I mean, ovo-lacto, lacto, ovo, or piscetarian–or a combination thereof?
Declaring a distaste for meat automatically opens one up for condescension. Would omnivores attack with the same fervor if Blonde didn’t like to eat lima beans? Would they insist that she defend the choice to go anti-lima? Would all the Pro-Limas go on the offensive and insist that people who don’t wish to eat lima beans be corrected and de-programmed?
The OP asked if the inhumane practices shown in a PETA video were legitimate. No experts have responded yet, and each person has reacted based on personal taste and emotion, backed up by a few cites. If a vegetarian makes a choice based on emotion, then expressing their feelings is necessary in order to explain their preference. Surely it is not a surprise that there are people who base lifestyle decisions on emotions as well as research.
It shouldn’t offend an omnivore that some choose to avoid meat anymore than it offends a vegetarian that some omnivores avoid vegetables. Vegetarians don’t mind at all if you feel that kale tastes unpleasant or should be raised for ornament instead of food.
No one here would be so coarse as to attack a person of the Jewish faith for avoiding pork-The protective shield of religion is not the only legitimate justification for avoiding meat. The original issue here has been lost in a battle of wills-
Which of these are true statements?
- The meat packing industry is cruelty free.
- The meat packing industry is aware of and occasionally implements a more humane way of raising and slaughtering livestock.
- It is possible to research which commercial producers of meat use more humane methods, and which producers cut corners in order to save money and consequently cause more harm than good to livestock.
- It is possible for some omnivores to purchase meat from small farms or hunt skillfully in order to provide meat for themselves and their families.
- Convenience and low cost does not guarantee the safety of meat or humane conditions for livestock.
Um, Psalex, I do believe that people would indeed have trouble with Blonde if she disliked lima beans to the point that she called anyone who ate them:
Rapists
Ravagers
Smiters
Ravenous
Ruiners of the environment
Pet-killers
And the majority of these posts are not attacking Blonde or any vegetarians. In fact, the main person doing the attacking (including a fair amount of name-calling and mudslinging) is Blonde.
Most of the omnivores here are clearly on the defensive because Blonde first went on the offensive.
2 through 5.
My compliments on an excellent post, Psalex; you have stated your points in a much less emotional manner than this Irish Blonde could ever do.
skeptic_ev: choose a cause you feel very strongly about. Cage yourself in a room with others that disagree.
I stand by everything I’ve posted.
Blonde: My belief system is one that relegates me to minority status. I am in a world full of people who disagree, sometimes vehemently, sometimes with malice. I clearly see why the way I believe is the right way to believe based on logic and reason; yet, the vast majority of people do not agree with me.
Hence, I understand your frustration. I not only sympathize, but I empathize. I’m sure sometimes you want to just shake some sense into the people around you. But if you really want people to seriously consider becoming vegetarians, if that is truly your goal, then alienating them is counterproductive.
Hmm … IMHO still shows you as the last poster, Blonde. I’m posting this so that you will be able to see that I’ve responded.
Very interesting. Thanks for contributing that.
I’m a vegetarian, but have kept out of this thread up until now.
But there are a few things that bug me.
First, I understand that my diet (ovo-lacto) still does cause some animal death. I think we all use products that cause animal death. I use 35 mm film—that’s made from gelatin—that’s animal death!
I don’t claim that I am vegetarian soley for moral or “because of the animals” reasons, but I do prefer to not eat large chunks of their flesh. But hey—that’s just me. I don’t preach to anyone else because, simply put, it’s obnoxious.
I don’t really make many statements about my personal or moral feelings about my vegetarianism. It’s my business. I don’t make it anyone else’s. But I am continually amazed at how often others feel the need to make my diet their business. It really bugs them, even though I do nothing more than say, “No thanks” to the hot dogs.
