Should you feel guilty for eating meat?

[In Search of Username]

No, I don't feel guilty. As a species we have evolved to be omnivorous. Who am I to dictate to nature?

'It's natural therefore it's right' is the worst fucking argument I've ever heard, but every damn person uses it when this topic comes up, I swear. Everything is natural. Your every action is by definition 'natural' because you did it, according to your nature and to the natural laws of the universe. So saying something is natural as a way of proving it is moral is basically saying that everything that has ever happened in the universe has been morally acceptable.

Come up with a better argument.

First off, relax a little bit.
Secondly I don't feel guilty for eating meat for that reason. If you happen to disagree with it that doesn't always mean the argument is invalid.
If you want an extended reason, I don't feel guilty because the meat was farmed, and if we didn't eat it, they wouldn't exist in the first place.

I still don't see why I need to justify it. Someone asked my opinion, and I gave it. I'm not judging if they do decide to not eat meat but it's not something that bothers me in the slightest.

Sorry, it's just that the whole argument of something being acceptable because it's natural always annoys me, whatever context it's used in. In any other argument it's considered complete nonsense to use that argument but in this context people seem to consider it a perfectly acceptable argument to use, and no-one has ever been able to give me a logical reason why.

If eating meat doesn't bother you, fair enough, just don't try to act like nature is somehow on your side. Vegetarians evolved too, y'know.

 

[TomWiley]

there are so many wrongs in this world, but meat eating is not one of them, yes an ethical treatment of our food might be preferable, but it is so far down my moral priorities that i am not even sure it is there. with all the suffering that humans go through, from starvation, violence and violations the pain of something destined to be consumed barely registers.

i still dont understand how there still exists starvation on this planet given the over abundance of food

I think it's just a tad ironic that you mentioned human starvation as a more important issue. The meat industry is an enormous waste of water, grain and other resources that could be used to feed the entire human population many times over. Instead, these resources are wasted on the luxury of meat for us living in the western world.

Secondly, I don't really understand you're "let's deprioritize animal welfare because there are still many humans suffering"-argument. I mean, it's not like we can't do both! It's not like we have to shift time and money from helping human beings in some third world country to get clean water just because we choose to regulate the meat industry.

I hear this argument quite a lot; that we should take care of our human fellow human beings before we start worrying about animals. I usually reply with "well, which human rights organization do you donate to", which is normally met with silence.

More often than not, I find that the people interested in animal welfare are often the same people interested in other forms of charity.

 

[nuba km]

I don't think you read my post properly as the presumption is made that most of the meat eaten is form animals allowed to graze. As form so much media outcry factory farmed meat isn't sold in most shops, at least were I live (its like even though sweat shops exist most major cloths shops don't get cloths form them due to the chance of bad publicity)

True, I didn't.

Am not sure, but I doubt, that most animals are allowed to graze however. At least here in Norway a vast majority of pigs eaten are kept indoors all their lives, and the same goes for chickens. I am not sure about the cows, but it would surprise me if they were treated differently.

I am also interested to here how you producers actually meet demand where you live if they don't produce industrially, and also how expensive your meat is as a result. Animals are factory farmed because it is a necessity to keep production high enough and prices low enough. And when you do that it's hard to have animal welfare at the same time.

I live in northern Ireland, their ain't a lot of people here, quite sure their are more farm animals then people living in this country

Also it is arguable whether it is better to be not allowed to move and force feed food is better or worse then having to worry every second of your live about being eaten alive.

I agree, it is arguable. But as I said in the first post; there is a third way that prevents both.

if you agree it is arguable which way of live is better and you yourself mentioned that it is hard to supply enough meat with the third option (also making it fairly expensive and hence harder for lower income families to obtain), what's so wrong with eating animals who live lifes equal to once they would live in the wild.

 

[Sansha]

I don't feel guilty for eating meat, because my species - human - is built to be omnivorous except in a few rare exceptions, where people are vegan for health reasons.

To me, saying humans should be 'above' such barbarism is arrogant and self-centered. There are plenty of carnivores and omnivores out there of other species who kill for their food, and they need it to survive, just as humans will be malnourished and not properly sustained from not eating meat without appropriate supplements to make up those proteins and irons.

Think back tens of thousands of years ago when our first ancestors hunted the mighty mammoth, wolf or saber-toothed cat to survive. I assure you the wolf didn't give a shit about tearing apart a human, ugly adult or cute baby, for its meal, just as those men didn't think of the fluffy bunny caught in their traps. The same applies today. Case in point: Dingo; Azaria Chamberlain.

I am the result of millions of years of evolution and survival, thousands of years of advancements and decades of society, and I'll be fucked if my ancestors fought their way to the top of the food chain so I could feel guilty about the dead animal I'm powering my body on.

