Sure, animals are also killed in during slaughter, but anyone would have to admit that slaughtering an animal and murdering humans are two completely different things.
Really, it’s that simple.
Read this.
I pity your future cats.
MrVisible-
You asked “Would you prefer to be born, live a short life, then die, having served a purpose, or never have been born at all?”
Wow. That’s a whole new thread waiting to happen. But, it did bring me back to the “Would you take the red pill or the blue pill” theme, from The Martix.
That being said, what were people’s reactions to the “humans are not born, but grown” aspect of the Matrix? It’s essentially the exact same thing that’s happening now, with the meat industry.
I can only hope that “the one” cow awakens sooner than later and starts kickin’ ass . . .
Well, I don’t tend to think about the enviromental impact of eating meat, because I am frankly more concerned about an activity I do far more often than eating - using electricity. I am fortunate enough to live near all the major power plants for my state, and I have seen firsthand the emmissions they make, the massive holes in the ground caused by open cut mining the brown coal to make the electricity with, and despite all that I’m not prepared to give up using electricity. I guess if I thought about it, I would come to a similar conclusion about eating meat. I’m going to horrify a lot of people, but it must be said - I really don’t care about most enviromental issues. Again, I’m a product of my upbringing, having been raised in a region that depends on the employment created by open cut mining to generate electricity and harvesting trees to produce paper. Enviromentalists, or “Greenies” are generally not well liked in this area.
Yum. (ok, occasionally “blecch,” but generally the former)
I don’t bother justifying it - in my mind, there’s no wrong here.
If you’re asking whether I afford the same level of importance to animals as I do to people - no, I don’t. I don’t afford all animals the same level of importance. That doesn’t mean they are detached from my ethics and morals. No, I don’t feel guilty, so I see no reason to actively seek alternatives. Of course, I realize that I could eat an entirely vegan diet, I simply have no desire to do that.
Sparculees -
To find some “members of our own species that have severely trespassed the moral boundaries that we have collectively adopted,” you need look no further than the meat industry, which consistently targets children with advertising of happy cows on farms, and shows hamburgers growing on trees, all the while handing out little plastic toys that assure these children will be lifelong customers. These lifelong customers are therefore paying for a product that has little to no benefit to the human body (as most scientists agree,) and promotes the destruction of the environment.
So, I would not distance the issues as much as you’d like to.
Drastic -
You pity my future cats, but not the cow that used to be your lunch? I don’t get it.
As for the difference between killing plants and killing animals, which I have failed to address thus far, the answer is fairly obvious.
As many have already posted, we have to eat. It’s a fact that we can’t live without doing so. So, we might as well do it in such a fashion that it causes as little pain and cruelty as possible, and also in a way that has the least negative effects on the earth.
Eating plants, therefore, is a much more acceptable solution. They don’t have central nervous systems, they don’t feel pain as you or I or a pig would. Many trees and plants offer sustainable food sources that don’t actually kill the plant, such as fruits, berries, nuts, etc.
I’m sure everyone took here took biology in high school, or college. Remember? The fetal pig had a brain, and a spine, and a face fairly similar to yours. The plants that were growing in the back of the classroom didn’t. There’s an abvious difference.
Above and beyond the pain/death issue. Raising animals for human consumption produces much, much more waste, and uses exponantially more resources.
That’s how I justify my “killing of plants” to eat. It’s the most responsible way than I can come up with, and mathematically, it just adds up better.
Why does this make you squeamish?
Me too. Anyone who has spent more than a day with a cat knows that they eat meat, and that’s all there is to it. Ignorantly risking your cat’s health so that you can impose your moralistic standards on an innocent animal is far crueler than killing it for meat. Any cat made to eat vegetarian will effectively be staving to death–that’s why it deserves more pity than your “poor” cows. Get it?
Maybe you should do some research on “awareness” before you claim that a cow can feel emotions and fear as we do.
Lemur866 -
You wrote “I would guess that you have an agenda here. You wish more people shared your opinion about the moral value of non-human organisms.”
Not entirely. I want to learn how others, who do not share my perspective, fit the killing of animals into their own moral structure. I’m simply asking people to explain to me why it is that they feel it’s okay to kill and eat animals, when there’s really no actual need to do so. In fact, there are many, many scientific studies that come to the conclusion that the world would be much better off if people began to shy away from eating meat.
So I guess my question is how people can justfy not doing something that has more or less been generally accepted as a good idea, and more or less proven to be advantageous for both their health and the environment.
Again, the “because our anscestors did it” is not a viable reason. Plus that into any number of other moral/ethical situations, and you can see that it quickly falls apart.
Baron -
I’ve done the research, and it all points in the same direction.
As far as what you said:
“Ignorantly risking your cat’s health so that you can impose your moralistic standards on an innocent animal is far crueler than killing it for meat. Any cat made to eat vegetarian will effectively be staving to death–that’s why it deserves more pity than your “poor” cows. Get it?”
Do your own research, visit a few slaughterhouses, and then get back to me. We’ll see who’s “got it” then.
dalmuti, do you consider humans to be animals or not?
Sua
Excuse me once again Mr/s. Dalmuti??? You didn’t read my post right… read again. Somewhere in there I opted to use the words ‘collectively adopted’. Found it? Good! As would be apparent from the ratio omnivores to vegetarians in Western society we have NOT collectively adopted a moral standpoint that prohibits meat eating, we don’t even frown upon it. Actually, our culture encourages it as part of a healthy diet.
