eating meat

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

are you vegetarian?

yes
187
18%
no
868
82%
 
Total votes: 1055

User avatar
Nath
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 8:14 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Nath » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:02 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:Sure. Like I have said, and keep saying, this is an individual choice, and each person has to decide for himself.

I'm just sharing my personal view, here.

Fair enough. If your personal moral sense tells you that eating meat is wrong, then by all means, don't. That's perfectly reasonable.

My moral sense makes no such claim about chickens, but forbids me from eating humans. Therefore, I eat one but not the other.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby The Reaper » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:05 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:Right, sorry. It's hard for one solitary vegetarian to keep up with all of you heartless carnivores.. Am I, like, the only vegetarian on this entire forum? Or just the only one stubborn enough to keep posting in this thread?

edit: In any case, my stubbornness will have to end for the time being, as I really must go to bed. 'Till the morning, then, lads... :)

Theres other ones. They're all asleep tho. You know how we carnivores are, night pack hunters and all ;)

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:38 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:"Because it tastes good" just isn't a good enough argument to pay people for this:

Image

[/not very shocking image]


I usually go with "Because meat contains many essential amino acids I can't get from plants."

or...

"I think vegetables have the same right to live as a chicken."

Seriously, won't someone think of the poor, suffering carrots and potatoes?
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:02 am UTC

(double post 'cause it's 5am, and I don't care)

turnwrite wrote:Animals do not just frolic in a field all day until it's time for them to come in and get killed.


Um, yeah, they do. Especially out here on the I-81 corridor. There's acres upon acres of open grazing pasture out here. Which is probably why it takes forever to get anywhere....


turnwrite wrote:They do not have happy lives.


I think I read that poll in an issue of Dr. Doolittle's monthly magazine. Remind me again where you got that information, or did you conduct your own survey of local farm life? No really, those cows I drive past on my way to the range look pretty content to hang out under a tree all day.

turnwrite wrote:By the age of six weeks, 90 percent of chickens in factory farms are so obese they can no longer walk. This is because we pump them full of steroids, so they will grow to nugget size faster. 40 percent of cows are lame by the time they are killed, because of all the drugs and poor living conditions we condemn them to.


Nuggets are pretty small, you know? (joke!) Free range chickens taste better, anyway. That's part of why I like having so many farms around here. Fresh meat! :D

Also, I read that article you cited in the above quote all the way through, and it turns out it was the chickens were trading drugs with the cows, but the chicken drugs were making the cows lame.

turnwrite wrote:If you want to support an industry like that, then by all means, do so. It's your money. I will make a different choice, myself, but fully respect your right to spend your money supporting whatever practices you wish. Just don't lie to yourself about what you are doing.


Aye, but you should consider the same when you cook living beings while they are still alive, eat them while they are still healthy and breathing, and massacre their young by the dozens, all for your moral high-ground.

Dead flesh doesn't actively react to damage other than physically, as in not biologically or physiologically.

*waits for "a dead body bleeds", or some other silly attempt to get away from that argument*

How many living things have YOU killed today?

*swats a fly*
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

DougP
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:03 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby DougP » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:31 pm UTC

AbNo wrote:
I usually go with "Because meat contains many essential amino acids I can't get from plants."


False.

or...

"I think vegetables have the same right to live as a chicken."

Seriously, won't someone think of the poor, suffering carrots and potatoes?

[/quote]

Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.

I actually think "because it tastes good" is THE BEST argument for eating meat. Far be it from me to deny another person's right to eat meat if they really want to. Its a subjective matter, and "because I need the protein" and then this BS vegetables have a right to live argument are just complicating the issue with junk. Since there will never be a law outlawing eating meat, we are dealing with a moral argument, which pretty much makes it inherently subjective. You can try to convince someone its immoral to eat meat, but if they just plain don't care, there is nothing you can do. The fact of the matter is you can be a perfectly healthy individual being with a diet including meat, a vegetarian diet, or a vegan diet, and you can be UNHEALTHY on any of those diets as well.

Meh, i think i've rambled on too long. I eat a vegan diet, by the way.

