Vegetarian: Arguments For and Against Vegetarianism

[Hux]

I have a big, hypocritical problem with animals suffering on my behalf.

On the other hand, I would kill for Sweet & Sour Spareribs.

 

[Hux]

Actually, that's not true. There's an entire niche of animals that survive without killing things (scavenging).

Very few animals are dedicated scavengers or dedicated hunters. They are opportunistic for the most part. There is of course Herbivores - unless you stretch the meaning of killing plants.

 

[beeksc1]

Growing your own food

For me, it's just a personal food preference.
...
I find it hard to justify vegetarianism on any significant moral grounds, as well. Meat eating is part of the heritage of human dietary evolution. As it is for much of the animal world, at large. And, killing an animal for food, in order to survive in a realm where one would otherwise perish, is hardly immoral.

For the most part, I also look at it as a personal food preference. But a person in the Western world usually would eat a chicken or cow, but not eat a cat or a dog.

Where is the fine line?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5s5qGg01nE

Humorous… Cows with Guns satire on YouTube

Personally I think we eat a little too much meat (especially red meat) in our society...
Athon

...
As intimated in my last post, fat also creates fat in humans. There is probably a very good (almost certainly, actually) evolutionary reason for this. Care to guess? Cold? Adaptation? Anyone?

Evolutionarily speaking, humans have eaten meat because it is a great source of highly concentrated protein (amino acids). In the hunting and gathering days of humanity, sometimes a tribe or group would be unable to eat for a couple of days or even a week; that is, the meat the tribal group ate the preceding week proved very beneficial to their survival.

Another point that you might have been hinting at is that meat can be salted and kept for a latter time; vegetables and fruits are without this capability. Salted meat was used as a stored food.

In industrialized lands, these two lines of reasoning no longer hold the water they once did. We have access to fresh produce everyday.

I happen to think that it's entirely possible to eat a perfectly healthy vegetarian diet. I know plenty of people who do.

Perhaps, one day you will curb your meat consumption; but, if not, it is your choice.

...
Factory-scale livestock production causes many problems, both with waste and pollution and also with the consumption of large amounts of plant foods that could be better used... The whole sector could well be improved and done more efficiently.
Still, I don't think the Western world is going to abandon their pork chops and hamburgers any time soon.

Exactly, the problem of eating meat is how it arrives to your plate.

To any meat-eating individuals, when is the last time you snapped a chicken’s neck or slaughtered a cow? To the people raising their own livestock, killing, preparing, and cooking their meat, it seems there is no ethical and/or philosophical dilemma here.

The problem arises when consumers rely on corporations to raise and kill the animals. The conditions are appalling.

Has anyone viewed the documentary film Food Inc.? I have not; but, I know what it covers. It documents the corporate take-over of the local-owned, family farms.

The problem is not eating the meat; the problem arises with regard to how the meat ends up on a person’s plate.

I encourage people to be self-reliant, raise their own livestock, and use some for food, if they so choose; personally, I would not kill animals I raised myself. But, if you do not raise and kill the meat you eat, think about what kind of industry you are supporting.

We cannot really go totally off-the-grid; yet, there are certain steps we can take to become more self-reliant. Growing your own food is a good start.

 

[Walrus32]

Actually, that's not true. There's an entire niche of animals that survive without killing things (scavenging).

How true. I often scavenge the meat counter at the local supermarket.

 

[paximperium]

For the most part, I also look at it as a personal food preference. But a person in the Western world usually would eat a chicken or cow, but not eat a cat or a dog.

Where is the fine line?

You answered your own question. It is a preference. In the East, they eat cats and dogs. In some parts of the world, they eat monkeys.

Exactly, the problem of eating meat is how it arrives to your plate.

To any meat-eating individuals, when is the last time you snapped a chicken’s neck or slaughtered a cow? To the people raising their own livestock, killing, preparing, and cooking their meat, it seems there is no ethical and/or philosophical dilemma here.

Why not? Is squeamishness the only ethical issue being discussed here?
I'd kill a cow and butcher it without any problem.

