June 14, 2012
-
Dear Omnivore:
JDN 2456093 EDT 17:36.
I’m tired of you calling me judgmental, because I occasionally criticize your consumption of meat. I have an analogy that may help you understand why this is such an absurd accusation.
Imagine you were living in a society run by cannibals. Cannibalism is an accepted practice; human meat is sold over grocery counters and in futures exchanges. Your entire society is built around the mass consumption of the dead. Thousands of people are killed every day in order to be eaten.You would, presumably, not wish to participate in this horrible carnage. But when everyone around you expects it of you, refraining makes you seem weird. Bringing up the obvious fact that there is mass murder going on around you makes you impolite. You would probably even be tempted to use violence to stop the horrific slaughter, but we will stipulate that you are opposed to violence in general and moreover note that a violent response on your part is unlikely to make any difference.
Now suppose that there are certain murders which people actually care about; when certain people are killed, there is mass outrage. If the victims were rich enough, or of the appropriate race, perhaps. Or if they were part of your family or friends. But people raised in pens and murdered for their meat? Obviously those murders are quite justified.
Consider how you would feel in such a world: You are surrounded by the most outrageous murder and hypocrisy. You take yourself out of that system as best you can (maybe you can’t entirely, for all the orthotic shoes are made with human skin, and you have to participate in an economy where every transaction you make feeds someone else’s cannibalism). In certain cases you speak out against the atrocities. But you are always calm and nonviolent. And then the cannibals dare call you judgmental?This is the world I am forced to live in. You are cannibals, if not in the most literal sense than in one only mildly extended: You eat the flesh of other sentient beings. You torture and slaughter, or rather pay people to torture and slaughter for you because you are too squeamish to do it yourself. You force me to sit idly by as holocausts are perpetrated around me, and when I dare speak up, you have the audacity to call me judgmental.
It’s not that you think the welfare of animals is irrelevant. When Mitt Romney ties a dog to his car, when Michael Vick trains pit bulls to fight, you’re outraged just as much as I am. When a psychopath vivisects cats in his basement, you’re as appalled as I am. But when the exact same horrors—or horrors far worse—are performed by our meat industry, you shrug and continue to enjoy your hamburger. When chickens are driven mad by their conditions and then have their faces cut off to stop them from killing each other, that doesn’t bother you. When pigs have their tails removed without anesthetic, you have no objection to make. When cows are raised in their own excrement and become so sick that they must be constantly fed antibiotics in order to stay alive, you don’t care.
You are so mind-blowingly hypocritical you make Bernard Madoff look like a paragon of moral consistency. You are a murderer who claims to be opposed to murder. You may even give to the Humane Society as your lunch undermines all that humaneness stands for. You are outraged by dog-fighters and cock-fighters, yet on a daily basis you fund cruelty orders of magnitude more terrible than anything they have ever attempted.
And when I point it out, you dare call me judgmental?
Comments (88)
Well it’s the definition of judgmental, no? And why, I ask, is that such a bad thing?
I don’t think I’ve ever called a vegetarian judgmental. I figure some of them are. I’ve heard of some that think of themselves as saints that must be revered by all, just because they refuse to eat meat. THAT I would have a problem with.
I agree with your points about animal cruelty. Just because it happens in a slaughterhouse doesn’t justify anything.
All that said, I think eating meat is not such a big deal. Nature is cruel. There’s nothing heartwarming, delicate, or subtle about the way a tiger rips into a beautiful deer, or the way a shark devours a manatee. This is nature’s way. We simply don’t use our teeth to kill. So, those who want to eat meat shouldn’t be chastised. Yes, something must be done about animal cruelty in all its forms, but I reckon that refraining from eating meat will not be the solution (unless 99% of the population actually stops eating meat.)
So, I will continue to eat meat. And, while I would be just as horrified as you would be if I were to witness some of the things done to animals raised for consumption, I don’t think I could do much about it. I honestly can’t save the world. There’s so many things going wrong in the world: child pornography, sex trafficking, rapists, pollution, animal cruelty, child abuse, spousal abuse, the right-wingers pushing their beliefs on everyone, discrimination against gays…the list goes on and on. Even if I dropped everything and dedicated my life to activism, I doubt it would make a substantial difference. *sigh* It sucks, but it’s just the way it is. If this is the cause you’ve picked (among others), fantastic! Kudos. Keep up the fight. We need people to fight for the rights of others, including animals. I have picked my causes, too, and this one is kinda not one of them. Sure, I’ll sign a petition if it comes my way or something like that. But, I can’t honestly dedicate my time to this. There’s too many other things I want to do. *shrug* Call me selfish, I guess…
Judgemental: of or denoting an attitude in which judgments about other people’s conduct are made.
Criticizing someone for their choices is judgmental, you admit in the first sentence that you do that. I have not once told someone who is a vegetarian… anything, really. Eat what you want. I don’t care. All I ask is the same sentiment from you and other people.
Just a suggestions, Before you write a post about people judging you, maybe you shouldn’t constantly judge them throughout the post. It’ll be nicer and people might take you a little more seriously.
Well said. This past year I’ve cut meat out of my life (with a couple of lapses). I do my best not to act to judgmental towards meat eaters, because I understand that it is a difficult lifestyle change to make, especially if you’ve spent most of your life enjoying meat. But when people engage me in conversation about it or ask me why I don’t eat meat, I will happily (and calmly) explain my reasons – and, when the situation is appropriate, I will explain what I think is wrong with the arguments people tend to automatically leap to in defense of their carniverous habits (like the “it’s natural, therefore it’s ok” line @In_Reason_I_Trust offers above).