User avatar
Azrael001
Posts: 2385
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:15 am UTC
Location: The Land of Make Believe.
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby Azrael001 » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:44 pm UTC

It is much harder to get the proper proteins without meat or meat by products.

DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


It is also obvious that a chicken or cow != person.
23111

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: eating meat

Postby Gelsamel » Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:54 pm UTC

DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


Uuuh you think something can't go through pain or suffer simply because it has no central nervous system? Just because you can't empathise with plants doesn't mean they don't suffer.

After all, unless you believe in a soul or something else non-material then the consciousness is a product of a bunch of cells/neurons in our brain. Just because a consciousness isn't there doesn't change the actions within the body. A plant's cells still go through deterioration and death from diseases and other stuff. The cells still decay and die, the only difference is there doesn't happen to be a set of cells differentiated and grouped together in such a way to produce a conscious experience of said cell death.

Are you saying that you only care about suffering and pain caused to conscious, sentient beings? Even though apart from this intangible experience there is no difference between either case? You can take that stance if you want, but I wouldn't say it's terribly logical - EVEN IF your vegetarian diet wasn't the direct cause of hundreds of thousands of small animals dying during harvesting (which by the way, don't get eaten).


(Excuse me if I addressed anything already mentioned to you, I know half of this has been discussed 10 pages back anyway)
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:43 pm UTC

turnwrite wrote:Right, sorry. It's hard for one solitary vegetarian to keep up with all of you heartless carnivores..


So I'm heartless for being unable to properly absorb cholesterol? I've already posted that I do have a medical condition that makes eating meat essential to my health, and if I turned vegetarian, I would probably die. Eat whatever you like, but stop pretending that it makes you a better person.

I'm not going to argue on the sentience of plants, but the harvesting of vegetables and grains do kill countless insects and small mammals. Also, for not eating humans- humans have the capability for intelligence. Have you ever spent time around actual cows, chickens, turkeys, or sheep?

Cows are stupid. They don't know enough to come in out of the rain, and most of their lives are spent standing around, chewing their cud.

Chickens are stupid, greedy, nasty, and mean. They will chase you if you if you get to close to them, they will try to peck you, they will leave their filthy droppings all over everything... and this is them on a good day. They also smell horrible.

Turkeys are stupid. They will stand staring up into the rain with their mouths open until they drown.

Sheep are so stupid that if two sheep fall off the edge of a cliff, and the others notice, they will throw themselves off. They will also drown themselves trying to drink swiftly running water.

I was raised in farm country, and I've spent enough time around all these animals to know that they are stupid, they would never survive in nature, and I have no moral qualms about eating them. Pigs are the only routinely slaughtered food animals that have any potential intelligence at all.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby Malice » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:46 pm UTC

DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


This I don't get. Is the moral problem with eating meat the fact that it requires killing animals (and if so, why?), or is it that it currently involves making them suffer during life? Or is it somehow both?
Image

User avatar
cypherspace
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:48 pm UTC
Location: Londonia

Re: eating meat

Postby cypherspace » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:56 pm UTC

Kendo_Bunny wrote:I was raised in farm country, and I've spent enough time around all these animals to know that they are stupid, they would never survive in nature, and I have no moral qualms about eating them. Pigs are the only routinely slaughtered food animals that have any potential intelligence at all.
You do realise that the only reason they would never survive in nature is because we domesticated them and bred them until they were no longer anything resembling the original animal?

"Animals are stupid, therefore it's okay" is the worst justification for eating them that I have ever heard. I'd continue the logical path but it'd only Godwin the thread.
"It was like five in the morning and he said he'd show me his hamster"

DougP
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:03 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby DougP » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:58 pm UTC

Malice wrote:
DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


This I don't get. Is the moral problem with eating meat the fact that it requires killing animals (and if so, why?), or is it that it currently involves making them suffer during life? Or is it somehow both?



Its definitely both. Is it wrong to kill a person? Most people would say yes. Why? Because its depriving them of their life (against their will, i don't have any particular problem with assisted suicide, but thats another thread). Is it wrong to torture people? Most people would say yes. Why? Because it causes suffering.

