meat is murder

Is killing animals for food ever justifiable?


  • Total voters
    263
Status
Not open for further replies.

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#26
Justifiable? Yes. Necessary? No.

Some western countries definitely need to reduce their meat intake because current levels are not feasible as developing nations consume more.

However I don't see a problem in raising animals for meat or testing purposes. There are plenty of perfectly good reasons for being a vegetarian, but all of these ethical issues are pretty ridiculous. Neither plants nor animals want to die, but we have to eat something.
Mostly this. I don't eat meat because eating it in such mass quantities is usually extremely unhealthy for a person. I could probably get away with eating meat 1-2 times a week and remain healthy, but honestly I don't really see the need as I get all my necessary nutrients from plant-based sources -- and at a cheaper cost than a slab of meat would give me.

Americans really do need to cut down on their meat intake but I mean, "whatever."

I linked the studies in a previous thread but I'll leave them here regardless:
Health benefits of a vegetarian diet
On beliefs that a vegetarian diet is healthier
 
#27
You may enjoy eating meat, but that doesn't make it right. An extreme example:

Timothy Accleby was a good-natured man. He had a nice social life, and a well paid jb. However, he enjoyed spying on his neighbour's daughter, whilst she was in her shower.

DOes enjoying it make it right?
I 100% agree with your comment here, because eating meat is totally comparable to a creepy man spying on his neighbor's daughter! Completely comparable! Like, it's so comparable it's ridiculous!

Best laugh ever.
 
#28
I 100% agree with your comment here, because eating meat is totally comparable to a creepy man spying on his neighbor's daughter! Completely comparable! Like, it's so comparable it's ridiculous!

Best laugh ever.

Mmmmmm that's some sexy beef in that shower.
I wanna just moistly bite the succulent chunks of that flesh.
Oooh. Leather looks good on her.
 

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#29
Sure, that's your opinion. Don't agree, but the only difference is from fundamental ethical views; pure value statement on both sides. Agree to disagree I guess.

Too bad that Meat gives you the full string of essential amino acids where as grain, doesn't. It also takes a lot more variety of plant foods to create the same group of amino acids... too bad that fresh vegetables, nuts, and other health products are so expensive for the average person in a 1st world country. A $1.00 cheeseburger contains all your essential amino acids... I wonder how many plant based products it takes?

I'm not sure what the market forces at work are; but at the final consumption line, meat products are cheaper than vegetarian ones as of now.

Being a vegetarian, with the food industry as it is, is a wealthy man's luxury.

Okay, come on dude-- you know this statement is ridiculous. I definitely agree that over fishing is a huge problem, and that we are definitely in the process of fishing to extinction many species on the market (and off the market... sharks ((nother big problem)) and species we don't eat that get caught in the nets).

But the ocean having zero life in it? I'm sure you're aware of how laughable this statement is. Humanity doesn't have the power to destroy life on earth, and humanity having the power to destroy life in the ocean is just about as absurd.
I would disagree with further expansion of meat producing lands (especially more rain forest destruction), but a meat industry is far more efficient and effective for providing meat products to developed society than hunting or personal farm rearing. Please be reasonable man.

How much environmental destruction do you think would occur to provide meat to the population of the world today through hunting? There's a reason the mammoth etc. went extinct. A developed meat industry is something that's definitely desirable.

Now as for the method of the meat industry... kind of on the fence on that one, but making the process more humane has some considerable merit.
I'm not sure how actually factual this is but it actually suggests that switching to a vegetarian diet can reduce food costs through a year, and that is with getting your essential amino acids and vitamins.
http://20somethingfinance.com/cost-of-vegetarian-diet/
 
#30
I'm apparently a crackshot on the shooting range, but I don't go hunting. I have deer once in a great, great while. It's actually not half bad, but I like to stick to pork, beef, and chicken.
 

icepick

she brings the rain
is an Artist
#31
I decided to become a vegetarian because I could not justify the trade-off between significant animal suffering and minimal to moderate human pleasure, simple as that.
 