What’s funny is how often that simply stating that I don’t eat meat (and perhaps daring to explain my reasons when I’m asked about them) will spark an angry, indignant, righteous reaction from people. I find that kind of reaction pretty telling, frankly. It seems likely to me that most people are, on some level, aware of the obvious rightness of the arguments for vegetarianism — it’s just that most people do a good job suppressing that awareness. When such people are confronted with someone who is attempting to live up to an obligation they are trying desperately not to acknowledge, indignation and angry accusations of “righteousness” are pretty understandable reactions.
@chaospet - Tell me how it’s unnatural. I’m all ears.
My best friend and her family raise chickens and turkeys to eat. They are given free rein over the yard, fed organic food, and have shelter at night. Her father actually becomes very upset if one of her foster brothers harasses them. When it is time for them to be slaughtered, it is taken care of in the quickest, most humane way possible.
I do agree that the American meat industry treats animals atrociously. They have no respect for another living creature. But there are people who raise animals for their meat a better way–don’t short change them in the process of condemning the meat industry.
You took liberties in an extended analogy. I can too.
Giving farm animals the full moral consideration of human beings is like having feelings for a door knob. Fucking, conversing with, and putting into the voting booth a door handle just because you empathy and just because you can’t help but finding enough in common with it. (Hey, we’re all made of atoms aren’t we? Some carbon and a bit of oxygen and metals. If you stare at it long enough, that bulb protruding from that wooden door looks lot like a human head)
Dear Vegetarian/Vegan: All that lives, including you, feeds upon death. The last raw carrot you ate was fully alive until you chewed it, and if instead it had been planted in the soil it would have continued to live and reproduced in the following year. The soy beans that were ground to make your tofu were the embryos of another generation. And so on.
Hundreds of small animals are killed on every acre of cropland, every year, both intentionally and unintentionally. Voles, mice, and other small mammals die due to plowing, cultivation, and mechanical harvesting, and also due to traps and sometimes poisons which are intentionally placed with the intent to kill them on your behalf. Birds and their nests are likewise destroyed by agricultural equipment. Hunters are turned loose on the land to control (kill, on your behalf) the populations of rabbits, deer, and other crop predators whose populations, left unmolested, would in just a few years ensure that city dwellers both vegetarian and omnivorous would starve. Insect populations are decimated every year by poisons, both organic and not, without which there would be widespread human starvation.
Live like you want to live and eat as you wish, but know that these facts remain unchanged by your outrage.
@HappierHeathen - EPIC. Indeed, it seems their arguments are pretty damn black and white. Which, I expect from religious nuts, but not from otherwise intelligent skeptics. It’s just odd the way that vegetarianism kind of becomes a sort of religion, isnt’ it?
You nailed it. Unless they can find a way to make plastic nutritious, it’s ALL based on death. This is just the way it is. It’s thoroughly unavoidable.
Like you said, they can make their choices and we’ll make ours. But, to assume this attitude that their way is better, that it is beyond all reprieve, that it’s got absolutely no blood in its hands is ludicrous, to put it nicely. Again, it’s pretty black and white the way that meat-eating is bad, but vegetarianism is unimpeachably good, squeaky clean and respectful of life to its very core. That’s a load of bullshit, of course.
@In_Reason_I_Trust -
If we want to get technical, even plastic wouldn’t qualify as a non-biologic source of food, since it comes from oil, and oil comes from ancient marine plants AND animals. I have no problem with vegetarians/vegans/whatever. It’s just another religion. But like with any religion, I really resent evangelicals who feel it’s their call to convert me. In the case of vegetarianism, if it’s your philosophical choice I’m fine with that, but it denies your place in the circle of life where animals and plants are dependent on each other. It’s possible to be humane and eat meat, unless you feel that all killing is wrong regardless of how it’s done. If that’s the case, we’re back to the whole “your carrot was living when your teeth mashed it” argument.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - I can’t find it in me to draw a good/bad line on this issue. It’s just what is. I can’t fault a city dweller for being ignorant of the food chain or commercial agriculture, being so far removed from both as they typically are. I can’t apologize for being human, either — I was born to digest animal proteins and fats, as evidenced by the function of my liver and gall bladder.
@clumsyandunaware - I tend to agree with you. The OP is focused primarily on the horrific factory farming practices that produce most of our meat – and I think any reasonable person (who isn’t desperately grasping for ad hoc justifications of their own dietary preferences) can easily the see the wrongness of contributing to an industry like that. For that reason I am in practice pretty much a vegetarian, because I know that in most cases any meat I would have access to is likely produced by cruel means. But if a situation arises where I know that the meat before me is produced in a humane way (like your friend’s family), then I have much less of a moral objection to eating that meat.
One: While I am sure there are animals that are tormented, I am also positive that the VAST MAJORITY of them are not. Man who raise cattle love those cows and the things they do for them, like helping them to birth by reaching into the cow all the way up to their shoulders and getting very nasty in the process, shows just how much they care for those animals. At the slaughterhouse, they are killed instantly, so they do not suffer. And I have watched truckload after truckload of chickens going to a chicken slaughtering house, all of which a re very fat and healthy and have their faces in tact.
Two: Animals were created for us by God, and He said they would be meat for us when they got off the ark. However, this post which puts animals on the same level with humans, and compares eating them with cannibalism, is indeed the logical conclusion to the ridiculous notion of common ancestry. So, for people who believe that, I can understand you coming to that conclusion.
Three: I, in fact, *do* raise animals for meat, including rabbits, ducks and chickens, and one turkey we are fattening up for Thanksgiving – and have the guts to slaughter them myself. Also, my husband hunts and we slaughter deer and squirrel and wild turkey. And man does it taste good! They do not suffer, they are dead before they hit the ground.
Four: I am not opposed to the death penalty. And many hunters carry their dogs in cages in their truck beds, much like what Mitt Romney did when he tied his dog, IN A CARRIER AND SURROUNDED BY OTHER THINGS TO BLOCK THE WIND, to the top of his car. Doesn’t bother me at all. However, I would also like to point out that Obama admitted to EATING dog meat, so if he’s your hero you might want to knock him down a few pegs if eating meat is so horrible to you.