Though animals lack the depth of mental capacity that humans do, they definitely show a will to live, and can experience suffering. For me, it is unthinkable to partake is contributing to that for either humans, or animals.

Is it really that hard for your to understand why someone would take issue with this, but not with plants, or are you just playing semantic games?

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Gunfingers » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:03 pm UTC

What logical path? The logical path ends at "Animals are stupid enough to be edible." We have a logical stopping point. Specifically: sapient life.

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:04 pm UTC

cypherspace wrote:"Animals are stupid, therefore it's okay" is the worst justification for eating them that I have ever heard. I'd continue the logical path but it'd only Godwin the thread.


If the only logical conclusion you can draw from a discussion on eating meat is to make a Hitler/Nazi reference, I question your logic, and rightfully so, I might add. :?
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:06 pm UTC

Actually, the point I was making was about why it's different to eat animals than humans. Certain domestic farm animals have no capacity for intelligence or reason. Humans do.

DougP
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:03 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby DougP » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:09 pm UTC

Gunfingers wrote:What logical path? The logical path ends at "Animals are stupid enough to be edible." We have a logical stopping point. Specifically: sapient life.


Ok, so I guess people with mental disorders that put them on part with some animals are stupid enough to be edible? What about new born babies? I'm not saying you are claiming this, because I'm positive you aren't, but thats where the 'intelligence' argument leads, if you are wondering. All im saying is that intelligence is not a good measure. You say Sapient life is the cut off. Could you be specific as to what you mean by this, and how you came to this conclusion?

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:25 pm UTC

Before I get started, I'd just like to say I think it's funny that anti-meat people complain about the killing of other living things(not just animals), but think it's perfectly fine to eat living plants.

(interjection unrelated to below)

DougP wrote:
AbNo wrote:I usually go with "Because meat contains many essential amino acids I can't get from plants."

False.

False. Yes you can get amino acids, but not the same ones (that SOME/MOST PEOPLE) need from plants.

DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument.


Article from the Canadian Medicine Association, November 1926.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1709102

:mrgreen:

DougP wrote:Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


Congratulations on stating the obvious. :D

I would also like to remind you that A ≠ B.

Just because a flower is not a duck does not mean that a plant lacks a central nervous system. The Canucks were looking into this back in the 20's, as that above link shows.

Saying "the sky is blue in the daytime" does NOT make your next sentence correct by proximity. :wink:

DougP wrote:.....we are dealing with a moral argument, which pretty much makes it inherently subjective. .... The fact of the matter is you can be a perfectly healthy individual being with a diet including meat, a vegetarian diet, or a vegan diet, and you can be UNHEALTHY on any of those diets as well.

(emphasis added)

Thank you. This is probably the most level-headed post in this whole thread. You've hit the nail right on the head with these two lines. If people would realize this on a LOT of issues, we might be able to get more done in here.... Kudos to you, Doug.

Honestly, I think this entire subforum seems to be argument for the sake of argument, and some people are happy with that, be it that they realize this or not (someone's being wrong on the internet....).

Now if you'll excuse me, I have some chicken breasts in the freezer that need to be cooked and eaten. :mrgreen:

(Also, I've been up for 52 hours straight, I take no responsibility for typos, error, or omissions)
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

User avatar
cypherspace
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:48 pm UTC
Location: Londonia

Re: eating meat

Postby cypherspace » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:29 pm UTC

AbNo wrote:
cypherspace wrote:"Animals are stupid, therefore it's okay" is the worst justification for eating them that I have ever heard. I'd continue the logical path but it'd only Godwin the thread.
If the only logical conclusion you can draw from a discussion on eating meat is to make a Hitler/Nazi reference, I question your logic, and rightfully so, I might add. :?
Hardly the only one. Just that if you believe that "animals are stupid, therefore it's okay to eat them", anyone who believes that something else is "stupid" is logically justified in eating them. And stupid/intelligent are entirely subjective terms.

DougP wrote:
AbNo wrote:I usually go with "Because meat contains many essential amino acids I can't get from plants."

False.

