Why I think eating Meat is A-ok

[Vault101]

lol You got any idea how not vaguely even pretending to be logical the whole "It's nature" arguement is? Have you seen how wild hominids behave? Do you behave the same? If we have the ability to choose not to go with our "Nature", and natural animals are dicks, then maybe the hole in your non arguement is that, unlike animals, you get a choice and still act like a dick?

BTW this is all from an omnivore, I'm just okay with knowing I lack the ability at present to alter my diet. I know what I'm doing isn't optimal and I cope. The urge to prove your actoins right and good has outstripped your ability to reason methinks...

well I have also hated the "its nature" argument in raltion to alot of other unlrelated stuff (gayness for one)

all Im saying is if we are humane as possible about it, I see no reason why its wrong to eat animals bred for the purpose of being eaten

 

[Vault101]

Im just saying that if animals can eat animimals..then we should be ablw too as well

My point is that you cant apply the same rules we use for humans to animals

make your mind up

1. we require protein and the nutrients found in meat, we have teeth for it and are able to digest it, we LOVE meat, so whats wrong with eating it?

2. a wolf goes out and kills a baby deer, thats nature, thats how it must work

a woman goes out and kills a little girl, that woman is a psychopath and a threat to society

 

[Jandau]

I've been thinking about this quite a bit over the past few years and have come to the following conclusions:

1. Eating meat is perfectly fine. Our bodies are set up to accomodate eating meat and expect nutrients that are most commonly found in meat. People have been eating meant since the dawn of time and other creatures are happily eating meat.

2. People in western countries eat too much meat, often with meat being a part of almost every meal. We don't need to eat as much meat and eating too much meat can have negative effects on our health. Sure, meat brings some needed nutrients (which CAN be found elsewhere, but it's a hassle), but we don't need to binge on it. Having meat be a part of one meal a day is more than enough. Personally, I eat meat 2-3 times a week and I try to make it fish if I can.

3. If we're going to eat meat, we should treat animals that provide it with a modicum of respect and provide them with decent accomodation for their short stay on this planet. No need to be dicks to creatures who die so we can live. Also, this eliminates the whole "cruelty to animals" argument, or at least most of it.

4. We'll have to eat less meat. Producing meat is more resource intensive than producing plat-based food. It's less efficient, requires much more ground area, etc. As we are starting to run low on space on the planet, meat will simply be too inefficient to produce, especially on the level that some people are accustomed to (see 2.). Meat will still be available, but it will be less readily available and more expensive.

 

[Grey Walker]

If not eating meat made us healthier, then we wouldn't have evolved canines.

We are capable of both compassion and cruelty. Many animals are not capable of either, save for direct human interference.

Protein can come from many sources, but specific amino acids (which make proteins) can not.

Hormones in meats are essential for proper human development.

A high starch diet is worse than a high fat diet. (I.e: Meat is healthier than grain)

I am against killing dogs, cats, and horses (etc.) for food because they were not born or bred for food. If they were, then alright.

Cruelty towards raising an animal for slaughter is wrong. Cruelty in killing is wrong. Raise the animal in relative comfort (more than they'd have in the wild, having lived on a farm for a good part of my life I can say this was the case there) and kill it quickly.

If we didn't raise animals for slaughter, then we'd have to hunt them in the wild, which I think would be much more cruel than domestic raising. Not to mention we'd drive them to extinction.

I am going to prioritize my health and well being over the life of an animal, no matter how cute it is.

If anyone wants to be vegetarian or vegan, go nuts. I can't stop you, nor would I waste my time trying to.

That being said, you do not gain any moral standing above me because you refuse to eat meat.

 

[Joshimodo]

The fact we are omnivores cleared that up a while back, but good post anyway.

 

[Zulnam]

Why do you care what other people think about your meat-eating hobbies? I mean honestly, did we really reach that point in time when we can say "Well, world peace is going on, now that's a *****; cut off our topics by 50%... Let's see... Cancer, cured... Aids, ok...".

I like eating meat, I eat meat, and I don't feel any need to justify this. I don't even feel the need to explain it. I consider it biologically normal to eat meat. If other people want to be vegetarians, good. More meat for me.

 

[Cracker3011]

That, and the fact that meat-eating is in our genetic makeup. If we weren't meant to eat animals, then why were our digestive systems equipped for it?

 

[DracoSuave]

The survival of many species currently rests in the hands of carnivorous people. If people stopped eating meat, what do you think happens to farm animals?

Protip: They die at the farm or they die in the wild.


Morality on the matter is grey when it means potential extinctions.

 

[fundayz]

Yeah, its a part of nature. We are carnivores, we are top of the food chain, it is to be expected we eat meat. Its simply one of the easiest ways to sustain ourselves. Its not like Vegans are any better, because they too sustain themselves at the expense of another life. The only difference is that the life they snuff out to survive doesnt have a face and cant scream in pain.