Five: I don’t really care if you judge what I do as wrong. As long as you don’t try to force me to live by your version of morality, we’re okay.
@chaospet - I thought the claim was that we are all somehow immoral for “eat[ing] the flesh of other sentient beings” and are considered by the author to be cannibals. The point about cruelty in meat production came after that statement and did not reference it, which led me to believe that the cruelty of commercial meat production is a related but largely separate issue.
@HappierHeathen - Well fair enough; I was focused primarily on the part of the OP that specifically discussed the cruelty involved in much of factory farming practices. I don’t know what the author would say about meat produced in humane ways. I’ll just say that for me, the issue is entirely about contributing to unnecessary suffering.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - Huh, my original comment somehow disappeared. Sorry for repeating myself if you saw this already. Anyway, my claim is not that meat eating is “unnatural”. My issue is with the inference – that if something is in some sense “natural” (which is a horribly vague and ambiguous term, but leave that aside for the moment), that it therefore is morally ok.
Considering the fact that you’re being judgmental about others by comparing them to cannibals using weak arguments and strawman analogies (thus being hypocritical yourself and entirely destroying your argument–which wasn’t very valid to begin with), I’m going to have to be less eloquent than my fellow dissenters and simply restate one of the main rules of the internet:
OP is a faggot.
I believe animals should be treated humanely and with respect, but there is nothing morally wrong with eating them.
So, I would be against any factory/company/slaughterhouse that feeds animals by byproducts and feces, who don’t let them run around within reason, and who otherwise inject them with growth hormones and other such chemicals that make the mature unnaturally. Also, who don’t kill them in a timely manner that would reduce pain and suffering.
The reason it isn’t morally wrong to kill them with the full intent of eating them and not letting them go to waste after such humane treatment, is 1) because it is beneficial to eat mean in small amounts every once in awhile and 2) animals are not the same in value as humans. That’s not to say they have no value or aren’t to be protected from cruelty the same as humans, but that the life of a goat or sheep or chicken is not the same as the life of a child. Human life is more valuable than an animal life. But, that also means we have a responsibility to take care of our animals as much as we can, while also being good stewards of them as natural resources.
I would be against the companies who multiply their stock by the day in unnatural ways, and treat the animals as nothing more than objects. That isn’t right. It’s also not right to equate a human life with an animal life. Both ideas are missing the mark. But one extreme isn’t better than the other.
@chaospet -
I am all for the humane treatment of critters, foursquare. The ag producers here in my neck of the woods are, too. I’m not going to make the same claims for the largest outfits elsewhere, or for animal concentration feed lot operators, or for industrial slaughterhouses, or try to apologize or rationalize away the things that many but not all of them do. Not all cattle/hog/chicken/whatever operations are run in a manner as egregious as the worst of them, or in a manner so respectable as the best of them.
My beef (pun intended!) is with the posit that veganism is universally morally superior to omnivorous eating.
Here’s the deal: You are, in fact, judgemental. But you apparently feel that being judgemental in this case is justified. Bully for you. Be judgemental. Jump right out there and trumpet your judgement. But what you want is to be judgemental and ALSO for everyone else to pretend you aren’t judgemental because you feel your judgement is justified. Well, tough luck. You can either have your own opinion that differs from the herd, or you can have the herd’s approval. But you, obviously, can’t have both. Put on your big boy pants and deal with it.
@LaSalamandre - It’s true that it all somehow goes back to nature. But, well, I don’t think fossils can experience any suffering anymore.
But yes, I agree with all your points.
@HappierHeathen - Very good points again. I don’t think there’s a bad/good line here, either, at all. These are just things that ARE. We are very well-prepared to masticate and digest meat (as you said), which is a very good point against those who claim it’s not natural for us to eat meat.
I wonder if the very early humans (or even our pre-human ancestors) were naturally equipped to eat meat. If the predecessors of homo sapiens were entirely vegetarian, it might have been a case of us “forcing” ourselves to eat meat, and eventually developing the necessary mechanisms to digest it. On that point I’m not currently certain, but I’ll look into it. Regardless, if the lion isn’t cruel when he rips apart the deer, then we aren’t either. But yes, there are some instances in which man is very cruel to animals unnecessarily, and those will never get my approval.
@chaospet - Well, fair enough. I thought you were going to make the case that the act itself of eating meat is unnatural. But, if your issue is with the philosophical “tactic” of arguing that because something is natural it’s morally good, then that’s fine. I guess we could go on forever with that one. LOL! But, like HappierHeathen said, I do believe that in this case, it does apply. We are just another biological entity, and as such, we all depend on other biological entities (be they animal or plant) to survive. That means we, like all other creatures, MUST cause the obliteration of another creature in order to provide our sustenance. The good ol’ food chain, as it were, is all about organisms consuming other organisms for their survival. I don’t see why humans must think they’re not part of that loop. *shrug*
Factory farming is disgusting and cruel. The practice flat out tortures animals and is killing our environment.
I cannot understand how human beings can eat pigs, honestly. They are such intelligent creatures. Even more so than dogs.
I appreciate the points you are trying to make.
Cannibalism is the act or practice of humans eating the flesh of other human beings. People eating animal meat =/= cannibals.
Forgot that in my last comment.
@Celestial_Teapot - If you think loving a little cat or a little dog is the same as having your own pet door knob then you do indeed define psychotic.
I’m not kidding or trying to be mean. You’ve just expressed some 200 proof, high octane insanity.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - It’s natural to defecate on the sidewalk and while we’re at it, Why Don’t We Do It In the Road?
It’s also natural to murder anyone who gets in our way, screw someone else’s wife or husband, steal whatever suits our fancy.