#33
While I'm an omnivore, I mostly agree with what Myzozoa said on the subject. Meat makes less sense from an economic standpoint because of just how expensive it is to produce, even if you're treating the animals in a completely inhumane (and presumably cheaper) way. You need to produce feed and water for them (supplemented with whatever essential nutrients/amino acids etc that the animals need since most mammals require the same amino acids we do in our diet), you need space for both the plants they'll be eating and their actual living spaces (even if they are just factory farms), and then you also need to provide basic medical care so they're not dying before they get nice and fat.

It might be somewhat hypocritical considering my complaints about space for animals/their food, but that being said, I'm not against raising animals for slaughter, I just think the actual raising has to be far more humane than the standard shit you see coming out of factory farms. I realise that being able to afford even the most basic types of "ethical" meat is essentially a middle class luxury, though. I'm also not against hunting animals, it's something I'd be willing to do (though I am glad it's not something I HAVE to do, gutting would be the worst).

I also kind of like how we use every bit of the animal... though I have a feeling this picture is meant to be taken in a bad way. Waste not, want not, right?

 
#35
There's the moral issue and there are practical and economic issues. I think the moral issue is too ambiguous and one of the reasons I don't think "murder" is actually a helpful word to determine morality. It's just a word. Obviously, I'm not going to endorse going out and killing people at random, but I don't need the word "murder" to condemn such an action.

I've heard many things about vegetarian diets. I've heard that they're more efficient in some way, but I've also heard that there are some negative consequences due to not being able to get everything without meat. All I know is, we all have limits as to what we can reasonably be expected to do, and for most people, vegetarianism is not for them.

I'm also leery of the idea that people should experience killing what they eat for the sake of "respect". Under such logic, there are a lot of traumatic experiences that people "should" have for the sake of understanding issues like homelessness, disability, war... the list goes on. Or is the meat issue special somehow?
 

mattj

blatant Nintendo fanboy
#36
I think it is a special issue. Or at least it was for me. I had gutted fish and whatnot when I was much younger, but it was when I started to butcher larger fish, and later animals that I had hunted, that it had an immediate, lasting effect on changing my view on issues like hunting for sport and the treatment of animals. Before that point, hunting and fishing was just a game. It was just entertainment. When I had to butcher the animals myself I realized that these are living creatures that feel pain. I can't just be screwing around shooting squirrels just to shoot squirrels or catching fish and then tossing them up on the bank to die (which I did, and many, many people in my are still do). Unless I have a seriously valid reason to do so (cheap, healthy food in my case) I can't justify harming them. But it wasn't until I started butchering them myself that I came to this conclusion.

It might just be me personally though.
 
#37
very impressed by chou toshio in this thread, who has perfectly displayed how very challenging it is for people to poorly rationalize their harmful moral actions
 

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#39
There's the moral issue and there are practical and economic issues. I think the moral issue is too ambiguous and one of the reasons I don't think "murder" is actually a helpful word to determine morality. It's just a word. Obviously, I'm not going to endorse going out and killing people at random, but I don't need the word "murder" to condemn such an action.

I've heard many things about vegetarian diets. I've heard that they're more efficient in some way, but I've also heard that there are some negative consequences due to not being able to get everything without meat. All I know is, we all have limits as to what we can reasonably be expected to do, and for most people, vegetarianism is not for them.

I'm also leery of the idea that people should experience killing what they eat for the sake of "respect". Under such logic, there are a lot of traumatic experiences that people "should" have for the sake of understanding issues like homelessness, disability, war... the list goes on. Or is the meat issue special somehow?
The debate isn't on whether you can get all of the necessary acids and shit, it's about whether if the quantity you get is necessary for growing children and pregnant ladies. Some sides say yes, other sides say no. If you're a fully grown adult then there's no downside that's seen visibly.

It also makes me sad none of you clicked on the link to view the benefits of a vegetarian diet, I went through all the trouble of finding the study on my campus access and DLing it :c

EDIT:
Soy is real bad for you in high quantities, I saw someone suggesting soy in this thread I think. Soy has high estrogen levels which just fucks shit up. I think Eastern cultures have developed a resistance to this I think but I might be lying (or explaining the lack of sweet beards).
 