I also notice that there’s a “disconnect” with people who are so sensitive about “the poor little animals” and yet see no problem with eating them. For instance, in that dreadful Paris Hilton “reality” show, “The Simple Life,” the grandma on the farm asked the two girls to help her (grandma) pluck some chickens for dinner. Paris and Nicole, the two Delicate Flowers from Beverly Hills, acted quite sensitive and swoony at the idea of dealing with these dead chickens. The very thought! How dare anyone suggest that these two princesses pluck chickens! And yet, there they were, scarfing down the chicken at the dinner table.
This attitude irritated me. I didn’t feel offended or the least bit irritated with grandma. She killed the chickens, she plucked them, and by damn, she was gonna eat them. I may personally never want to do that myself, but I respected grandma for being consistent. Paris and Nicole (and I suspect many others) are not. They want to eat dead animals, but they consider it beneath them, and somehow deeply offensive to have to “touch the dead animals.” Excuse me?!?! You’re touching them when you eat them, you ninnies!
I’ve encountered many a person who acts so “sensitive” about their love for animals, but they have a disconnect when it comes to eating them. I don’t understand this. I also don’t understand the difference between pets and food. Pets are food, depending on what country and what culture you live in. Cats and dogs are good eatin’ in certain countries. Hell, people are food, and no doubt a good source of protein too.
At least grandma was pragmatic. I can respect that. I don’t respect this disconnect I see amongst so many others.
I can think of three explanations: 1) you are conveying an attitude of moral superiority nonverbally 2) they are reacting to previous experience with other people 3) they feel guilty about eating meat and are lashing out at you. No way to tell which one it is, but unless it’s #1, it ain’t your problem. Have some Tofurkey and tell’em to get bent.
Most people don’t eat animals, they eat meat. Yeah, I know, but that’s how our brains work. Our hearts don’t bleed for all the creatures, just the ones we know. That’s why the lobster tank freaks us out.
Pets are not food, they’re pets. They are animals we’ve bonded with. If I keep a cow in my backyard, name him Clyde and take him for walks, he’s a pet. I don’t have to have the same relationship with every cow on the freakin’ planet. Just Clyde. People in other cultures eat dogs and cats, I get that. But they’re not pets. They’re livestock.
Well, it’s inconsistent. Back in the good ol’ days, people had to kill their food. Would you?
If you were asked by grandma to help her pluck the chickens, would you? What if she said that if you didn’t help prepare the food, you wouldn’t get to eat it? Would you consider that “fair,” or would you think that grandma was a big ol’ meanie for forcing you to (shudder) “touch the dead animals”?
They’re all animals, and you think it’s okay to eat animals. Oh wait—except for the ones that you’ve “bonded” with.
Sorry, but as far as I can see there’s still a disconnect there.
sadnil, , your profile indicates that you live in Ohio. If you and Mrs. Sadnil have week-ends off, perhaps you could take a trip to the country. (Or contact the family back in Wisconsin- lots of farmland there). In my area it is possible to purchase safe, fresh meat from small family farms. Most farmers who sell beef to individuals will ask you to meet them at the slaughterhouse, as it is illegal for a small farmer to sell packaged meat to individuals. (Not going to get into the politics here, but big industry and legislature has passed hundreds of arbitrary laws that restrict small farms from profiting from the sale of meat; no surprise the fat cats want all the money for themselves) Slaughterhouses are inspected routinely by the state health department and are strictly regulated as to cleanliness, the health of the animals, and methods of kill and butcher.
You may not want to go inside, but if you do, you will find pristine conditions and a quick and easy killing and butchering process. The livestock is not kept overlong in pens, but instead an appointment is made, the farmer delivers the animal, it is unloaded directly into a chute and killed within minutes. Most butchers will carve the animal into precisely the same cuts you can buy pre-packaged at the grocery store: filets, hamburger, roasts, etc. Your meat will be handed to you wrapped in butcher paper or vacuum-sealed. The cost of half a calf is usually between $150 and $200.00 in my area (TN,VA,NC border) and butchering is usually around $50.00 or $75.00. (No charge for the kill, the farmer pays for this cost) Half of a calf butchered will fill a 12 cubic foot chest freezer, and will feed one person for nearly a year.