You may want to contemplate your totally useless argument the next time you are unnaturally wiping your butt with the most expensive toilet paper you can afford.
@In_Reason_I_Trust -
“That means we, like all other creatures, MUST cause the obliteration of another creature in order to provide our sustenance. The good ol’ food chain, as it were, is all about organisms consuming other organisms for their survival. I don’t see why humans must think they’re not part of that loop. *shrug*”
This may have been true before the 20th century, but with the advent of technology and nutrition we no longer must cause the obliteration of other creatures in order to sustain ourselves. We eat meat not because of a lack of healthy alternatives for our source of protein but because we choose to.
I agree with @chaospet‘s general point that it’s fallacious to move from natural to morally permissible. Everything we do is natural in the sense that it is done bodily. Preying upon other members of the same species, the human species and others, is also natural. Heterosexuality, homosexuality, vegetarianism, cannibalism, fidelity, courage, infidelity, rape – all of these are found in the animal kingdom, including within the human animal kingdom.
I don’t mind if you judge me, personally. But let’s argue it out. Does killing a plant constitute murder?
If not, what is it about killing an organic thing that makes it murder?
The problem with this argument is that it equates human nature with the nature of all edible animals.
It’s obvious that human nature is different in very significant ways from the nature of animals that human beings have eaten since forever.
So the murder of humans is evil whereas the killing of a cow for food is good.
But some parts of human nature are similar to certain animals.
For example, the man, like the tiger or the house cat is a predator. When a predator kills its prey for food it is committing a good act since it is feeding itself according to its nature.
I would argue that vegetarianism is evil since it requires that man forsake his nature as a predator.
Woah, seriously. I understand a person’s point of view that slaughtering animals for human consumption and the way that it’s done to be less than humane. However, I don’t think you’re thinking about the big picture here. If we didn’t have mass raising and slaughter of animals, how would we get and eat our meat? This isn’t the hunter-gatherer days anymore, far from it. The world has far too many people to even think in those terms. And, how do you know that the hunter-gatherers were humane? You can’t say that for certain, because it was thousands of years ago.
@HappierHeathen - Your point about all the animals killed anyway intentionally or unintentionally seems irrelevant. That the best world is beyond reach does not justify not making this world any better than it is. That killing animals is inevitable in some circumstances doesn’t justify the wholesale killing of animals. One could reason that we can, and therefore should, take measures to reduce the number of animals killed.
@nyclegodesi24 - Have a nice day.
@HappierHeathen - You too!
Okay, I raise cattle for consumption. What would we do with them, if we didn’t eat them? Our cattle are VERY well taken care of. They are a precious and valuable commodity in one instance and beautiful, interesting friends in another instance. Our cattle are naturally raised and are free roaming in very large pastures or open mountain grazing land. They are NEVER tortured or mistreated. When we butcher a steer he is killed with a bolt gun to the head and death is instantaneous.
I have vegan family members and a few vegetarian friends. They are free to eat whatever or earn their living however they want. I don’t judge them, or anyone else.
@nyclegodesi24 - YOU’RE KILLING THE PLANTS! Your argument is invalid. And, you’re annoying, but I’ve learned to laugh it off. Bye!
I agree with the others in that if we nitpick on semantics of course you are judgemental. we are all judgemental, because judgement about what is good and bad for our world is necessary to keep it going and make it better.
Obviously you mean ‘overly judgemental’ , more than others and in an unjustified (very arbitrary) way, like someone who is judgemental of race.
And while it is great that everyone here says they never say anything bad about veggies, it is true that many people sort of feel threatened by it. There have been psycholgical studies on it (google Minson Monin Meat or something like that) somewhere I read that these experts state meat-eaters feel morally degraded by vegetarians (and therefore start attacking with jokes). I personally expireneced that too a few times.
Once someone asked me if I feel morally superior. If eating meat was the only parameter to ‘judge’ a human as a whole and everyone had the same ecological and biological conditions, I totally would. But the thing is, while I don’t eat animals, I do a lot of other shit that isn’t good for others and the planet, and I am not even a nice person. I also eat dairy. Animals are obviously a lot more close to us than to doorknobs.
It does make sense to put a species on a pedestal in that we never can become a different species (and don’t seem to endager ourelves directly). There are many reactions tied to the physical appearance and abilities.
On the other hand a turtle has the cognitive abilities of a 1 yr old, and an ape can learn 1500 words and is smart enough to trick you/lie to you. Is it ok to kill infants?
In the end I just don’t eat meat. It’s one of many things one can do to improve the world. And sometimes I voice my concerns because I don’t want to be eaten if I have tbi or someting and my vocabulary declines to a few hundred words.
Do good and talk about it, but maybe in a way that takes fears away from people.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - Lol… Uhh, thanks for not responding to a single thing I’ve said. Why is the argument invalid? What are my premises/conclusion? Do you disagree that we can get the nutrients we do now from meat from other non-meat products?
@In_Reason_I_Trust -
Would you purchase child porn?
Presumably you think that’s wrong. Even though the photographs have already been taken, the children have already been abused, and your action is unlikely to change anything by itself, you still think it’s wrong to buy child porn, because it feeds into that system. It raises the marginal demand that little increment. It puts some of the blood on your hands. (You probably wouldn’t enjoy child porn, but that’s really not the point. Even if you did, it would still be wrong to purchase it.)
Now explain to me how this is different from buying meat. How somehow it’s no longer your responsibility not to benefit from or feed into the system of cruelty when it’s meat instead of porn.
@ETCACTOR -
I’m glad to hear that you are about 1% as cruel as a standard CAFO. That 99% reduction is very important, and I’d be the last to deny it.
But what about that other 1%, you know the part where you actually kill animals for your own benefit?
What would we do with animals if we didn’t eat them? We already have a model for this: Cats, dogs, horses. In short, pets. Would we need to control their population through sterilization? Yes, just as we do with cats, dogs, and horses.