It might be easy to grow meat but it is one of the most wasteful, expensive and polluting way to produce food. Furthermore, there's no way you can't appreciate the difference between killing a plant that does not feel pain(or even think) and killing animals that can feel pain.

Also on the nature point, you must remember that many of these animals simply would not exist if not for them being purposely born into the world for no other reason than consumption. Would the cattle population be almost as high as the human population (estimates 1.7 billion) in nature and not being protected by humans?

The issue with meat production/consumption is not preserving cattle population, it's about the energy cost of growing those cattle, the pollution it creates and the ethics behind killing concious animals for food.

Personally, I think that it's terrible that those animals have to suffer but unfortunately they happen to be some of the tastiest meats for humans; I love meat and would never give it up. It is normal in nature for things to suffer and so I don't see the purpose of avoiding it when it comes to our own food sources.

What I DO think needs to be done is to obtain sustainable growing practices and humane treatment of livestock. Animals are not human, but they are living, concious creatures just like us and should therefore have some rights.

 

[NOHC]

If we weren't supposed to eat the animals, they wouldn't be made out of meat.

 

[ThePinkAcidSmurf]

Snip

I'd just want to say thank you Vault101 for bringing an interesting subject to my attention.

 

[Liam Barden]

Yeah, its a part of nature. We are carnivores, we are top of the food chain, it is to be expected we eat meat. Its simply one of the easiest ways to sustain ourselves. Its not like Vegans are any better, because they too sustain themselves at the expense of another life. The only difference is that the life they snuff out to survive doesnt have a face and cant scream in pain.

The only difference is that the life they snuff out to survive doesnt have a face and cant scream in pain.

scream in pain.

Maybe this is just me, but that seems to be a FREAKIN HUGE difference. How on earth are we meant to decide what is moral, if not by the harm it causes. Harvesting plants doesnt cause any harm or suffering whatsoever, whereas the current factory-farming industrial complex we have puts tens of billions of sentient beings through unimaginable torture every single year. These creatures may not be as inteliigent as humans, but we have no reason to believe they dont feel just as much pain.

And just because our ancestors do something does not mean that we are justified in continuing that practice. Thats called an appeal to tradition, or the naturalistic fallacy, and Im sure you would recognise it as a fallacy if we were talking about any other issue.
Slavery? Always done that, keep it going
Dog fighting? Its a tradition. Its expected that we would continue to do it.
Sweatshops? Dont worry, we were born with the most money. Its only natural that we exploit the foreigners.
Womens rights? Dont be silly. Men are at the top of society, we own them. Its only natural.

Im not trying to imply you agree with any of that, but rather the reasons why these arguments are lacking is the same reason why your argument lacks merit.
You are (perhaps unintentionally) justifying torture and abuse on the basis of tradition.

 

[Cracker3011]

That, and the fact that meat-eating is in our genetic makeup. If we weren't meant to eat animals, then why were our digestive systems equipped for it?

I dunno, why were you equipped for murder with those devious opposable thumbs? Because it might be nessicary? Having options and being adaptable is what got us where we are, not some pointlessly bizarre determanistic recursive logic, that's what got Sarah Palin a tilt at the white house.

HOW DID YOU KNOW I MURDERED-*Ahem*

I'm hardly saying everyone MUST eat meat because they can, I'm merely pointing out, as omnivores, we can.

 

[PontiusTM]

dont need too, Ive seen it all in real life,

point taken. Still my question remains unanswered: why then don't eat cats, dogs or hamsters. As stated earlier the "long history together"-argument is not taken for several reasons given in the specific post.

 

[guntotingtomcat]

You have stumbled across an interesting point.

How are we inherently unnatural?
How come animals killing and eating is different?

I can imagine one response could be, because we don't have to. A wolf can't substitute it's meat diet for supplements, like we can. Vegans get on all right, after all, and are even pretty healthy, compared to the average person.

I would argue that the entire concept of nature is without any substance whatsoever.

And peta need to go ahead and die.

 

[Moeez]

"So, somewhere in the world right now a fuzzy little hatchling is crammed into a Pelican's stomach, anguishing through a gruesome, protracted death. Is there any fate more inhuman than slowly suffocating in a putrid, acidic sack of rotting fish? Smothering in a living bag of vomit while greasy acid scalds your skin, searing its way into every crack and orifice?"

Damn, as brutal as being digested alive by one of those long ass snakes.

Most of us don't eat carnivores as meat, that's strictly forbidden in religions. I would never eat meat that was tortured in battery farms, since I'm a Muslim most of the animals are not killed in that way. But the whole Islamic slaughtering versus stun and battery farm pain debate is a completely different issue, so I won't get into that.