Moral, schmoral.
Meat will never be obsolete as long as I am alive. Then my son gets to carry the torch.
So long as there is air on this planet and animals to eat, me or one of my progeny will eat meat.
I wonder when fruits, vegetables, and nuts will become obsolete[sup]*[/sup]. After all, the pesticides used to raise crops can be devestating to the local ecosystem, and can even occasionally affect the people eating them. Growing the crops requires large amounts of land to be leveled, all the animals living in it killed or driven off, and any other plants removed. They can all carry contaminants from the pesticides or other sources, or even cause disease if not treated appropriately.
*No, not really
I mean, really, just about everything you do has the potential to harm or kill you. Even the water you drink, considered the most fundamental element of life. Throwing out meat just because improper handling or excessive presense in one’s diet can cause harm, could be twisted to advocate throwing out any and all foods presented. It would be far better to simply recognize the benefits and hazards of such foods, and educate ourselves on how to handle such foods more healthily.
Personally, it’s going to take a lot to convince me that meat is “bad.”
If two people consensually have sex, and they’re using proper protection, and there are no STDs involved, it’s a harmless, pleasurable activity, and much more practical, at this point, than artificial insemination. There’s really no good reason to drop sex.
When you eat meat, you are eating an animal that has been butchered alive. Sure, you’re happy with it, but the animal probably wasn’t. It’s fairly simple.
Oh yeah, and there’s Mad Cow and such.
I agree. Meat is what’s for dinner.
Didn’t meat eating contribute towards homosapiens having larger brains?
If eaaaaaating meat is wrooooooong,
I don’t wanna be right!
Anyway, there’s a far cry between something being unhealthy and actually using the power of governmental force to impose such a restriction. At least there is now, the smoking issue is starting to tell a different story.
Animals don’t have any future-oriented mental states, so their actual death doesn’t harm them (as it does not frustrate any goals), only the pain inflicted by shitty conditions before that death harms them. I think there’s room to compromise on the issue.
Humans are omnivores. We, especially we males, seem to love to eat meat. So even if I have to kill the things myself, I’ll keep eating meat till the day I die.
If they do, get them to outlaw that Mexican water as well.
Animals aren’t butchered alive. They are killed, and then butchered.
One of our early ancestors was a vegetarian species. I think it was…homo-habilis? Someone can correct me if they know.
Anyway, this tree-hugging species went extinct because being a vegetarian poses survival issues that became insurmountable. Most notably, they were ill-prepared to deal with climactic changes, whereas the good and righteous meat eaters were able to migrate to follow the larger game animals.
So no, meat eating is not a universal human trait. It is simply universal among viable humans.
But hey, each to his own. I’ve had plenty of vegetarian dishes. They all sucked ass. And ironically, they were all prepared by vegetarians who assured me that the previous meals I’d had were simply not prepared correctly, and that a “proper” vegetarian meal is tasty and satisfying. Dirty smelly tree-hugging liars. (That’s unfair…they were usually pretty clean.)
Nitpick: if they’re our ancestors they didn’t go extinct, they evolved into us. But I get your point - we evolved to eat meat. I don’t know that that necessarily means it’s healthy (we live in a customized environment a lot of the time, we have to adjust some natural habits) but I can see that it could. Does it necessarily mean we should? I guess you say yes. I, obviously, disagree.
“Good and righteous”? You are joking, right?
[/quote]
I’m trying to be light. I’ll try and think of some relevant jokes if you lke 
I take it my example was a bad one - can you suggest anything better? Or should I just accept that a majority couldn’t be convinced by moral vegetarianism under any circumstances, because animals have no feelings?
Pesticides are a fairly recent invention. Yes, they are widely used today. No, they don’t have to be.
**
Nutritional yeast also supplies B12. One needn’t eat meat to be healthy.
I am a vegetarian simply because I don’t care for meat. I am a grower and buyer of organic vegetables (and organically produced milk and eggs) because I think we will be better off in the long run. And, yes, I think I’ll survive any unexpected climatic changes.
Well, for what it’s worth, here’s something to think about:
http://www.wildlifedamagecontrol.com/animalrights/leastharm.htm
Won’t someone think of the microtine rodents?
Pesticides are a fairly recent invention. Yes, they are widely used today. No, they don’t have to be.
**
Nutritional yeast also supplies B12. One needn’t eat meat to be healthy.
I am a vegetarian simply because I don’t care for meat. I am a grower and buyer of organic vegetables (and organically produced milk and eggs) because I think we will be better off in the long run. And, yes, I think I’ll survive any unexpected climatic changes.
Agreed.
Most certainly. My humor is a bit on the dry side.
I could never be convinced that eating meat is immoral. I couldn’t care less whether animals have feelings or not.
If it is immoral for humans to eat meat, it is immoral to allow animals to eat meat. After we outlaw meat, are we to kill all carnivores on the same moral grounds?
Or are we above the natural order? Seems a bit egocentric to me.
Sorry, just checking. You can tell it’s good when I can just tell you’re joking.
How about cruelty to animals? Your argument should apply equally there, but many people believe that a cat playing with a mouse is unfortunate, but a human doing the same is doing something very wrong.
It’s hard to explain why, I’m not sure myself. I think because we do have a choice and a cat doesn’t. I can see it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense (the mouse is hurt just as much either way) but otoh the same logic applies to a lot of things - eg. starving someone to death=evil, allowing people in another coutry to be starved to death=not evil.
In principle, vegetables are cheaper than meat. You need loads of vegetables to raise animals. That was one of Ghandis arguments to spread vegetarianism.
On the other hand, the current food industry is clearly maximized for meat, so we feed them cheap second class vegetables in big quatities and due to mass production, meat is very cheap. But that’s because we chose it to be this way.
I am vegetarian, btw, and in France and in Austria the situation is even worse. When I am in the US I buy as many boca burgers as I can eat, because I don’t get them here.
I had the best time in my life in India. vegetarians everywhere, vegetarian restaurants everywhere.
Well for a quite a long time we ate each other, then we stopped. Aren’t we glad about that?
And the argument about not being hunters and gatherers anymore, and not raping cavewomen whenever we want, that argument counts for me. Let’s remeber that we talk about the values of a society, not about single people which do not adhere to the common opinion. Rape is not accepted in our society. At least not where I live.
If I understand you correctly, then you already know exactly what your children and grand children will do later in life?
So basically you are the kind of guy who forces his children to do exactly the kind of profession he wants and if your son wants to become hairdresser instead of doctor, you will remove him from your family tree? Are you the kind of guy who throws out his son because he is homosexual?
No, you should just accept that the majority can’t be convinced by moral vegetarianism under any circumstances, because animals taste good!
Do you have a cite for that?
/me laughs and laughs and laughs and laughs…
and shakes head despairingly at what some people consider a cogent argument…
:wally :rolleyes: :smack: :dubious:
Do you mean that seriously?
If so, could you elaberate? I think even if human meat tasted good we’d eschew it, so ‘tasting good’ clearly isn’t sufficient for something to be eaten.
Are you serious? I think canabalism is pretty rare even in animals.
Thanks.
Don’t you think that’s way too personal?
Would you like to rephrase that as “History suggests our grandchildren will reject some things we think of as perfectly normal. How do you know meat-eating isn’t one of those things, given that whatever they, we’re likely to see nothing wrong with them?”?