I am not sure what your yearly grocery bill is for meat, but if you purchase 2 pounds of hamburger, a small roast, and 2 New York strips the cost (according to today’s grocery store sale papers) is approximately $20.00. (yearly cost: $1,040- your freezer would be paid for in no time)
Ya know, if someone goes out to dinner with me and declines to order meat cuz he/she is a vegetarian, that’s fine with me. I got no problem with people eating whatever they want to eat. (The best way of eating for me isn’t Standard American Diet either.)
But if this hypothetical dinner guest starts up on why vegetarianism is a morally superior choice, then we’re going to Have A Discussion. I think that’s what’s going on here.
And don’t even start about PETA…
Maybe it’s not technically wrong to eat your pets, yosimitebabe, but because of the way the human mind generally works, I would be very concerned about the mental state of someone who roasted his cat (or other companion animal) for dinner.
Both sides present nice arguments.
I have been a vegetarian for the last 4-5 months. I do see evolutionary evidence that it is natural for me to eat meat, such as my teeth (as mentioned on the first page), but the part that is keeping me a vegetarian is the fact that animals feel pain just as we do, and they are capable of suffering, just as we are.
Another important point that I would like to mention is that the most valuable thing an individual human being has is a future. Due to a lack of self-awareness I have not yet deduced if this is valuable to animals as well, but a brief think-it-over tells me that it does indeed apply to them.
I understand that great lengths have been gone to in order to eliminate the suffering and pain of bred-to-be-eaten animals, but this, along with nearly all of the comments in this post, disregards the fact that they were in the first place, bred to be eaten. To me this is something in the order of not natural. You can of course argue that even in the time of Homer’s Iliad and definitively before that man has been breeding ‘livestock’, and you can also argue that we do the same thing to vegetables. My counterarguments would be that vegetables do not feel pain, and that Achilles personally slit the throat of any meat that he ate.
It should be said though, against my logic, that vegetables have a future as well =) (Unless we adopt Einstein’s fun idealism that time does not exist, in which case future is irrelevant 
)
In my teenage years I killed, gutted, ate, and sometimes skinned elk, deer, pheasant, quail, goose, and rattlesnake. Today though, I see a difference in the act of me killing and eating something that grew naturally as in, - in nature -, and the meat industry manually inducing cows, chickens, and pigs to grow and reproduce faster than they normally would, and then submitting them to the equivalency of a fake existence of seeming pleasure and then death by bolt-through-the-skull. It seems to me to be the equivalent of demeaning the existence of any possibility of a future at all by deciding before the cow is even born what the definitive course of its life, and death, will be.
As stated before though, I am not entirely sure that a cows future is as valuable as a mans, and if I, or someone else, is able to logically counter to my wonderments I will indeed start eating meat again.
Also, PETA is too full of emotion to deal with logic IMO, and I hope some of this helps the OP.
I’ve never personally toured a slaughterhouse, but I do know that stress degrades the quality of meat and that it is truly in the best interest of producers to reduce any stress-producing incidents, which includes pain.
Slavery implies a natural state of freedom. Animals are bound to their instincts and cannot see beyond themselves and their immediate surroundings. Therefore, they are in bondage even in a state of nature. Our obligation isn’t to try and free them, as that is impossible. Our obligation is to make their natural bondage as comfortable as possible. Which we do.
That’s not an answer and you know it. Very, very few people would want cattle as pets, and all of those cattle have to go somewhere. They won’t disappear in a cloud of self-righteous morality. Nor will they be as happy in the wild as they are on the farm or in the slaughterhouse.
Finally, what’s up with snow leopards? I mentioned wolves, not snow leopards, and I don’t see how the big cats are at all relevant.
Derleth, here is a USDA resource detailing the many stresses that animals bred for food encounter. If in fact every meat packing plant were free of stress then we would have no need for research, regulations, and laws such as those detailed on this website.