The problem arises when consumers rely on corporations to raise and kill the animals. The conditions are appalling.

Corporations are irrelevant in this discussion. Having better conditions and killing an animal without suffering what matters. A large family owned battery farm is no more unethical than a corporation.

The problem is not eating the meat; the problem arises with regard to how the meat ends up on a person’s plate.

I encourage people to be self-reliant, raise their own livestock, and use some for food, if they so choose; personally, I would not kill animals I raised myself. But, if you do not raise and kill the meat you eat, think about what kind of industry you are supporting.

No. That is nonsense. Personally raising lifestock is inefficient and Appeals to Emotion is not a valid argument.

We cannot really go totally off-the-grid; yet, there are certain steps we can take to become more self-reliant. Growing your own food is a good start.

No. It isn't. I'll let the professional farmers and butchers do it more efficiently.

 

[dio]

I encourage people to be self-reliant, raise their own livestock[...]

Unrealistic. You're envisaging some sort of idyllic utopia.
This is not how it works. Not with the current levels of human population.
We became specialized in our own fields (we had to). I get paid for my contribution to whatever service my company is providing, and I pay for whatever services I need. I can't teach my kids university level material. I can't cure diseases. I can't grow/butcher cows. I pay other people to do these for me.

 

[Drudgewire]

Exactly, the problem of eating meat is how it arrives to your plate.

To any meat-eating individuals, when is the last time you snapped a chicken’s neck or slaughtered a cow? To the people raising their own livestock, killing, preparing, and cooking their meat, it seems there is no ethical and/or philosophical dilemma here.

Oh goody, the old "you're not getting your hands bloody" mantra. Sorry but to those of us who didn't get too close to the talking Disney characters, this is akin to "you shouldn't have surgery if you aren't willing to cut yourself open."

And yeah, I've spent many a day on my grandfather's farm and hunted everything from duck to deer, so if it's somehow considered hypocritical to not be willing to kill animals in order to eat them you can throw away my paperwork.

 

[beeksc1]

Empower yourself

...
Is squeamishness the only ethical issue being discussed here? I'd kill a cow and butcher it without any problem.

Corporations are irrelevant in this discussion. Having better conditions and killing an animal without suffering what matters. A large family owned battery farm is no more unethical than a corporation.

No. That is nonsense. Personally raising livestock is inefficient and Appeals to Emotion is not a valid argument.
No. It isn't. I'll let the professional farmers and butchers do it more efficiently.

Squeamishness is not the ethical decision being discussed here. You said you would kill a cow. Have you ever done this?

You think ‘Corporations are irrelevant in this discussion.’ I beg to differ. Big business is a significant factor leading to the unconscionable conditions that many livestock are raised. Personally raising livestock is not inefficient; how long did humanity raise they own animals? And your attempted rebuttal to the appeals to emotion is entirely invalid.
It is your choice to rely on ‘professional’ corporations to provide you with what you need to live.

Unrealistic. You're envisaging some sort of idyllic utopia. This is not how it works. Not with the current levels of human population. We became specialized in our own fields (we had to). I get paid for my contribution to whatever service my company is providing, and I pay for whatever services I need. I can't teach my kids university level material. I can't cure diseases. I can't grow/butcher cows. I pay other people to do these for me.

Wow, you sound so disempowered and weak. You do not have to feel so helpless. Try to let go of your conditioning and empower yourself.

Growing your own food is common sense, not an idealistic view of the world. And you are so wrong about ‘I can’t, I can’t…’; you can, you just have been mislead to believe you cannot.

I can teach students at the University level. I can recommend ways in which a person can be healthier. I can grow my own food. And so can you, if you actualize your full potential.

 

[Drudgewire]

You think ‘Corporations are irrelevant in this discussion.’ I beg to differ. Big business is a significant factor leading to the unconscionable conditions that many livestock are raised. Personally raising livestock is not inefficient; how long did humanity raise they own animals?

Oh, so corporations AND CITIES are the problem.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Squeamishness is not the ethical decision being discussed here. You said you would kill a cow. Have you ever done this?