As for wild animals, we should leave them alone, at least until such time as we know enough about the ecology that we could intervene on their behalf without totally disrupting the ecosystem. Our record of intervention is pretty poor thus far, hence non-intervention makes the most sense right now.
@PrisonerxOfxLove -
I don’t mean to say that omnivory is as bad as cannibalism. I mean to say that it is of a same fundamental kind, because humans and animals are of the same fundamental kind—i.e. sentient beings.
And yes, many animals are predators. If you want to know my detailed opinion on this matter, I believe that predation is also bad, in the same way that natural disasters and random accidents are bad. (I.e. no one in particular is morally responsible, but harm is still done.) It would be worth preventing these things, if we could find a cost-effective means of doing so. (I prevent some acts of predation all the time, when I stop my cats from going out to kill birds. You could argue I am not obligated to do this, but can you really say it’s not good to do?)
@pnrj - What you are advocating is imposing your values not only on other human beings but other animals as well.
Your personal values don’t trump the way things are. It is good that a cat attacks a bird because that is the cat’s nature. The cat has no choice.
On the other hand, human beings by their nature, can choose what they want to eat. And you advocate taking away that choice thus violating human nature.
Your values on this topic are therefore evil because you advocate the destruction of the nature of the human person and the cat, and the imposition of your own personal values on eating.
I’ve been grilling steaks and burgers all week. Tonight’s barbecue ribs will be made in your honor.
And they’ll be delicious. Better than your rabbit food.
@pnrj - The analogy fails. Here’s why. ALL child porn is automatically and by definition a terrible abuse of a child. That’s NOT the case with eating meat. Yes, SOME animal slaughterhouses (or enterprises of similar bent – the ones that kill animals for consumption) do mistreat the animals, but not ALL.
I will not stop eating meat just because SOME people abuse the system. Nice try, though.
@nyclegodesi24 - http://happierheathen.xanga.com/pulse/14026390/item.html There’s my answer. Later, tater!
@In_Reason_I_Trust - Have a nice day.
@crazy2love -
“If we didn’t have mass raising and slaughter of animals, how would we get and eat our meat?”
I assume the point he is trying to make is that everyone should go vegan/vegetarian?
@pnrj - Amazing… Leave the deer herds alone for just four years and the forests will have stopped regenerating and much of the understory will range between decimated and regionally extinct. Leave the rabbit populations alone for just three years and grasslands will desertify. And so on.
Please, at least try to understand ecosystems a little bit before professing that your childish view is somehow morally superior. Yours is not a more evolved perspective, it’s a less informed one.
All the meat I buy is farm-raised. Or I kill it myself. But hell, I’m gonna keep eating meat because it’s goddamn delicious. (Also because I eat a balanced diet and fuck you if you think I’m going to take supplements to pity your bleeding heart.)
Humans evolved to take advantage of any food supply they could. Just so happened that some caveman somewhere killed a mammoth and said to his caveman buddies, “Fucking hell, mates, this beats the hell out of dying from starvation because the berries never grew back!”
I’m not even going to entertain all of the idiotic and blindly hypocritical comments I’m sure have emerged on this blog when i say
AMEN. This is a brilliant post that I will be showing to others. Thank you.
@ShimmerBodyCream -
I think that’s his point, but if everyone on the planet went vegan/vegetarian, all the animals that would normally get killed for food would roam free and entire ecosystems would be destroyed because there just aren’t enough resources to support that kind of animal population.
@DrummingMediocrity -
om nom nom
@chaospet -
“What’s funny is how often that simply stating that I don’t eat meat (and perhaps daring to explain my reasons when I’m asked about them) will spark an angry, indignant, righteous reaction from people.”
Yes. very true. My Dad was informing my uncle that I was a vegetarian and I got dirty stares just because I chose not to eat meat. Being a vegan/vegetarian in the midwest is pretty shitty sometimes.
@bloggicus_maximus - You’d have to stop raising/breeding them, not let them loose in the forest.
@chaospet - Exactly. Cognitive dissonance.
@bloggicus_maximus - The animals raised as livestock would simply die out, as most of them are intentionally bred (often forcibly so) in massive numbers in the first place.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - Animals commit many types of atrocities against each other which humans would otherwise scoff at. Animals do not have the intellectual prowess to intellectualize their victims’ suffering, as well as to invest in less cruel sustenance like we can. To compare us to other animals is to deny the humongous evolutionary advantage of man. Each person who decides to stop eating meat can save hundreds of pounds of animals every year, think about how many chickens that is. And if that person decides to advocate for the cause on top of it, the numbers increase even more. To throw your hands up because animal cruelty and exploitation happens in such massive numbers is like saying “oh well, a lot of gangs exist in L.A. and will continue to perspire after this one murderer is found guilty, so there’s no point in seeking justice for one homocide.” Solving the animal cruelty problem is much simpler than the contentious and complicated issues of politics, human rights issues, and many others that are often cited as “higher priority” endeavors. Also, it is natural to eat meat yes, because humans were able to gain power over other animals, but is it necessary? Usually not, and that’s the point. A lot of horrible things are natural. Might does not equal right.
@clumsyandunaware - I wonder how ‘humanely’ killing another human being without pain who had not earned a death sentence would make you feel?
@Celestial_Teapot -
“Giving farm animals the full moral consideration of human beings is like having feelings for a door knob.”
The point is to acknowledge that farm animals are sentient living creatures. Door knobs are not. “Full moral consideration” is not necessarily covered in the simple idea to not kill where it is unnecessary.
“Fucking, conversing with, and putting into the voting booth a door handle…”
Not sure where you thought this was implied by the idea that animals don’t deserve to die without due cause. I have never heard someone advocate for animals being given voting rights, and most animal rights advocates do not believe bestiality is at all humane or appropriate.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Very good points.