It is clear that you do not believe that animals feel pain, or fear, or a have sense of presence. (Though many dog owners might disagree)
As you are online, I assume you have the same access to resources that I do and can (and should) take the time to locate and note research to back up your claims.
I think I’ll move this to Great Debates.
Two things you can do to remain a carnivore with a relatively clear conscience:
-
Make generous contributions to the Humane Farming Association.
-
Eat only meats which have been raised humanely. Commonly known as “Free Range”.
Life is set up so that life eats other life. You have nothing to feel guilty about in that. But we all must take responsibility for how we contribute to the * suffering * of other beings in our service.
It seems to me that Blonde has ignored some valid arguments that counter her own.
Vegetarians may have a healthier diet than some omnivores, but that’s not to say meat eaters can’t be “healthier” than vegetarians, and you’d have to define healthier. That also requires generalizing all meat eaters. The world of nutrition and how it relates to health is full of endless information in studies, some countering the other. For a vegetarian to blast a meat eater citing studies of Alzheimer’s or the likelihood of another disease due to a diet containing meat, doesn’t mean that vegetarians aren’t prone to develop diseases differing from meat eaters. Again, there are pros and cons for each side, by simply generalizing all vegetarians and saying they are healthier, is irrational.
Animals can feel pain, just as humans, but one must ask where the line be drawn, in terms of what feels pain when consumed. Human evolution has led us to eat animals. One could argue that most living things feel pain, so if you’re using this argument on why you’re a vegetarian, you must not only apply it to animals, but to all human consumption. Some Cows may feel discomfort when being milked, that doesn’t mean everyone should be a vegan.
You’re right in that Cows don’t need to be eaten, but one could apply the same logic to carrots, in that they don’t need to be consumed. Or horses for that matter, or pigs, or cows be milked, so that argument is illogical.
Although we don’t own the earth, Cows and animals are raised for slaughter for consumption, as many don’t believe as strongly as you in your previous arguments for being a vegetarian. Many may interpret the bible’s stance on meat as to be the ultimate deciding factor. I think its ok for you to express your views to your children, and it’s none of my business as to how your raise them, but I think it would be unfair for you to limit their freedoms and choices by forcing them to abide by your beliefs or favoring one over the other.
I decided to stat my opinion after reading many arrogant posts. I’ve read Fast Food Nation, which I thought was a good book that discussed slaughter house horror stories and fast food globalization, however, one can observe by other studies and other posts, even from this thread, that those instances don’t necessarily apply to all slaughter houses. Even if slaughter houses killed in a compromising humane manner that non-meat eaters agreed upon, would it then be ok to eat animals?
I may be lashing out at Blonde only because her opinion is extremely biased. My opinions may differ, but I believe you should take each opinion with a grain of salt in order to formulate your own opinion, as opposed to blasting those who disagree and ignoring sound arguments. This debate can be endless, as each side has valid arguments and benefits. Some may feel stronger about some than the others, which ultimately leads to their stance.
rufus - all I have said, in a nutshell is:
a) Vegetarianism is usually a healthier lifestyle (of course, you can find cites that say eating beef in moderation can be part of a healthy diet - but you cannot dispute the recent statistics on heart disease, and the change in the food pyramid).
b) Animals feel pain, and we have many other alternatives for food. Anyone who has accidently stepped on their dog’s tail, or seen an animal die knows they feel pain, as we do. Not to mention that mankind has killed hundreds of species for fur, or some exotic body part. Do you really think those animals didn’t feel pain as they died? Oh, and – carrots cannot feel pain. Really.
I’ve already stated that my children eat whatever they want - so your comment as to how it would be “unfair” for me to limit their freedom is uncalled for.
My opinion is biased because I feel strongly about the subject, and I apologize for not having time to respond to each and every point thrown out in this thread. But, did you really mean to say that “human evolution has led us to eat animals?” One could argue that our current state of evolution doesn’t require us to eat animals, as we did prior to access to vegetables and meat substitutes.