PS; eating meat is one of the few pleasures my lifestyle affords me. Like a middle-class worker who just wants a beer and cigarette at the end of a hard day, I'll be damned if I'm going to let you make me feel guilty about something that makes me feel good. And I do indeed make an effort to purchase my delicious flesh from non-cruel sources.
It's really the least I can do; this animal died so I would not go hungry. I'll not have an animal suffer unduly before its death so I can have a bacon sandwich.

 

[MammothBlade]

No. It's just called being a part of the circle of life. Humans' place at the top of the food chain is nothing to be ashamed of. The flesh and blood of lesser, dumber creatures sustains the life of humans. And I personally enjoy eating another animal, the remnants of that predatorial instinct. It just wouldn't be the same with artificial meat.

My only concern with cruelty to farm animals is the quality of the meat. Steroids don't exactly make for a fresh meal. Too much stress hormones degrade it somewhat. The problem isn't that the prey is suffering, it's that it will taste like crap if it isn't raised properly.

 

[MammothBlade]

I don't feel guilty for eating meat, because my species - human - is built to be omnivorous except in a few rare exceptions, where people are vegan for health reasons.

To me, saying humans should be 'above' such barbarism is arrogant and self-centered. There are plenty of carnivores and omnivores out there of other species who kill for their food, and they need it to survive, just as humans will be malnourished and not properly sustained from not eating meat without appropriate supplements to make up those proteins and irons.

Think back tens of thousands of years ago when our first ancestors hunted the mighty mammoth
, wolf or saber-toothed cat to survive.

Well said, there's absolutely nothing to feel guilty about. And, you called my name? I'm right here.

 

[TomWiley]

No, I don't feel guilty. As a species we have evolved to be omnivorous. Who am I to dictate to nature?

'It's natural therefore it's right' is the worst fucking argument I've ever heard, but every damn person uses it when this topic comes up, I swear. Everything is natural. Your every action is by definition 'natural' because you did it, according to your nature and to the natural laws of the universe. So saying something is natural as a way of proving it is moral is basically saying that everything that has ever happened in the universe has been morally acceptable.

Come up with a better argument.

First off, relax a little bit.
Secondly I don't feel guilty for eating meat for that reason. If you happen to disagree with it that doesn't always mean the argument is invalid.
If you want an extended reason, I don't feel guilty because the meat was farmed, and if we didn't eat it, they wouldn't exist in the first place.

I still don't see why I need to justify it. Someone asked my opinion, and I gave it. I'm not judging if they do decide to not eat meat but it's not something that bothers me in the slightest.

Sorry, it's just that the whole argument of something being acceptable because it's natural always annoys me, whatever context it's used in. In any other argument it's considered complete nonsense to use that argument but in this context people seem to consider it a perfectly acceptable argument to use, and no-one has ever been able to give me a logical reason why.

If eating meat doesn't bother you, fair enough, just don't try to act like nature is somehow on your side. Vegetarians evolved too, y'know.

I have to agree on that. The "it's just natural"-pseudo-argument often shows up when people are asked to change their lifestyles. It's just a way for people to justify doing what they've always been doing. I'ts just in so many different moral debates, and it's always used by those who have an interest in things staying the same.

I remember reading an Scientific American article which referred to a number of American polls where Americans were asked whether they would consider eating dog meat or not. I don't remember the exact percentage, but on overwhelming number answered that they would be uncomfortable with eating dog meat.

It doesn't make any sense when you think about it. Pigs are not less intelligent than dogs, and I'm sure that if we kept pigs as pets rather than dogs, people would feel differently. It just goes to show that it's not reason and ethics that motivate people in their decisions, it's simply tradition.

 

[Sansha]

No. It's just called being a part of the circle of life. Humans' place at the top of the food chain is nothing to be ashamed of. The flesh and blood of lesser, dumber creatures sustains the life of humans. And I personally enjoy eating another animal, the remnants of that predatorial instinct. It just wouldn't be the same with artificial meat.

My only concern with cruelty to farm animals is the quality of the meat. Steroids don't exactly make for a fresh meal. Too much stress hormones degrade it somewhat. The problem isn't that the prey is suffering, it's that it will taste like crap if it isn't raised properly.

I so love your choice of words. My motto is 'Sansha eats dead animal'. Delightful reactions all 'round.

 

[PrinceFortinbras]

if you agree it is arguable which way of live is better and you yourself mentioned that it is hard to supply enough meat with the third option (also making it fairly expensive and hence harder for lower income families to obtain), what's so wrong with eating animals who live lifes equal to once they would live in the wild.