@Saridactyl - An analogy is a comparison of similar things, not the same things. Cannibalism is an appropriate comparison in that we, as sentient creatures, can empathize with the horror of being murdered, and sentient animals also feel horror when they are killed.
@HappierHeathen - No one denies that other animals will be killed in one way or another, but ending one’s consumption of meat and its byproducts undoubtedly will drastically lower the fatality rate. Also, most of those who don’t eat meat for ethical reasons do so because they are aware that animals are sentient, and can thus suffer and usually show a strong desire to live. Plants do not have central nervous systems, which means there is not evidence of their sentience, or at least that they are anywhere near as sentient as animals. Eating plants in place of animals (and there’s not much alternative) is clearly the lesser of two evils.
Rather than argue, I have one question.
We ARE Omnivores…that is a biological fact.
We can exist on a diet without meat…but ethics, political convictions, and empathy don’t change our biology.
There are people who actually can’t digest meat…they lack the amino acids, or enzymes to break it down. Most eat a diet that tends to be carb heavy—which are usually cheaper to obtain. I happen to be carb intolerant…not just gluten…just about any type of carb.
Why are you judging people about something that might just be hard wired to their metabolisms? Or do you honestly expect them to martyr themselves for meat?
@DrummingMediocrity - Let us imagine that world you envision, and here in my neck of the woods we just take several thousand head of livestock out of production and let them live out their lives, sterilized as has been suggested by others. Hundreds of millions of calories, poof, gone from the food supply.
Here where I live at a mile and a quarter above sea level in the semi-arid west, the land around us is absolutely not cropland. Native grasses that thrive here and upon which cattle and sheep can thrive are not edible for humans, and no human food crops can be grown without irrigation. But there’s not enough water for irrigation anyway, and growing food crops is an iffy proposition at best even for kitchen gardeners in our short high mountain valley growing season. Most years we can count on no more than 100 days in our growing season, and even then our nighttime low temperatures are always below 50 degrees (Fahrenheit) and often below 40 degrees even in July and August so many crops are completely out of the question. If we get an unusually cloudy summer like we had last year to deprive the plants of sunlight, or an unusually windy summer as we’re having so far this year to dessicate the plants, even kitchen gardens fail to produce at normal capacity. In short: This is absolutely not arable farmland but it produces hundreds of millions of calories of human nutrition every year.
At present, literally ALL arable cropland on Earth is under crops and our total arable acreage is decreasing each year due to aquifer depletion and desertification. There simply is not any new farmland anywhere on the planet, yet you would have us take a great huge chunk of nutrition out of the food supply that cannot be replaced. We either eat meat, or we sacrifice millions of human beings every year until our numbers are reduced to that which is sustainable with only our continually decreasing arable farmland resources. So which is the lesser evil? And if saving livestock lives is preferable, whose human babies do we bury?
@DrummingMediocrity - I know what analogies are, this is just a terrible one. Eating cow is not similar to eating another human being.
@DrummingMediocrity - You’re praising Curtis and slamming me? LOL! Nothing you say matters. Adieu.
@pnrj – You just recommended a comment by Prisonerxofxlove, aka Curtis, aka Lobornlytesthought palace. Defecating in the street is natural? REALLY? This is a comment you’re giving your endorsement to? Wow. You’ve been away for a while, so perhaps you don’t know who this man is. He’s a nutjob, a bigot, and an identity thief. “And they shall know you by the company you keep.” Before you side with someone, you should look into who they are first.
http://in-reason-i-trust.xanga.com/photos/d8dad276607559/#filmstriptitle
http://in-reason-i-trust.xanga.com/photos/d0289275619814/#filmstriptitle
http://celestial-teapot.xanga.com/739127035/lobornlyte-is-a-man-and-i-can-prove-it/
http://in-reason-i-trust.xanga.com/749223115/i-had-a-glimmer-of-hope/
Your credibility just went down the toilet. I’m unsubbing. I’m done with this shit.
@Saridactyl - I gave you a specific justification for the comparison. Cows are not people, but cows share the trait of sentience with people.
@In_Reason_I_Trust - I explained where some of your assumptions were misguided; I did not slam you. Agreeing with Curtis on an issue once in awhile does not equate to my being his advocate. Throwing your hands up and making irrelevant accusations when someone points out fallacies in your argument is ironically very Curtis-like of you. That doesn’t make you look too credible in comparison.
@HappierHeathen - Animals produce less sustenance as meat than they consume in plants. Your argument would only be valid if that were taken out of the equation.
@DrummingMediocrity - Yes, and then I said that I don’t think it’s a very good one. Cows are not capable of rational thought and speech like humans are. They are NOT comparable. I’m sorry, but I don’t agree with this. I feel it’s a poorly constructed argument that bears no reasoning on why people should or shouldn’t eat meat. Human beings eat meat. There is a food chain for a reason.
I have no problem with people not eating meat, I say nothing to them, but leave the rest of us alone. We are not doing anything to feel bad about and we won’t feel bad about it just because some people don’t like to eat meat.
@Saridactyl - No, cows are not comparable to human beings on an intellectual level, but that’s not what I said. Would you argue that a mentally retarded adult or a human baby cannot suffer to the same capacity as Isaac Newton would have? They are much less capable of rational thinking. If not then there’s absolutely no reason for why you brought up intellectual capacity.
Intelligence is not mandatory to feeling pain. Cows can feel pain just like people can. That is the ONLY relevant comparison I brought up, and pretty obviously what the OP was referring to.
This quote sums it up quite well: “The question is not can they talk, nor can they reason, but can they suffer?” I hope that clears up any misunderstandings.
“There is a food chain for a reason.”
First of all, it’s interesting that people like to call us “the top of the food chain” when the majority of people couldn’t kill their own meat if their lives depended on it. That would only be a legitimate statement if you actually do.