You think ‘Corporations are irrelevant in this discussion.’ I beg to differ. Big business is a significant factor leading to the unconscionable conditions that many livestock are raised. Personally raising livestock is not inefficient; how long did humanity raise they own animals? And your attempted rebuttal to the appeals to emotion is entirely invalid.
It is your choice to rely on ‘professional’ corporations to provide you with what you need to live.



Wow, you sound so disempowered and weak. You do not have to feel so helpless. Try to let go of your conditioning and empower yourself.

Growing your own food is common sense, not an idealistic view of the world. And you are so wrong about ‘I can’t, I can’t…’; you can, you just have been mislead to believe you cannot.

I can teach students at the University level. I can recommend ways in which a person can be healthier. I can grow my own food. And so can you, if you actualize your full potential.

I would prefer paximperium to reduce the fracture in my broken arm than do it myself, regardless of how actualized my full potential is. I can't build a car as easily as I can buy one nor can I make a watch or a laptop. Of course we specialize and depend on others for their specialties. That's the way functional, successful societies have evolved.

Sometimes I do self diagnose and treat when it's something I feel confident in treating, like a headache. I can change the battery in my watch and rotate the tires on my car. I have lived on a farm and butchered animals. For every individual or family to raise their own livestock for personal comsumption is inefficient. Think of the residents of a large apartment complex trying to do that!

So, is your OP about vegetarianism vs. omnivorism or is it about utopian societies?

 

[PixyMisa]

Actually, that's not true. There's an entire niche of animals that survive without killing things (scavenging).

Also many parasites.

 

[dio]

I can teach students at the University level.

How many disciplines?

I can recommend ways in which a person can be healthier.

I think I'll still pay trained certified professionals for any health issues, thank you.

I can grow my own food.

I have no doubt you can. But you see, for some of us that activity is not really appealing. I'll stick with paying other people to do the dirty/smelly jobs for me.

 

[Red3]

Unrealistic. You're envisaging some sort of idyllic utopia.
This is not how it works. Not with the current levels of human population.
We became specialized in our own fields (we had to). I get paid for my contribution to whatever service my company is providing, and I pay for whatever services I need. I can't teach my kids university level material. I can't cure diseases. I can't grow/butcher cows. I pay other people to do these for me.

Exactly. And where's the land to do it? As you said, at the current population rate this is nothing more than idealism. Although, making people grow and breed their own food might solve the population problem, because most would starve to death trying!

I tried vegetarianism for a while and it didn't suit me or seem logical really when I thought about it. The argument shouldn't be no meat vs meat, but too much meat vs some meat. The leguminati (heehee, i just though of that) have hijacked the issue of unbalanced diets and used it for their own ends. Too much meat is the issue, not meat itself. Their is a lot of shoddy/dishonest/downright woo information surrounding vegetarianism & veganism.

 

[beeksc1]

Of course we specialize and depend on others for their specialties. That's the way functional, successful societies have evolved.

For every individual or family to raise their own livestock for personal comsumption is inefficient. Think of the residents of a large apartment complex trying to do that!

So, is your OP about vegetarianism vs. omnivorism or is it about utopian societies?

I agree, we live in a co-dependent society; but, to say it is inefficient to raise and/or grow our own food is just a result of both intense indoctrination and classical conditioning. Just because we have to work forty hours a week to live how we want to live does not mean it is inefficient to become self (and communally) reliant. It might be much work to grow fruits, vegetables, and mushrooms; but, when we do not have to work so much outside of the home, it will not seem like so much work.

How many disciplines?

In the fields I am specialized in.

I think I'll still pay trained certified professionals for any health issues, thank you.

Not a bad idea.

I have no doubt you can. But you see, for some of us that activity is not really appealing. I'll stick with paying other people to do the dirty/smelly jobs for me.

Okay. But your perspective just sounds like one of lifelong conditioning.

The argument shouldn't be no meat vs meat, but too much meat vs some meat. The leguminati (heehee, i just though of that) have hijacked the issue of unbalanced diets and used it for their own ends. Too much meat is the issue, not meat itself.