By arguable I mean that we cannot know since we can not ask the animals about this. Therefore I would rather be on the safe side and go for the option that causes the least amount of suffering. That is number three. And let me make my position clear: I think we should eat the least amount of meat possible. Alternative number three not meeting the market demand for meat that exist today is therefore only a good thing. If you wonder why I think this I wrote a post about it earlier.

I am a vegetarian because I think minimizing the suffering in the world is of moral value (I could also explain the reasoning behind this if someone is interested). That means that everything that has the capacity to suffer has moral relevance. I.e. we should care about how we treat those things. Modern science has shown that it is very likely that a lot of animals (mammals, birds, whales etc.) have this capacity for suffering. We also know that a lot of the animals we eat suffer a lot before they are killed and eaten. Therefore it seems logical to me, in a market economy where buying something incentivizes further or increased production, to not eat meat.

 

[Ravesy]

If other animals had invented bows and arrows and traps then we'd be the ones being gobbled up now. We got there first and as a result...nom nom nom!

 

[Sansha]

if you agree it is arguable which way of live is better and you yourself mentioned that it is hard to supply enough meat with the third option (also making it fairly expensive and hence harder for lower income families to obtain), what's so wrong with eating animals who live lifes equal to once they would live in the wild.

By arguable I mean that we cannot know since we can not ask the animals about this. Therefore I would rather be on the safe side and go for the option that causes the least amount of suffering. That is number three. And let me make my position clear: I think we should eat the least amount of meat possible. Alternative number three not meeting the market demand for meat that exist today is therefore only a good thing. If you wonder why I think this I wrote a post about it earlier.

I am a vegetarian because I think minimizing the suffering in the world is of moral value (I could also explain the reasoning behind this if someone is interested). That means that everything that has the capacity to suffer has moral relevance. I.e. we should care about how we treat those things. Modern science has shown that it is very likely that a lot of animals (mammals, birds, whales etc.) have this capacity for suffering. We also know that a lot of the animals we eat suffer a lot before they are killed and eaten. Therefore it seems logical to me, in a market economy where buying something incentivizes further or increased production, to not eat meat.

Have you considered the rabbits, gophers and birds that have their nests and bodies torn to shreds by vegetarian-bound soy and corn crop farming?

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97836&page=1#.UBkiN7T9PUs

If you want to completely eliminate animal suffering for your diet, that's fine, but your sole option is to grow 100% of your food yourself, by hand, without using pesticides and politely asking the crows and rabbits to not tear your garden to bits.

 

[MHR]

Everyone seems to think it's okay because "thats the way things are" and "destiny."

We're predators after all. The difference between us and every single other predator on earth is choice. A lion can't choose to farm up a salad 'cuz it's a stupid freakin lion. Is it up to the apex sapient to do whatever the hell feels good, or utilize its resources to ease the common suffering?

People think cannibalism is bad, but what's really the moral difference besides the obvious risk of disease and parasites? Animals and people both have the same capacity for pain and desire for self-preservation. Being dumber doesn't change those two factors. I watched stargate Atlantis and the humans portrayed didn't seem to think it all that great that they were the food source in that galaxy, even if the wraith feeding process was admittedly exceedingly torturous. Still, not one of the characters brought up a thought regarding the lifeforms they consumed daily.

Not to mention, with all the excess resources spent on farming meat for cheeseburgers to feed fat pricks, we could easily solve world hunger with a easier-to-produce vegetarian diet.

I'm not saying be a vegetarian like me, but the ignorance is pretty insulting. You can ask any little kid anywhere if killing something needlessly is bad, but then they grow up and say that killing for their Big-mac is fine.

 

[nuba km]

if you agree it is arguable which way of live is better and you yourself mentioned that it is hard to supply enough meat with the third option (also making it fairly expensive and hence harder for lower income families to obtain), what's so wrong with eating animals who live lifes equal to once they would live in the wild.

By arguable I mean that we cannot know since we can not ask the animals about this. Therefore I would rather be on the safe side and go for the option that causes the least amount of suffering. That is number three. And let me make my position clear: I think we should eat the least amount of meat possible. Alternative number three not meeting the market demand for meat that exist today is therefore only a good thing. If you wonder why I think this I wrote a post about it earlier.

I am a vegetarian because I think minimizing the suffering in the world is of moral value (I could also explain the reasoning behind this if someone is interested). That means that everything that has the capacity to suffer has moral relevance. I.e. we should care about how we treat those things. Modern science has shown that it is very likely that a lot of animals (mammals, birds, whales etc.) have this capacity for suffering. We also know that a lot of the animals we eat suffer a lot before they are killed and eaten. Therefore it seems logical to me, in a market economy where buying something incentivizes further or increased production, to not eat meat.

