouth to fuel your body.

But ... I do want to point out a couple of possibilities that you may have missed.

1. Meat eaters often accuse vegetarians of being self righteous merely for having an alternative diet. I see that often in these threads.

2. You may be unconsciously goading them. Every vegetarian thread comes with numerous posts where people say things like, "Bacon! *Drool*" or "just thinking about vegetarians makes me want to eat a big, juicy steak!". These kinds of posts happen regularly. I could point some out in this very thread.

So please, eat what you want and be respectful of the choices that others make on their own behalf.

Deal? Deal.

----------

We simply are.

Again, our capability of self-awareness and intellectual reasoning should [in many cases] allow us to move past, "we simply are" to something more than just that.

 

[AustinIllini]

Not that I'm 100% agreeing with you, but I think the better philosophical question would to be to ask why we continue eating other animals, now that we've got the intelligence and capabilities to remove ourselves from that system entirely.

Because this is wrong. Animal fats are imperative for survival. We lack the capabilities to remove those fats from our diets as a species.

----------

That's an interesting answer, as most people point to human intelligence and our superiority over animals as a reason why we can morally exercise dominion over them.

You seem to be arguing just the opposite. You appear to be justifying it based on the fact that since other animals don't live according to the standards of higher human intelligence, then we are morally justified to use those relatively unintelligent standards to base our rationale.

No.

 

[citizenzen]

No.

The word, "no" alone says very little.

I'd love to here the reasoning behind those two letters.

 

[Renzatic]

Because this is wrong. Animal fats are imperative for survival. We lack the capabilities to remove those fats from our diets as a species.

I won't claim I'm 100% sure on this, but I don't believe there are any enzymes or proteins in animal fat that can't be replaced by some vitamin, pill supplement, or through copious amounts of certain vegetables. If we absolutely desperately needed a certain something only found in animal tissue and nowhere else, then people wouldn't be able to survive as vegetarians.

Granted, vegetarianism is ultimately a luxury we can indulge in because civilization provides us with huge helpings and large varieties of foods. If we ever found ourselves in an post-apocalyptic end of the world as we know it type situation, even the staunchest of vegetarians would eventually find themselves chowing down on meat to keep from starving. We eat meat because it's an incredibly rich source of certain types of protein no single plant can match on its own. But in our current state of society, vegetarianism is something people can choose to do, because, quite simply, they know when their next meal is coming, and they can always get enough to eat.