False. Yes you can get amino acids, but not the same ones (that SOME/MOST PEOPLE) need from plants.

Still false, I'm afraid. Humans need 21 amino acids, contained in protein. Protein is either considered high biological value (HBV) or low (LBV). HBV protein contains all the essential amino acids - LBV does not. Meat is generally HBV protein, plants aren't, but by combining LBV intakes, you can get all the amino acids you need. Baked beans on toast is a source of HBV protein.
Last edited by cypherspace on Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:36 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
"It was like five in the morning and he said he'd show me his hamster"

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:32 pm UTC

Gelsamel wrote:After all, unless you believe in a soul or something else non-material then the consciousness is a product of a bunch of cells/neurons in our brain. Just because a consciousness isn't there doesn't change the actions within the body.


It should be noted that insects (particularly cockroaches) have a nervous structure different than a standard mammillian-esque CNS structure.

Would someone like to tell me insects cannot feel the same sensations as animals just because their nervous system is different?
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

AbNo
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AbNo » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:34 pm UTC

cypherspace wrote:
AbNo wrote:
cypherspace wrote:"Animals are stupid, therefore it's okay" is the worst justification for eating them that I have ever heard. I'd continue the logical path but it'd only Godwin the thread.
If the only logical conclusion you can draw from a discussion on eating meat is to make a Hitler/Nazi reference, I question your logic, and rightfully so, I might add. :?
Hardly the only one. Just that if you believe that "animals are stupid, therefore it's okay to eat them", anyone who believes that something else is "stupid" is logically justified in eating them. And stupid/intelligent are entirely subjective terms.


Do you believe that plants are "stupid", using most any definition you like?

cypherspace wrote:Still false, I'm afraid. Humans need 21 amino acids, contained in protein. Protein is either considered high biological value (HBV) or low (LBV). HBV protein contains all the essential amino acids - LBV does not. Meat is generally HBV protein, plants aren't, but by combining LBV intakes, you can get all the amino acids you need. Baked beans on toast is a source of HBV protein.


You're telling me I will get the same nutrients, minerals, and proteins out of plant matter that I will from a salad?
Last edited by AbNo on Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Darwin was right, but nanny-staters keep trying to undermine him

User avatar
cypherspace
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:48 pm UTC
Location: Londonia

Re: eating meat

Postby cypherspace » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:35 pm UTC

AbNo wrote:Do you believe that plants are "stupid", using most any definition you like?
Why does that matter? I'm not vegetarian.
AbNo wrote:You're telling me I will get the same nutrients, minerals, and proteins out of plant matter that I will from a salad?
Pardon? I would imagine a salad is plant matter.

Assuming that you got something wrong there; You didn't say nutrients or minerals. You said amino acids.
"It was like five in the morning and he said he'd show me his hamster"

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby Malice » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

DougP wrote:
Malice wrote:
DougP wrote:Next time you prove that plants have a central nervous system, can feel pain and suffer, then this will be a legitimate argument. Its quote obvious that a flower != a chicken or cow.


This I don't get. Is the moral problem with eating meat the fact that it requires killing animals (and if so, why?), or is it that it currently involves making them suffer during life? Or is it somehow both?


Its definitely both. Is it wrong to kill a person? Most people would say yes. Why? Because its depriving them of their life (against their will, i don't have any particular problem with assisted suicide, but thats another thread). Is it wrong to torture people? Most people would say yes. Why? Because it causes suffering.

Though animals lack the depth of mental capacity that humans do, they definitely show a will to live, and can experience suffering. For me, it is unthinkable to partake is contributing to that for either humans, or animals.

Is it really that hard for your to understand why someone would take issue with this, but not with plants, or are you just playing semantic games?


I don't understand the position because it doesn't make logical sense unless you're doublethinking.

First of all, you have to ignore the fact that plants, too, are alive, and eating them therefore requires killing them.
(You seem to place particular importance on the will; but I hope you won't come back and tell me it's perfectly fine to slaughter coma patients right and left.)

Second of all, you have to ignore the fact that, unless you grow all your own plants in a hermetically sealed bubble, fruits and vegetables end up killing animals, too.