As you might be on to something, can you please explain what you mean by the issue has been hijacked?

Regarding the too much meat and conscious portions of meat, I do not know if that is true; but, it seems reasonable.

 

[Red3]

As you might be on to something, can you please explain what you mean by the issue has been hijacked?

Regarding the too much meat and conscious portions of meat, I do not know if that is true; but, it seems reasonable.

I mean by hijacking that some vegetarian groups skew the argument to look like meat itself causes health problems when in actual fact it's people's lack of concern for their own well being that's the problem. People are greedy and the pro animal groups are taking responsibility away from the individual and making a scapegoat out of a product to suit their own personal agenda.

 

[TimCallahan]

For about a decade, I was an ovo-lacto-vegetarian. I based my diet on Frances Morre Lappe's Diet For a Small Planet. Eggs, it turns out, have a ratio of the eight essential amino acids most compatible with human chemistry. Dairy products are a close second, followed by various meats. The vegetarianism espoused in Diet For a Small Planet involved balancing grains and legumes, which, when combined in a single meal, give the necessary balance of essential amino acids.

Whie I am no longer an ovo-lacto-vegetarian, i do still rely on a mix of protein sources. For example, I frequently make burritos, using brown rice, refried beans and cheese as the main protien sources. Sometimes I add chicken.

I can't say I see anything wrong with eating an animal that humans have bred, raised, fed and potected. Ethically, I feel farm animals should be well treated and, if butchered, given a quick, painless death. For all sorts of environmental and health concerns, we ought to consider reducing our meat intake.

All that said, I have to point out that, when it comes to smug self-righteousness, snotty vegans are hard to beat. Vegans are complete vegetarians - no dairy of eggs allowed. Of course, many are not snotty. However, those who are tempt me into trying "long pig."

One thing we might want to consider is the posibility that, through genetic engineering, we might eventually be able to grow the equvalent of beef as mirobial colonies in a vat. That would circumvent th ethics problem of killing a sentient animal.

 

[dio]

Okay. But your perspective just sounds like one of lifelong conditioning.

Lifelong conditioning to dislike hard physical labor* and excrement smell?

Sounds more like evolutionary conditioning to me.


*- I must confess I have no idea how much physical labor is involved in food production these days. In large farms it must be mainly mechanized. In "self-reliant" operations however it must be considerable.

 

[beeksc1]

Lifelong conditioning to dislike hard physical labor* and excrement smell?
Sounds more like evolutionary conditioning to me.

Okay. I will just say thank goodness everyone does not share your perspective.

I mean by hijacking that some vegetarian groups skew the argument to look like meat itself causes health problems when in actual fact it's people's lack of concern for their own well being that's the problem. People are greedy and the pro animal groups are taking responsibility away from the individual and making a scapegoat out of a product to suit their own personal agenda.

Thank you for your constructive input. In most ways, I agree with where you are coming from. I am all for personal responsibility; nonetheless, the effects produced by corporations and their assembly-line production of farm animals is another big problem.

For all sorts of environmental and health concerns, we ought to consider reducing our meat intake.

 

[six7s]

How do you arrive at the conclusion that ethical reasons for vegetarianism constitute an "argument from popularity"?

By acknowledging that 'ethics' is synonymous with 'group think'

 

[Cavemonster]

beeksc1,

I live in a city. It is illegal to keep chickens here, but even if it wasn't, space is fairly expensive and hard to come by.

In addition to that, I love the work I do. I like gardening, but I'd rather spend my time building my career. You say that people who grow their own food can then work less, but most jobs don't have that kind of flexibility. The hours you work are the hours you work to keep the job. And you can't suggest that it would be at all easy to shop around for a flexible job doing what you love, not in this market.

We do grow a little of the food we eat, but for most people who have anything invested in the work they do, anything more than a little veggy gardening isn't at all realistic.

Technically, I could do everything from scratch and weave my own clothes, but that would mean displacing all the things I do now that are so important to me. We are lucky to live in a society with that kind of choice, and yes, someone who wants to can very well live to a high degree of self sufficiency, but that's a full-time job and thensome.