All that being said, I just realized how futile this is, It’s been far too many decades since I left high school and last had this debate. I forgot, Vegetarianism is a religion. I have no business to convert those of faith, it is everyone’s prerogative to hold true and dear their beliefs and when this gives comfort and fills life with meaning and purpose it is a good thing. Therefore I say only; great_dalmuti, go forth and vegeterianate if this makes you happy. Personally I’ll go have a steak now.
And thus observing status quo, Sparculees retires from this debate
I realize you’re trying (unsuccessfully) to be facetious, but this is just one more sign of a rather disturbing subtext in your posts: humans are casually evil and destructive and had better wake up and adopt a moral code you find comfortable before they get the destruction they so richly deserve.
If you wanted a serious debate, you could introduce arguments that humans are eating too much meat, that in order to meet this increased demand, rain forests are being clobbered in favour of pastures. I’d even side with you. But your insistance on the purely arbitrary moral point that eating meat is wrong is ridiculous, and is justly being ridiculed by the posters to this thread. Your argument isn’t helped by implying we are a bunch of children, eating meat unquestioningly because that’s what mommy and daddy and big corporations told us to do:
“Most” scientists are likely to conclude that westerners eat more meat than they should. I don’t know of any consensus claiming that meat has no benefit at all. If that’s an example of the factual basis of your argument, you’ve already failed the criteria for a solid debate and have moved into “witnessing”, trying to convert readers to your belief system purely on faith. Fortunately, we’re a pretty skeptical bunch with a low tolerance for hogwash.
Meantime, if you do get a cat, I look forward to the day it brings you a dead pigeon as a “gift.” I hope you’ll show proper appreciation for your cat’s moral beliefs.
And it will happen, too–the cat will think it’s feeding its poor starving owner.
Which direction? The fact that denying a cat meat is effectively starving it? The fact that cats will seek out meat if denied it?
I’ve seen slaughterhouses. I’ve even seen Faces of Death a few times. 
I’d rather get my head cut off or even get cut up alive than starve to death.
And if “all living things” deserve live, then what differentiates animals from soybeans, or bamboo, or bacteria? All living things are made of cells. If you eat a salad, you are eating cells. If you eat a steak, you are eating cells. Are cells from vegetables somehow inferior or superior?(Please be prepared to cite your source) If all living things regardless of a human’s perceived worth deserve to live, then you are as much a murder as the guy eating a steak.
…In other words, you’re both eating to gain sustenance, not make a political statement. Go be vegetarian all you want–just KEEP IT TO YOUR FREAKING SELF and stop asking other people to be like you. You sound suspiciously like someone looking for reassurance that they are right.
Bryan, thank you for deciphering the real message of the OP.
Bryan Ekers -
That would have been a more productive thread to start, and I take comfort in the fact at least one person would have agreed with me.
I do belive that humans are casually evil, and destructive. I don’t really know how you would refute that.
I don’t want people to adhere to anything, mcuh less a moral code, if they don’t feel comfortable with it. I’m not trying to make a beliver out of anyone. I’m simply attempting to show people that there is, in face, a direct connection between each and every burger they eat, and many, many side effects that they might not be aware of.
I would not argue that it’s wrong to eat meat, and I don’t belive I’ve ever actually wrote that. I do think it’s wrong for people to make the decision to eat meat, without fully thinking about and understanding the consequences of their actions. That’s not too much to ask. And my original post reflected that very question. I asked what people felt, when they ate animal flesh, and if they thought it was “wrong” or not.
No, my insistance that people do not think about these issues enough, and merely (and literally) eat what is fed to them, was probably not very tactful. But, there weren’t many posts which led me to believe that people were actually thinking about the issue at hand thoroughly.
Yes, people here are a skeptical bunch, but there hasn’t been very much actual “debate” taking place. It seems that many of the dopers here feel that debate is merely ignoring questions that people post, and simply go off on a rant. Sad.
But, to my own fault, I didn’t start the post off as a debate. I asked a question, which I feel didn’t get answered very suffienctly. So, if anyone else is still up for it, I’m simply asking people to explain to me why it is that they feel it’s okay to kill and eat animals, when there’s really no actual need to do so. (In fact, there are many, many scientific studies that come to the conclusion that the world would be much better off if people began to shy away from eating meat.)
I’m always amazed at how often this Heilein quote is right on the money…
Baron -
You really don’t know what the physiological differences between a plant and an animal are? You’re taking your role as “devil’s advocate” a little too far.
It’s amazing how guilty you sound. I think you’re just a vegan in disguise.
Please show me where you deduced that “The fact that denying a cat meat is effectively starving it.” It’s easy to supplement the missing vitamins with . . .well, vitamin supplements. So, if giving my fictional prospective cat vitamins to make up for a lack of meat in its diet is “forced starvation,” should each and every parent in the United States that’s giving their kids Flinstone’s Chewable Vitamins be hunted down and convicted for starving their children, becasue they’re not serving enough green leafy vegetables for the kids to get 100% RDA of all of the different vitamins? C’mon. Think about it.
Just because you didn’t like the answers doesn’t mean they’ve not been answered “sufficiently”. You asked three questions. At least four people directly responded to your three questions, and several others responded to all or part of them.
You didn’t like the answers. Well, life is suffering.
Sua
MrVisible-
“Nothing will benefit human health and the chances of survival for life on earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.”
-Albert Einstein
Sua -
Yes. I do consider humans to be animals. Sorry for not responding to your post earlier. What does that the question of whether or not humans are animals have to do with this “debate?”