#41
As mentioned by myzozoa, matthew and others, a vegetarian diet is much more sustainable than the current western and even oriental diets many of us are used to. Looking at the west, the amount of energy and space that go into raising cattle and feeding them to boot is an enormous amount of resources. In terms of oriental diets, we're currently overfishing many of the world's main fishing resources to a dangerous point right now; due to both the cultural component of these respective meats to their cultures it's incredibly difficult to curb, but education is a good step in teaching people to live with the world in mind.

In terms of health, the essential amino acids can be found in most nuts, soy and even leafy vegetable products alongside other crucial minerals and vitamins. I'm not sure where everyone is getting their "you can't live without meat" which is completely false; with the advent of GM foods the step into creating sustainable grains with essential nutrients is closer than ever even with our current adequate vegetarian diets.

It all boils down to the cultural component, our background and our own preferences. While I don't expect many of us to completely cut down on our meat intake, I would prefer that we be a bit more planet-conscious whenever we're consuming a product.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
#45
i suppose you're against lesbians because there are less women for the rest of the 'normals'
Well, I certainly am. Not a day goes by that I don't ask a self proclaimed lesbite to stop with their lesbiotic shenanigannery. It's just not right.


Also, look at these nerds thinking about how cool they are, how "conscious of the environment" they are and what not for choosing to be vegetarian... I was BORN unable to eat meat. Y'all think you're a bunch of eco-warriors just because you hopped on a bandwagon? You make me sick.


But in response to the OP. Hunting is perfectly fine. I'd never be able to do it personally, but then again, I'm a giant walking vagina. The only kind of hunting I have a problem with is the hunting without any challenge bullshit. Like the guy who sits in the back of his buddy's pick-up driving down a backroad trying to pick off deer or other random animals off the side of the road. Or the rich guys who buys guides to track the animals for them and use high-tech weapons to kill the animal from so far away it never knew he was even there (Or worse, the guys who go "hunting" in parks where they literally herd the animals at you). That shit's not cash.
 
#46
You may enjoy eating meat, but that doesn't make it right. An extreme example:

Timothy Accleby was a good-natured man. He had a nice social life, and a well paid jb. However, he enjoyed spying on his neighbour's daughter, whilst she was in her shower.

DOes enjoying it make it right?

are you fucking kidding me? you are either a moron or a troll.

I have a story for you: timothy accleby had a friend called eagle4 who liked to post ridiculous and irrelevant shit.

People have been eating meat forever. Animals eat other animals. As long as people are not hunting animals for fun and not eating them it should be considered ok.

Most people choose to not eat meat (generalizing here) not because "eating meat is wrong" because anyone who has any sense knows that it has been a way of life of humans and a large portion of the animal kingdom for a long time, but because of the way mass produced meat is treated, or because they simply don't like the idea of eating meat.

Saying eating meat is plain wrong is just dumb and idiotic, and your example has NO RELEVANCE in any way to the topic at hand, and if you want to try and prove a point, please use something more relevant and not completely stupid.
 
#47
Vintage eBooks is right: our ancestors did it in the past, and so we should do it now. Anyone can think of hundreds of applicable examples of this, such as honoring our parents, raping women, and going to school.
 
#48
It is biological fact, as the diversity of life in the ocean decays, ecosystems will collapse as important species will be extinct. If you want me to modify my statement: there will be no pretty or edible life in the oceans in 60 years due to pollution and overfishing. There will still be bacteria and micro organisms and maybe a few other things. Biomass, however, will be but a tiny fraction of what it is now.

Humanity has the power to due a lot of destructive things, your proposition is ridiculous in the face of nuclear bombs, so I'm not interested in discussing it.
Oh please. Earth has been hit by objects from space estimated to have power on a completely different scale than all the nuclear war heads humanity has put together. We have the power to destroy ourselves and our interdependently evolved species; but life on earth? No. Life in the ocean, which is still the foundation of life on earth and the vast majority of life forms on earth-- no.