Third of all, you have to ignore the fact that suffering is not a required part of the idea of eating meat. It might be part of today's meat industry. But that does not make meat-eating in general an immoral issue, any more than, say, paying taxes is immoral because currently your money goes to supporting a war.

Fourth of all, you have to ignore the fact that your life, your very existence on this earth, is by necessity carved out of everything else here, and causes death and suffering every day of every year, literally from your cradle to your grave. You can change the form but not the amount. Either accept it or kill yourself.

In summary, if you actually believe that killing and causing suffering in any living organism is wrong, suicide is the only option left to you, and to claim that vegetarianism is an acceptable substitute is ludicrous. It's a cop-out. And either you know it and you're being hypocritical, or you don't, and you're doublethinking.

(You, specifically, are free to take the "you"s in this post generally, referring to any vegetarian/vegan/whatever who claims moral imperatives against killing or torturing living organisms as their reasons.)
Image

Bluecold
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 1:13 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Bluecold » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:34 pm UTC

turnwrite wrote:"Because it tastes good" just isn't a good enough argument to pay people for this:

Image

[/shocking image]

I'd like to have my meat in bite sized chunks. So if that means they have to chop the horse up before they package it, then I'm perfectly okay with that.
And if gross pictures should prevent people from doing something, you'd never been born. Have you ever seen pictures or film of a woman in labour? nasty.

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Gunfingers » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:54 pm UTC

DougP wrote:
Gunfingers wrote:What logical path? The logical path ends at "Animals are stupid enough to be edible." We have a logical stopping point. Specifically: sapient life.


Ok, so I guess people with mental disorders that put them on part with some animals are stupid enough to be edible? What about new born babies? I'm not saying you are claiming this, because I'm positive you aren't, but thats where the 'intelligence' argument leads, if you are wondering. All im saying is that intelligence is not a good measure. You say Sapient life is the cut off. Could you be specific as to what you mean by this, and how you came to this conclusion?


You're right, i misspoke (missposted?), what i meant was "member's of a sapient species".

DougP
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:03 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby DougP » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:15 pm UTC

Malice wrote:
I don't understand the position because it doesn't make logical sense unless you're doublethinking.

First of all, you have to ignore the fact that plants, too, are alive, and eating them therefore requires killing them.
(You seem to place particular importance on the will; but I hope you won't come back and tell me it's perfectly fine to slaughter coma patients right and left.)

A person who was (is) in a coma, had the capability at one point to make a decision. In fact, it is common practice for being to leave behind "living wills" that might state if they are in a coma without chance of coming out, they want the plug pulled. They also have the right to leave a living will to say they want to be kept alive as long as possible, just in case. So yes, will matters, even for Coma patients. This is apparent in the legal battles that often make the news when something like this happens and people have not left a legal document that specifies what they would have wanted.

Second of all, you have to ignore the fact that, unless you grow all your own plants in a hermetically sealed bubble, fruits and vegetables end up killing animals, too.


There is a moral difference between wholesale slaughtering of animals and trying the best you can do within a given system to minimize what you see as a problem. Seeking to reduce a problem that you can not eliminate is as reasonable choice. You are trying to make it a black and white issue by essentially saying that "well, you're going to kill some anyway, so what does it matter?" This excludes any gray area.

Third of all, you have to ignore the fact that suffering is not a required part of the idea of eating meat. It might be part of today's meat industry. But that does not make meat-eating in general an immoral issue, any more than, say, paying taxes is immoral because currently your money goes to supporting a war.

Well, we are talking about today's meat industry, aren't we? In some hypothetical future meat industry in which suffering has been eliminated, I will take that into account. I don't think those two things are quite the same. Tax money doesn't go exclusively to war, it can go to other things you might find valuable, like medicare and other socially beneficial programs.

Fourth of all, you have to ignore the fact that your life, your very existence on this earth, is by necessity carved out of everything else here, and causes death and suffering every day of every year, literally from your cradle to your grave. You can change the form but not the amount. Either accept it or kill yourself.