That aside, the ‘reason’ humans evolved to the top of the food chain is that they had to for survival; humans did not always have the resources to subsist on plants alone. Since modern technology has given us advanced methods of obtaining suitable alternative foods, and buy varieties of crops grown all around the world, most humans no longer need to exercise their predatory drive. That combined with higher intellectual functioning comes an awareness of what we are doing when we cause other animals to suffer.
Vegetarians get on my nerves, every thing always revolves around their special needs. I was raised on meat, almost everybody was in my country, you can’t undo it anyway, but I wouldn’t see any reason to. You expect me to imagine how I’d feel if I was an animal? What do you suggest, a chimp, like my supposed forefather monkey in the “evolutionary ladder?” Oh, and so what about my hunting again? My burgers and steak? What country do you even live in again? I love a bloody burger or steak with an ice cold beer or 6. It’s the American way. yeeee doggie! @blonde_apocalypse - You tell em blondie! Impressive. @mtngirlsouth - You made some great points, I think he forgot all about God creating the animals for our food, and it’s all over the Bible that we’re supposed to eat animal meat. I like that you raise your own, I almost knew I’d like your comment before I ever read it. I would add that unlike humans, animals don’t have any awareness they’re gonna die, so they’re luckier in the natural chain of life anyway when it comes to worry and suffering, we’re supposed to eat them. I like to crank up the grill. Good point though, I won’t eat any grilled dog but that’s right Obama did, so more of the liberal cover up, I say, talk about it. @Celestial_Teapot - I agree. Full moral consideration, there’s no way, as I was just saying they don’t even know they’re ever going to die. That’s a pretty good deal already, what next, grief counseling prior to the slaughter?
@DrummingMediocrity - Did you not understand the part about the beef cattle being raised on unarable land? And that they are converting grasses that are indedible for humans into meat that is edible, and the loss of those calories from the food supply would mean starvation for millions? Or that all arable land on Earth is already farmed, and global arable acreage is decreasing year over year due to natural forces we cannot counter?
I’m not trying to convince a single vegetarian or vegan to start eating meat. I’m just hoping to inject some objective reality into the discussion — every fact I have presented in this thread is independently verifiable and I invite you to do so if you are so inclined. If you would rather maintain belief in some fantasy, then by all means do so. Live like you want to live.
@HappierHeathen - You seem to be suggesting that we need the meat industry in order to provide enough calories for the world’s population. Actually the opposite is the case – the meat industry makes it so that we don’t produce as much food as we could otherwise. More than 2/3 of the world’s agriculture is dedicated to providing food for livestock. If we dedicated that agriculture to providing food for humans, we could actually produce MORE calories than the meat industry itself provides. You can see that point discussed here, along with other important points about the environmental impact of the meat industry: http://woods.stanford.edu/evp.php?name=livestock
I’m off to go hobo-hunting. Anyone in?
Nice chin pubes.
@chaospet - I have not and will not defend or promote modern industrial meat production practices. That has not been my purpose here, has never been my purpose anywhere. My view is that feedlot operations in which cattle are grain finished are bad for the animals, the environment, for the humans who consume their product, and totally unnecessary. A beef steer is perfectly edible and to my taste preferable if it is slaughtered without ever having seen a feedlot, and is instead grass finished in the fields where it lived.
The article also states, “At the same time, people in certain regions of the world, such as southern Africa, are suffering from a deficiency of animal protein, and the means to enrich their diets is needed.” The article does not recommend vegetarianism.
@HappierHeathen - @chaospet - covered what I would have had to say as a response.
That the article was not biased on behalf of vegetarians made it a more neutral source for all parties.
Also, I freely said that ‘most’ people do not need meat anymore. I would not deny that people from vast non-arable lands such as many parts of Africa may not have alternatives, especially considering the abject poverty (which is not unlikely correlated) which would not allow them to trade or purchase varieties of food in local markets.
@DrummingMediocrity - Have a nice day.
@HappierHeathen -
“loss of those calories from the food supply would mean starvation for millions?”
I am fairly certain that giving up meat will not mean starvation for millions of people in the UK, U.S.A., France, Germany, or even India (a lot of people there don’t eat meat to begin with).
As @DrummingMediocrity - points out, that people who cannot but eat meat aren’t be morally obligated to give up eating meat does not mean that people who have the means to forgo meat don’t need to. You’re repackaging the same fallacy over and over again.
Oh and have a nice day.
@nyclegodesi24 -
“You’re repackaging the same fallacy over and over again.”
lol I like that, clever
You know, what I find ironic is that your reasoning, pnrj, is much the reasoning pro-lifers make all the time. I wonder if you consider yourself a pro-lifer.
@galadrial -
“It’s biology.”
Humans have evolved many immoral biological “facts” that can be overcome.
“Most eat a diet that tends to be carb heavy—which are usually cheaper to obtain. I happen to be carb intolerant…not just gluten…just about any type of carb. “
I’m sorry but I don’t believe that. Carbs are necessary to live. You would be dead if you didn’t eat carbs alone, but even more due to the fact many other nutrients cannot be obtained without eating carbs.
“Or do you honestly expect them to martyr themselves for meat?”
A martyr is someone who sacrifices him/herself on behalf of another. Would you say that a man who chooses not to cheat on his wife, even though it is part of his “biology” to do so is a martyr? How about an employer who does not rip off his employees even when he could? These would be natural, greedy human inclinations which could be overcome and benefit not only the potential victims, but also the potential perpetrators’ OWN self-interests.
Taking meat out of your diet is almost always beneficial for one’s health (Bill Clinton, for example cured many serious health ailments he had by simply adopting a vegan diet). If anything, it promotes a better quality of life, and is therefore not a sacrifice.