Humanity could do its very worst to the planet, and in a hundred million years after we'd gone extinct, the planet would have done a lot of recovering, maybe even replacing all of its bio-diversity.

I find it absurdly egotistical when environmentalists say we're causing the end of the world; not really, we're only causing the end of ourselves and a few hundred thousand species that will go along with us. Evolution can easily replace us. The planet doesn't need us to protect it, but humanity could definitely afford to protect itself. That's what environmentalism really has at stake: saving us.

Don't get me wrong, we can definitely cause the collapse of many balanced food chains, but natural selection will just make new ones. If you think those new ones would be less useful to us; definitely true. Less pretty? Well, that's subjective but maybe (probably, yeah, pretty close to definitely here too). On the big picture though, bio diversity won't change much. Only on the visible level of big animals we humans seem to like.

But if you think humanity can reduce life in the earth's ocean to micro-orgasms, that's absolutely absurd; you're giving the adaptive power of nature way too little credit. It's a lot more powerful than us puny humans with our puny nuclear weapons infinitely less powerful than nature's own "big events."

Also your assertion that people eat cheeseburgers for complete protein is way more ridiculous than my claims about life in the ocean in 60 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_fishing

see the second paragraph^
True Mckay D's kinda burns all the nutrients out of it... ok, a 2 dollar can of tuna instead; happy?

"Running out of wild caught seafood" is a far cry of ending life in the ocean. lol

The type of thinking that insists on consumption of meat is precisely why the food industry has created a situation where vegetables are more expensive. There is not sufficient demand for massive increase in vegetable consumption of all forms, which would lower the price of vegetables in conjunction with a decrease in consumption of meat. If there were such conditions, we could simply convert land to vegetable farms and produce a shit ton of vegetables some of which could be sold fresh and others of which could be preserved effortlessly through canning (cans can be recycled so this is sustainable). This huge glut of vegetables would reduce the price of vegetables to a point where it would be cheaper for the average person to consume them than meat, even given the same desired nutrients. Many combinations of vegetables yield complete protein the way meat does. Beans and rice are complete protein, and very cheap for example. Soy fermentation, etc. I actually think soy is the food of the future, though it is also a common allergen, it has so many flavor and nutritional possibilities.
I'm not denying that the economic forces of today are what makes meat consumption cheaper than vegetable consumption; but I just outlined the real facts of today. I was being realistic.

I have to find it amusingly hilarious that you talked down to the insect plan as unrealistic straw-hatting, when getting the meat industry to disappear and expect everyone to make way and get on board for the economic/dietary revolution of vegetarianism for the good of all mankind to be any less fanciful. If you're going to talk about unrealistic ideals, you might as well play with other people's ideals. >__>
 

Matthew

I love weather; Sun for days
is a Site Staff Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Server Moderator Alumnus
#49
are you fucking kidding me? you are either a moron or a troll.

I have a story for you: timothy accleby had a friend called eagle4 who liked to post ridiculous and irrelevant shit.

People have been eating meat forever. Animals eat other animals. As long as people are not hunting animals for fun and not eating them it should be considered ok.

Most people choose to not eat meat (generalizing here) not because "eating meat is wrong" because anyone who has any sense knows that it has been a way of life of humans and a large portion of the animal kingdom for a long time, but because of the way mass produced meat is treated, or because they simply don't like the idea of eating meat.

Saying eating meat is plain wrong is just dumb and idiotic, and your example has NO RELEVANCE in any way to the topic at hand, and if you want to try and prove a point, please use something more relevant and not completely stupid.
Most vegetarians I know don't eat meat because it's cheaper diet for college students (in my town at least), is easy to prepare and cook for, and is generally healthier. I find it difficult that people don't understand that eating meat 4-7 times a weak is extremely unhealthy but there is no convincing those people that they are wrong because, "meat is delicious."
 
#50
I have no problems with animals being killed for my eating pleasures. It may sound cruel, but still. I think it's mostly because eating meat is an easy thing to do; you don't have to witness the animal getting killed, but you do get the pleasure of eating its meat. For the regular customer, there appear to be hardly any downsides to eating meat. And, well, meat just tastes a lot better than veggies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.