Again, you've made it into a black and white issue. There are shades of gray. It is reasonable to minimize one's negative impact even though it may not be able to totally eliminate, it. You claim that you can change the form, but not the amount. That is a pretty extraordinary claim, and have a feeling its pure rhetoric.

In summary, if you actually believe that killing and causing suffering in any living organism is wrong, suicide is the only option left to you, and to claim that vegetarianism is an acceptable substitute is ludicrous. It's a cop-out. And either you know it and you're being hypocritical, or you don't, and you're doublethinking.
[/quote][/quote]

Its not a substitute, like I said, its about minimization, not elimination. If its hypocritical to realize its impossible to totally prevent all suffering that happens as a result of my existence, but to try to minimize it, then fine, call me hypocritical, but I don't think it is by any definition of the word I am familiar with.

User avatar
Sinta
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:49 pm UTC
Location: in ur bases, stealn ur weponz.
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby Sinta » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:23 pm UTC

turnwrite wrote:Image


I'll have that. Skewer it and put it on the fire.

I don't know why people seem to expect me to feel bad when they show shocking images of why I should be vegetarian. An image doesn't stop me from thinking.

I like love meat. I like my steaks bloody rare. Beef, pork, chicken, rabbit, horse, snake, etc. Sure, I don't eat meat as often as I did, mainly because I now pay for my own groceries. With this freedom I want to be able to pay for the really good meat, where the animals are treated well. Quality, instead of quantity.

It's hard not to eat meat when you travel often and after growing up in different countries and cultures, it is rude to turn down food prepared when you're a guest in someone else's home. I even ate crickets once. Lovely. The enjoyment of food, meat included, and great company is something I can really take pleasure from.

I have nothing against vegetarians. I try to be polite and when I dine with one, I ask first if it's okay if I have meat. The same goes for seafood, with potential non-seafood lovers.

But I like meat. Mmmmmm.
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother." -- Albert Einstein

AvalonXQ
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 5:45 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby AvalonXQ » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:34 pm UTC

AbNo wrote:It should be noted that insects (particularly cockroaches) have a nervous structure different than a standard mammillian-esque CNS structure.

Would someone like to tell me insects cannot feel the same sensations as animals just because their nervous system is different?


Yes. Pain occurs because of the functioning of special nerves called nociceptors. Insects don't have them. Therefore, no -- insects don't feel pain.

To put in my own two cents -- wanting animals to suffer is sadism, which is evil. Causing humans to suffer devalues humans, which is evil. But causing animals to suffer, without wanting to, only devalues animals -- which have no inherent spiritual value. Therefore, being indifferent to the suffering of animals is not evil. I eat meat, and am not concerned with the conditions in which it is raised.

DougP
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:03 am UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby DougP » Tue Apr 01, 2008 12:51 am UTC

AvalonXQ wrote:
AbNo wrote: But causing animals to suffer, without wanting to, only devalues animals -- which have no inherent spiritual value. Therefore, being indifferent to the suffering of animals is not evil. I eat meat, and am not concerned with the conditions in which it is raised.


Its really hard to reply to this without making a post that is totally unfit for "serious business." Inherent spiritual value? evil? Please, these are just silly religious words that have next to no meaning. At least some other meat eaters in this thread have come to the conclusion on their own, and you know, thought about it, instead of just parroting some religious crap. I really have absolutely no respect for this opinion on the matter, and quite honestly it adds nothing to this thread.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:12 am UTC

It all comes down to where you, personally, draw the line on what is cruel and what isn't.

Obviously.

I draw the line at plants, because they don't feel pain in the same way that we do. It is true that they emit certain chemicals while under duress, and have various methods of self-defense. But even advocates of "plant pain" don't contend that they "feel" pain in the same way that we do. Even emitting these chemicals, they have no brain to pass them through. So though it is theoretically possible that they feel pain in some way unique to them, they don't feel it in the same way we do, and we have no way of knowing what, if anything, they undergo.

So this argument could be used to justify not stepping on ice. It can crack, see, and it might be feeling pain when it does that. Not in the way that we understand it, of course, but in its own way it might be feeling pain. You can't rule it out absolutely. Same goes for dribbling a basketball. You might be hurting it. Or squeezing a stress ball. Torture!