@nyclegodesi24 - Always an interesting point. The thing is, not allowing an abortion violates the mother’s rights by forcing her to use her body as the host of a(n albeit human) parasite, whereas not killing animals for food/clothing/products is not a sacrifice for anyone who has the means for alternative nutrition/clothing/product sources. I would argue that a sentient fetus is entitled human rights in the same way as I would advocate for any sentient creature’s who is at the mercy of those more powerful.
No, don’t worry, I actually do kill animals and eat them. It’s their fault for tasting so good.
@DrummingMediocrity - Yeah, I anticipated this argument. I think in cases of rape, this would make sense. But where pregnancy is the foreseeable result of consensual sex, at least, the argument that the mother can’t be forced to protect another human being has less force for me.
Suppose you’re a bystander and you witness a child from the window of a burning building. You might not be legally or morally obligated to protect her. But what if you’re the one who put her into the building? I think then, you became responsible for what happens to her – at least you are responsible for not being the person who lights the fire in the building that kills her. Especially if she owes her existence and her situation in danger to your actions, I think you are obligated to protect her. And when I think about the values generally being protected here, one of a person’s life at stake, and the other another person’s personal liberty, I lean toward life. The alternative, adoption, makes the personal liberty argument even less compelling.
@nyclegodesi24 - (BTW. As an omnivore, I’m becoming increasingly worried about my own consistency. I wonder if one day my pro-life convictions will compel me to go vegetarian.)
@nyclegodesi24 - That is true, though I still hold viability in the fetus as a starting point for such consideration. That said, I cannot disagree with your argument or the pro-lifers at all.
I can’t really add anything to what blonde_apocalypse and others have said.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Whoa, you didn’t get the point he made _AT ALL_.
I understand that you have certain feelings about eating meat. I also understand that you didn’t necessarily choose to have these feelings, and maybe you cannot help them. I understand that vegetarians and vegans think of eating meat as being a terrible thing. I tend to stay away from meat if I am going out with a vegetarian, just as I try to stay away from fattening or fried foods if I’m going out with someone who is on a diet, or staying away from alcohol if I’m around an alcoholic, list goes on. There’s a gentle consideration that we can take to make people around us more comfortable.
Keep in mind this consideration only works if you can take a behavior away. No one will ask you to eat meat in order to be considerate of other meat eaters. Yet, you sit there and judge us as all being terrible people because we don’t see the world and perception in the same light as you. To accept without judgement is a difficult thing, and I can see it is something you may struggle with, but please, try to be patient with your fellow men who hold nothing more than a different opinion on how the cycle of life does or should work.
@DrummingMediocrity -
Girl, you are entitled to an opinion.
But you just called me a liar.
Assuming you actually meant that, WHY would I lie about something like that?
I’ve spent the last decade trying different foods—because some made me sick. Some made me sick, and caused me to gain weight. Soy put me in the ER twice…so please…DON’T tell me how things effect me. And I promise not to tell YOU what to eat. Deal?
@galadrial - I do not think you are being intentionally dishonest, nor did I ever imply that I know what foods specifically affect you. I think that you are probably mistaken in thinking that you can’t eat carbs, however, because carbohydrates are one of several macro nutrients which are required in the human diet (here’s a source that explains it: http://www.livestrong.com/article/448041-do-humans-need-carbs/). I don’t doubt that you have multiple food allergies, which you’ve alluded to a number of times, and I believe you if many of your allergies may be to foods that have carbs in them.
I’m pretty sure you said cock at least once.
My daughter is a vegetarian, her boyfriend a vegan. I grew up in farm and ranch country, and I like meat. There’s been a world of changes in the way slaughterhouses and all animal husbandry arenas, but what it comes down to is the fact that there is abuse everywhere, in every industry, and you are not blameless regardless of how hard you try to be. Take a look at what happens to our water, streams, etc from ag pesticides and anti-fungal treatments. Look at the clothes you wear and the country of origin. It is impossible to live on this earth without contributing to the suffering of someone, somewhere. It’s as inevitable as our carbon footprints.
@HappierHeathen - or his piety!
I am a happy and proud meat-eater, who also voraciously devours delicious plant life, but I thought this was a very well-written post, and drew equally well-written replies!!!
This is wonderful. For some reason it didn’t work when I tried to rec it, so I’m leaving a comment instead. So many people disagree with my desicion to stay vegetarian, and I’m sick of using the same arguments. Your analogy is unique and truthful and it’s something I’m going to have to remind people of when they harass me for choosing to not eat meat.
@ShimmerBodyCream -
Ecosystems would still be destroyed if no one hunted for food. (To an extent, hunting is population control…if properly managed and shit.) But still, I don’t care if someone’s vegan/vegetarian. Makes about as much difference to me as someone’s religion does. Zero.
@bloggicus_maximus - I think hunting has done much more harm than good, decimating entire species and fucking up ecosystems royally. Also, I’d contest what kind of hunting? Killing adult male deer (which is common) does the exact opposite and can increase a population.
Also, I am not really concerned whether people eat meat or not. I am a vegan but I realize that change comes slow and everyone is somehow responsible for the death of animals in one way or another. We all just need to do what we can and gradually work towards noncruelty for our society. IMO demonizing either side doesn’t help, we all participate in cruelty in some form or another, we just have to actively work to lessen our impact.
I was veggie for four years and believe me, I understand. I never make that kind of statement because what a person eats is a matter of personal choice. I wish I could go back on the veggie diet myself and one day I hope to – the motivation is there but the body doesn’t cooperate.
Anyway, don’t let people get to you. They don’t have to live in your skin or with the choices you make. When you put your head down at night, only you have to sleep with the consequences, whatever they may be, of what you did throughout the day. I’m betting your diet causes you no restlessness whatsoever.
@HappierHeathen - ”droppin’ science like Galileo (sic) dropped an orange!”