See this is why I ask what is wrong with it, the best answer I get is pretty much what you said of you would like to minimise the suffering in the world. I have yet to find an answer that honestly makes me think there is something wrong with it.

Now time to make my position clear; as long as the animal eaten does not match the intelligence or near intelligence of a human (or endangered/vital part of an eco system), I see no wrong with eating it. It was going to be eaten by something and is just part of an eco-system and has zero chance of ever achieving something great with its live nor will it ever experience leisure or cares if it does/knows it exists and it would be a waste of time, money and effort to give animals leisure. So while I don't try to make you(you for this being used to refer to vegetarians in general) eat meat, I would appreciate if you(same as previous you) don't try to make others stop eating meat. Though if either group starts the debate feel free to take part and not hold back.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Does the lion mourn the fallen gazzelle?

Eating meat is part of the natural diet for humans, you should not have to feel guilty about it is just the food chain after all.

Wait, your moral code is based around the idea that anything a lion is okay with doing is fair game?

You should hear me roar

I was just using the lion as an example as it doesn't feel guilty about eating meat because meat is it's natural diet. Likewise humans how naturally have an omnivore diet don't need to feel guilty about the food they eat.

 

[PrinceFortinbras]

Have you considered the rabbits, gophers and birds that have their nests and bodies torn to shreds by vegetarian-bound soy and corn crop farming?

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97836&page=1#.UBkiN7T9PUs

I have. But I have never said that a vegetarian diet is perfect, nor have any vegetarians I know. Simply that it is better. Even if animals die to ensure that I get my food it is not hard to argue that fewer do.

That article also points out that meat production requieres the repeted slaughter og animals, and that a vast amount of the worlds grain production goes into the meat industry. Both of which are important points.

 

[itsthesheppy]

The thing is, unless you grow and eat your own vegetables and fruits from your own garden, you're not eating as morally as you think. I mean my dad owns a farm that I sometimes help out on. Ever walked behind a thresher? If you have then you know the carnage it leaves in its wake. I hope you don't think field mice are cute because it's a goddamn holocaust.

Sorry to say, the only way to eat 'morally' without killing any advanced vertebrates that you're aware of, you'll need to work on and maintain your own garden from which you get all your food. Forget about breads or anything else that uses ingredients you get from large farms and stuff.

It's not really feasible. You'd have to be independently wealthy or live off the grid. Life feeds on life. It's the way it is. We can certainly be a bit less cruel about it, and I try, when I can, to support that, but there's only so much I can reasonably do.

 

[redisforever]

No. Meat is delicious.
Well, not if the animal is cruelly killed, but besides that, no.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

We're omnivores.

Eat up.

Really though, a vast VAST majority of animals we use specifically for the purpose of consuming wouldn't exist otherwise. They're literally serving the purpose they were created for by being eaten. The packaged meat you see in the grocery store is, obviously, already dead. Not consuming it is just wasteful.

Thinking about it, if anything, you should feel guilty for NOT eating meat.

That poor cow/pig/sheep/etc. died to feed you and you're denying it its one and only reason for existing in this world.

You monster.

 

[solemnwar]

Vegetarian? Cool
Vegan? Cool
Omnivore? Cool
All-Meat Diet? Cool


Seriously, why do people get all up in each other's personal lives over stupid shit? There are much better things to be worrying about right now than whether or not your fellow man is eating the flesh of a once-living creature. Hell, there's the chance that I'll get my ass eaten by a bear or a wolf or something if I'm an idiot and go derping about in the woods like an idiot (I have no survival skills what-so-ever), so dammit I am going to inflict my carniverous ways onto the animal kingdom!


It's like people trying to guilt-trip you for having lots of sex. It's not necessarry, especially if you don't want kids. Even if you do want kids, we have a more efficient method available. We still do it, because it's fun and pleasurable. We eat meat because our bodies crave it and goddamn it tastes good, and it's far easier to get certain essential nutrients and such by eating meat. Healthy veganism and vegetarianism is possible, of course, but it's hard and it can be very expensive.

All-in-all, though, you're not doing anything "evil" or "wrong", so if anyone tries to guilt you about it, tell them to fuck off and mind their own damn business.

And same goes to anyone harrassing vegetarians and vegans. If someone is harrassing you for that lifesytle, tell them to fuck off too!

 

[MHR]

Really though, a vast VAST majority of animals we use specifically for the purpose of consuming wouldn't exist otherwise.

This makes it better? Many would argue this makes it worse. If they weren't ever bred into existing this way, that would be the best outcome. It's the same reason people spay and neuter their pets to prevent suffering - the only difference being accidental and institutional.