This, of course, is absurd.

But the arguments against such frivolous basketball-welfare concerns would go some thing like this: "Basketballs, if they do feel pain, do not feel it in the same way that living things do. Therefore, though it cannot be ruled out completely, I choose to concern myself merely with the welfare of entities I understand, and can definitively say are feeling pain one way or another."

So the line could be drawn at living things. Don't harm living things, because they feel pain in a way we understand.

I draw the line at animals, instead. And I use the same argument to refute claims of "plant pain" that one might use to refute claims of "basketball pain." Plants, if they do feel pain, do not feel it in the same way that animals do. Therefore, though it cannot be ruled out completely, I choose to concern myself merely with the welfare of entities I understand, and can definitively say are feeling pain one way or another.

Most of you, it sounds like, draw the line at humans. You apparently do not hold that animals feel pain in the same way humans do. Perhaps when they are beaten or have their throats cut, it hurts less than it would for a human.

That's fine, but from my understanding of the universe, animals feel pain in the same way we do (having a brain, and all), so I'm not going to hurt them. Plants do not.

We all draw that line somewhere, and it just depends on where you draw it. Animals seem like the most logical place, in my mind, but everyone has to draw the line for himself, wherever it makes him comfortable.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:36 am UTC

Actually, a properly slit throat kills instantly. That's why the guillotine was praised for being so humane.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:46 am UTC

Kendo_Bunny wrote:Actually, a properly slit throat kills instantly. That's why the guillotine was praised for being so humane.


Or you could address my actual point instead of just taking up space.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby Malice » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:50 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:Most of you, it sounds like, draw the line at humans. You apparently do not hold that animals feel pain in the same way humans do. Perhaps when they are beaten or have their throats cut, it hurts less than it would for a human.

That's fine, but from my understanding of the universe, animals feel pain in the same way we do (having a brain, and all), so I'm not going to hurt them. Plants do not.

We all draw that line somewhere, and it just depends on where you draw it. Animals seem like the most logical place, in my mind, but everyone has to draw the line for himself, wherever it makes him comfortable.


Or I accept that no life is a painless proposition, and at least the cow's life ends up being useful to me and my taste buds.
Image

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:01 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:
Kendo_Bunny wrote:Actually, a properly slit throat kills instantly. That's why the guillotine was praised for being so humane.


Or you could address my actual point instead of just taking up space.


You ignored my point that I would become seriously ill at the least, and probably die if I didn't eat meat. I like the taste, but at the moment, my primary motive is survival. Should I die so that some animals who can not survive by their own means won't? Eat whatever you want, but I'm not going to cede the moral high ground on an issue that is not primarily one of morality.

Also, you argued that slitting throats is inhumane. I pointed out that it wasn't.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:21 am UTC

Kendo_Bunny wrote:I would become seriously ill at the least, and probably die if I didn't eat meat. I like the taste, but at the moment, my primary motive is survival. Should I die so that some animals who can not survive by their own means won't? Eat whatever you want, but I'm not going to cede the moral high ground on an issue that is not primarily one of morality.


Right, sorry, I missed that in the sudden flurry of posts I was trying to read. Of course you should eat meat if you need to. Obviously animal life is not more important than human life. I just don't think animal life has no importance.

Kendo_Bunny wrote:Also, you argued that slitting throats is inhumane. I pointed out that it wasn't.


That is one in a plethora of mean things which get done to animals. Pumping them full of steroids, locking them up in tiny cages, debeaking them, never letting them outside, beating them, and eventually, yes, killing them. My point is that factory farms don't treat animals nicely, so please address that (which I laid out in my post above) instead of quibbling over the minor details of one of the many, many ways in which our "not nice" treatment takes place.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby The Reaper » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:24 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:So this argument could be used to justify not stepping on ice. It can crack, see, and it might be feeling pain when it does that. Not in the way that we understand it, of course, but in its own way it might be feeling pain. You can't rule it out absolutely. Same goes for dribbling a basketball. You might be hurting it. Or squeezing a stress ball. Torture!

This, of course, is absurd.

But the arguments against such frivolous basketball-welfare concerns would go some thing like this: "Basketballs, if they do feel pain, do not feel it in the same way that living things do. Therefore, though it cannot be ruled out completely, I choose to concern myself merely with the welfare of entities I understand, and can definitively say are feeling pain one way or another."

So the line could be drawn at living things. Don't harm living things, because they feel pain in a way we understand.

Plants are alive. Learn2Biology.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:46 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:Plants are alive. Learn2Biology.


Learn2NotMissThePoint.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby The Reaper » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:52 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:
The Reaper wrote:Plants are alive. Learn2Biology.


Learn2NotMissThePoint.

Oh, I saw the point, and I saw the ridiculous logic being used to push the point. Fact of the matter remains, you contradict yourself when you talk about living things one way and plants a completely different way, as if plants were no more than furniture and decorations that magically feed you. Here, eat this rock, I swear it tastes just like smoked cheddar.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:04 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:Fact of the matter remains, you contradict yourself when you talk about living things one way and plants a completely different way, as if plants were no more than furniture and decorations that magically feed you.


No, maybe you didn't read my entire post. About how the line could be drawn at living things, but why I draw it at animals instead.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: eating meat

Postby The Reaper » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:06 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:
The Reaper wrote:Fact of the matter remains, you contradict yourself when you talk about living things one way and plants a completely different way, as if plants were no more than furniture and decorations that magically feed you.


No, maybe you didn't read my entire post. About how the line could be drawn at living things, but why I draw it at animals instead.

I saw that. And then you gave the reason of it being like basketball pain. If you're going to choose a moral highground, try to find one that isn't covered in manure.

User avatar
Kendo_Bunny
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:56 pm UTC

Re: eating meat

Postby Kendo_Bunny » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:08 am UTC

turnwrite wrote:That is one in a plethora of mean things which get done to animals. Pumping them full of steroids, locking them up in tiny cages, debeaking them, never letting them outside, beating them, and eventually, yes, killing them. My point is that factory farms don't treat animals nicely, so please address that (which I laid out in my post above) instead of quibbling over the minor details of one of the many, many ways in which our "not nice" treatment takes place.


But it's not mean. Slitting a throat provides instant, merciful death. I agree factory farms are bad, which is why I try not to eat factory farmed meat. Are you all right with people who eat naturally raised meat, taken from vast pastures? You can't argue abuse for animals that live outside most of the time and in roomy stables otherwise, which are then killed mercifully, usually by either a slit throat or by a sudden shot to the base of the skull. Most of the parts of these animals are used as well, meaning less killing. Do you have a problem with this?

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: eating meat

Postby turnwrite » Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:11 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:I saw that. And then you gave the reason of it being like basketball pain.


No, in fact, I referred to that notion as absurd. But since you seem unable to read my entire post, I'll quote the relevant section. Maybe if it's reiterated and you don't have to read that whole, long piece of text, it will go down easier. Or at least go down at all.

turnwrite wrote:Plants, if they do feel pain, do not feel it in the same way that animals do. Therefore, though it cannot be ruled out completely, I choose to concern myself merely with the welfare of entities I understand, and can definitively say are feeling pain one way or another.

Most of you, it sounds like, draw the line at humans. You apparently do not hold that animals feel pain in the same way humans do. Perhaps when they are beaten or have their throats cut, it hurts less than it would for a human.

That's fine, but from my understanding of the universe, animals feel pain in the same way we do (having a brain, and all), so I'm not going to hurt them. Plants do not.

We all draw that line somewhere, and it just depends on where you draw it. Animals seem like the most logical place, in my mind, but everyone has to draw the line for himself, wherever it makes him comfortable.




edit:
Kendo_Bunny wrote:
turnwrite wrote:I agree factory farms are bad, which is why I try not to eat factory farmed meat.


Well, great. Personally, I feel that even the very act of killing an animal is mistreatment.. Still, good for you.
"How fortunate are you and I.."


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests