Why should or why shouldn't I become a vegetarian?

[Mälli]

I want arguments on this on both sides, vegetarian and meat eating. I think I should become a vegetarian because mass production of meat is a form of animal torture, bad to the enviroment and super capitalistic.

I just dont have the guts yet to become a vegetarian. I think meat eathing is ok if the animal has lived a good life and we need to lessen our meat eating anyway. Does vegetarianism really make the difference? Hit me with your arguments against or for meat eating comrades!

[Luisrah]

Eating meat is natural. Though, in the healthy point of view, you shouldn't eat much meat everyday.
In nature, animals don't care if the animal they're eating has lived a good life.
It's just how it works, and wether you stop eating animals because they are suffering, all the other animals that eat each other won't care.

We don't need to be so rigorous. Getting a job at a company is capitalistic, and you are going to be exploited if you do so, but hey, a guy has to survive right?

[Ehakamanda]

I'd say being vegetarian on the basis of animal rights is not looking at the big picture, in other words if you are truly for animal rights you should be vegan, as the life of a milk cow could even be arguably worse than the life of a meat cow, for example.

[mosfeld]

Im a vegetarian. I don't know, it's cheaper, chicks dig you, vegetarian cuisine is delicious.. you rid yourself of guilt from eating meat etc. Being a vegetarian isn't nearly as hard as people make of it, too. I'd go for it.

[Vendetta]

You should eat meat because meat is fucking awesome.

[CELMX]

If you don't care about what kind of food you eat, sure, don't eat meat.
I assure you, being a vegetarian will not affect capitalism, animal torture, or environment. And, animal torture, capitalism, the environment is greatly affected by doing things other than boycotting meat, b/c for every person that doesn't eat meat, I assure you many others would be walking into mcdonalds and eating a hamburger.

I would say petitioning, protesting, educating people about these issues is much more effective than vegetarianism. You can eat meat and still be against these problems. Plus, eating meat is natural, and there is nothing wrong with it. Animal torture, global warming, and capitalism, isn't natural, and fighting these shouldn't be done by boycotting the natural (eating meat). Instead, as I said before, organize and fight!:)
this is just my personal view, but if you want an opposing one, here it is by Bruce Friedrich (haha, mostly on humane meat, but also has some good stuff on vegetarianism)


People have become increasingly aware that virtually all of the 10 billion land animals slaughtered in the U.S. each year for their meat, eggs and milk are terribly mistreated. In fact, routine farming practices are so abusive that they would warrant felony animal cruelty charges were they done to cats or dogs.
As a result, huge numbers of compassionate people have joined the ranks of the vegetarians. Some, however, have looked instead to meat from animals treated less badly, which they call "humane meat." This raises three questions. First, is there such a thing as truly "humane meat"? Second, would consuming only humane meat satisfy the demands of ethical living? And third, do we, as individuals, have good reason to promote "humane meat" rather than vegetarianism?
Not only are many of the humane labels (http://goveg.com/organic.asp)--like "Swine Welfare" and "Animal Care Certified"--entirely meaningless, describing animals treated in nearly exactly the same way as unlabeled products (see PETA's discussion at GoVeg.com (http://www.goveg.com/)), but please ask yourself a basic question: Would you be willing to cut an animal's throat? For most of us, taking an animal's life is anathema; we just wouldn't do it. Of course, all of us could spend an afternoon shucking corn, watch a cornfield being tilled, or take part in every other aspect of getting plant foods to the table .
But how many of us could spend an afternoon cutting animals' throats, or even watching it? And then ask yourself in what other areas of your life do you pay others to do things you find too repulsive? And how ethical is it to pay someone to do things that are wholly unnecessary and too atrocious to watch?
We have no nutritional need for meat, eggs or milk. Eating meat means, quite literally, eating a corpse. It means robbing the animal of her or his life, and then devouring the body. Animals are all made of flesh, blood and bone, just like we are; they have the same five physiological senses of touch, smell, sight, hearing and taste. They are more like us than they are different.
People like Albert Einstein and Leo Tolstoy argued this very point, that using our power to harm the weak and innocent--on an issue as essential to who we are as eating--is fundamental to all moral action. Tolstoy summed it up by saying, "Vegetarianism is the taproot of humanitarianism." Einstein spoke of the human arrogance that considered ourselves apart and superior to other species, calling this justification for exploiting them "a kind of optical delusion of consciousness." He pleaded that "our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion," calling for "the evolution to a vegetarian diet." How can we try to create a better and more compassionate world while dining on the corpses of defenseless victims, each time we sit down to eat?
Perhaps the most critical point, though, for those who oppose factory farming and modern slaughterhouses, is that your decisions influence others, and your decision to eat any meat at all (even if the meat is from producers that are less abusive) will cause others you know to eat factory farmed meat, where they might otherwise not have.
I've been a vegan for 20 years now, and in that time, I've convinced many friends and acquaintances to follow my lead. Each one of these individuals saves just as many animals as my vegetarianism does. In other words, my example has exponentially multiplied the good for animals of my own decision. But the reverse is also true: By not advocating vegetarianism, all those saved animals would have, instead, suffered terrible lives and died horrible deaths.
Most people look at someone eating "humane" meat and simply see a fellow meat-eater; they are not likely to change their own diets, in part because for most people meat is meat, and in part because eating "humane" meat is far more difficult than eating vegetarian. Every restaurant and supermarket has food for vegetarians, but fewer than one in 10,000 (literally) has "humanely" labeled meat.
I want to be clear that, as I've argued before (http://www.satyamag.com/sept06/singer-friedrich.html), working for improved living and dying conditions for farmed animals is a critical element in the animal rights movement, and I spend a large portion of my time, day in and day out, working to change the way animals are raised and slaughtered. Victories like the banning of gestation crates in Oregon, Arizona, and Florida are real victories for animals. Burger King's decision to give preferential option to chicken plants that slaughter animals in a controlled atmosphere is praiseworthy, and Whole Foods' commitment to real change for farmed animals should be celebrated. We can't just ignore their suffering, as people who care about animals. And of course, eating meat from animals who are not gratuitously abused is better than eating meat from animals who are.
But for individuals who care about cruelty, vegetarianism is the only choice. Vegetarianism makes a statement against oppression at every meal. It is incredibly fulfilling to know that, where you can, you are promoting practices that are kind rather than cruel, and helping to create a society that is life-giving, rather than life-taking.
Remember, it's not a matter of putting animals ahead of human beings . Vegetarian advocates are simply suggesting that meat-eaters not ignore the concerns of animals entirely by dining on their corpses.
It's not that much to ask, and lives are depending on you.


btw...it's kind of annoying, can someone change the title to "why should..." instead of "why shoul..."?

[scarletghoul]

I love animals and despise the meat industry. Certainly it should be abolished one day. But I am not a vegetarian (anymore) because I realised my own personal boycotting of meat industry won't make any significant differance. So it's best to just enjoy the delicious flavour of animal flesh, despite it being a disgusting part of humanity, because by being vegetarian you are not making a differance to society and are just depriving yourself of some tastey food.

Of course if you do it for personal reasons like health or if you just dislike the taste or whatever then thats fair enough. Just don't think you're changing the world.

If animal liberation is to ever be achieved, it will be through human progress and after human liberation. In other words the revolution is the way. I see animal liberatioin as just another part of the awesome communist society that can be created if we struggle correctly

[whore]

meat is natural. so is rape. for that matter, so is exploitation. and yet, we object to the last two because we have a sense of justice and outrage.

it has been argued that meat is explitation and therefore wrong.

anyway, i don't eat meat for a few reasons. it is cheaper, i think it is wrong to cause harm to sentient beings, and environmentally meat production is generally bad.

[Martin Blank]

I assure you, being a vegetarian will not affect capitalism, animal torture, or environment. And, animal torture, capitalism, the environment is greatly affected by doing things other than boycotting meat, b/c for every person that doesn't eat meat, I assure you many others would be walking into mcdonalds and eating a hamburger.

Very much this. Whether or not someone eats meat is a personal choice, not a political statement. One can strongly oppose inhumane treatment of animals, including those giving up their lives to become food for humans, and also eat meat products. Elevating such a personal choice to the level of a political program, especially as a substitute for addressing all the issues that CELMX raises, is liberal, at best. At worst, it's outright reactionary.

This shouldn't be in the Learning forum, since this is a question of lifestyle, not revolutionary politics.


btw...it's kind of annoying, can someone change the title to "why should..." instead of "why shoul..."?

Good point.

Title corrected. Thread moved to Chit-Chat.

[RHIZOMES]

Because meat is awesome and if you become a vegetarian then you'll start associating with other vegetarians and their self-righteousness may consume your soul.

[scarletghoul]

anyway, i don't eat meat for a few reasons. it is cheaper, i think it is wrong to cause harm to sentient beings, and environmentally meat production is generally bad.
only the first of those reasons makes sense.
the last 2 points, though i agree with them, are not good reasons because your vegetarianism does not affect them.

[scarletghoul]

anyway, i don't eat meat for a few reasons. it is cheaper, i think it is wrong to cause harm to sentient beings, and environmentally meat production is generally bad. only the first of those reasons makes sense.
the last 2 points, though i agree with them, are not good reasons because your vegetarianism does not affect them.

[scarletghoul]

anyway, i don't eat meat for a few reasons. it is cheaper, i think it is wrong to cause harm to sentient beings, and environmentally meat production is generally bad. only the first of those reasons makes sense.
the last 2 points, though i agree with them, are not good reasons because your vegetarianism does not affect them.

[scarletghoul]

anyway, i don't eat meat for a few reasons. it is cheaper, i think it is wrong to cause harm to sentient beings, and environmentally meat production is generally bad. only the first of those reasons makes sense.
the last 2 points, though i agree with them, are not good reasons because your vegetarianism does not affect them.

[RHIZOMES]

Because meat is awesome and if you become a vegetarian then you'll start associating with other vegetarians and their self-righteousness may consume your soul.

[Sogdian]

There is always a third way, that is, reduce the amount of meat you eat! Every little effort counts.

[Comrade B]

I am a vegetarian. Figure it out yourself. The one thing that you cannot do if you are a vegetarian is complain about other people's eating habits or people will think you are a douche. Only advice.

[Invincible Summer]

I'm a vegetarian, although I suspect I will start eating fish again. My philosophy is "eat what you'd be comfortable killing yourself."

[whore]

only the first of those reasons makes sense.
the last 2 points, though i agree with them, are not good reasons because your vegetarianism does not affect them.
i disagree. it may not be a large influence on the production of meat or meat products. but by refusing to contribute to demand, i am, in a small way, reducing the production of meat or meat products, compared to if i ate them.

if i ate meat, there would be a bigger demand, and thus more meat would be produced...

[RHIZOMES]

I am a vegetarian. Figure it out yourself. The one thing that you cannot do if you are a vegetarian is complain about other people's eating habits or people will think you are a douche. Only advice.

I know this young Greens person at my campus who is all "omg how can you justify eating poor wittle bitty animals with your beliefs???"

then launches into a tirade of how effective consumer activism is

god kill me now

[Comrade B]

hehe, people who complain about other people's eating habits tend to be the most annoying people on earth. It it goes for both sides though... as some people on here should realize.

There are a lot of vegetarians who have this stupid idea of defending animals the the end, such as the morons who tried to have the starving Vietnamese refugees tried in San Francisco for killing a stray dog to eat. People should always come before animals, I just don't see why I should cause any additional suffering to forms of life if I don't need to.
Also, I have heard some stories about what happens in slaughterhouses from a friend who worked for the union in a one near my home town, and I got to say, that shit is disgusting.

[Dr Mindbender]

Can all the veggies in the house put their hands up?

*all the veggies strain and grimace in pain*

I rest my case. :lol:

[Stand Your Ground]

Well I went vegan cause I care about animal welfare. After watching these I didn't want meat anymore.
VIjanhKqVC4
2Ts4GEpnzj8
meat.org (http://meat.org)

[Angry Young Man]

You wouldn't be able to eat jelly babies, meat can be farmed under socialism, which will take into account better the environmental problem of livestock farming, and there are parts that cannot be used for arable farming.

Although that said, these parts would become wilderness, and I personally like wilderness. People talk about going to the country when they're basically going to a meat factory, and even the best parks leave something missing. But would it still be ruined by the presence of roads? There's huge livestock farming space in North Yorkshire which would look amazing if it was wild, and apparently if you get rid of sheep, wolves would come back.

[Incendiarism]

I was a vegetarian for three years. It's a personal decision; go for it if you feel you are up to the challenge. Depending on how committed you are, expect some very big changes.


There are a lot of vegetarians who have this stupid idea of defending animals the the end, such as the morons who tried to have the starving Vietnamese refugees tried in San Francisco for killing a stray dog to eat. People should always come before animals, I just don't see why I should cause any additional suffering to forms of life if I don't need to.

This is pretty much my stance. A lot of leftists tend to be vegetarian and are consequently those types of activists. I think it detracts from the bigger picture and trivializes human suffering.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I'm not in the mood to rant about this issue. However, I will say I am vegetarian, the arguments are better on the side of vegetarianism.

If you find yourself being convinced by the opposing arguments, feel free to PM me the arguments you find convincing. Or let me know via the thread. I'll be more than happy to refute them for you.

[RedStarOverChina]

Did you know that Rudolf Hess was a vegetarian and an "animal-rights" activist?

[Incendiarism]

Did you know that Rudolf Hess probably gave gifts to his friends and family?

[RedStarOverChina]

Did you know that Rudolf Hess probably gave gifts to his friends and family?
Shocking, but irrelevant.

[Redmau5]

Did you know that Rudolf Hess was a vegetarian and an "animal-rights" activist?

And?

[Steve_j]

In which way is eating meat natural? Because we have a history of eating meat for our health and well being (and in some cases survival)? For the majority of people now, eating meat is not necessary for our health and well being, in fact the meat based diets adopted by many today is actually detremental to their health and well being.

For most in wealthy countries eating meat is out of tradition, convinence or simply pleasure. That in my book does not justify the participation of the mass slaughter of sentinet beings.

[RedStarOverChina]

And?
Vegetarianism doesn't make you a better person, it just gets you high on morality.

[Steve_j]

You obiously lack the ability to contribute anything of worth to this discussion.

Congratulations!

[RedStarOverChina]

You obiously lack the ability to contribute anything of worth to this discussion.

Congratulations!
Thank you. :)

And you can "obiously" spell better than you can reason.

[Invincible Summer]

There are a lot of vegetarians who have this stupid idea of defending animals the the end, such as the morons who tried to have the starving Vietnamese refugees tried in San Francisco for killing a stray dog to eat. People should always come before animals, I just don't see why I should cause any additional suffering to forms of life if I don't need to.
Also, I have heard some stories about what happens in slaughterhouses from a friend who worked for the union in a one near my home town, and I got to say, that shit is disgusting.

The thing about the dog: It's not necessarily a matter of people coming before animals (although generally that's a good rule of thumb, especially in survival... I mean fuck if I was starving I'd kill an animal to eat), but in this case it's the Western concept that certain animals are "more worthy" of killing than others. In the West, dogs, cats, budgies, goldfish, etc are "pets" but pigs, chickens, etc are "food." It's been shown that pigs are more intelligent than dogs anyway... but to us they're "food," while dogs are not.

This is a contradiction amongst meat eaters that I find amusing. They're all like "I love eating animals!" but when you ask if they'd eat a dog or cat or guinea pig (all delicacies in other parts of the world) they're like "Ew wtf!"


Did you know that Rudolf Hess was a vegetarian and an "animal-rights" activist?

Oh god, are you going to mention that Hitler loved animals and was a vegetarian too? So what if "bad" people were vegetarians too? No one is claiming that being a vegetarian automatically makes you have 1000 "good person" points. It just makes the adherents to the diet more comfortable with what they eat.

I'm sure there are more "bad people" that eat meat anyways.

[Steve_j]

So i cant spell well whats your point? You still havent backed your point of view with any logical argument but just tried to smear other people. So feel free at any stage.

[RedStarOverChina]

All rights are invented concept design for our self-conservation. Every thing we do is to contribute to the survival and welfare of humans as a species---it has nothing to do with non-humans.

Pretending that animals or plants are sentient "just like us" does us absolutely no good, but instead presents various problems.

The very idea of giving animals rights (a human concept) is over-blown homo sapiens hubris---the idea that the entire universe could be ruled by rules invented by humans is ridiculous to say the least. Just because we see killing (some species) as bad, we assign "rights" to animals. If they do have "rights", don't they also have the right not to be killed by other animals? Are we going to sue those animals for rights violation?

If animals could speak, they'd mock you.

No, being a vegetarian won't change a thing except depriving yourself of a wide variety of good food---not just steaks, but other foods made of animal products. Cats will go out there and eat mice, and dogs will chase swallows, and kill them, if lucky. Animals will eat and get eaten.

At the end of the day, the only thing vegetarianism can achieve is feeding smugness all over the world.



No one is claiming that being a vegetarian automatically makes you have 1000 "good person" points. It just makes the adherents to the diet more comfortable with what they eat.Are you sure you didn't mean the exact opposite?

If vegetarianism is to be taken seriously, then I'm, indirectly at least, a "murderer". How's that supposed to make me feel more comfortable?

[Steve_j]

All rights are invented concept design for our self-conservation.

???? An invented concept yes, but designed for our self conservation only? Pehaps you should look a little more as to what "rights" are.


Every thing we do is to contribute to the survival and welfare of humans as a species---it has nothing to do with non-humans.

Speak for your self, some of us give a shit about beings that are not the same as us.



Pretending that animals or plants are sentient "just like us" does us absolutely no good, but instead presents various problems.

No one here has said "just like us" senitient to us means the ability to experience pain and pleasure.


The very idea of giving animals rights (a human concept) is over-blown homo sapiens hubris---the idea that the entire universe could be ruled by rules invented by humans is ridiculous to say the least.

So i can come over to your house and kick the shit out of someones pet, and tourture it to death in a depraved fasion and its ok because the rights of that animal are invented by humans?


If animals could speak, they'd mock you.

No, they would more likely tell you to fuck off and stop abusing them.


No, being a vegetarian won't change a thing except depriving yourself of a wide variety of good food---not just steaks, but other foods made of animal products.

Please explain what "good food' is.


At the end of the day, the only thing vegetarianism can achieve is feeding smugness all over the world.

Same could be said about about communism, it doesnt mean it true.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

People who don't eat meat have a strong tendency to be wankers. Don't risk it bro.

[BOZG]

People who don't eat meat have a strong tendency to be wankers. Don't risk it bro.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[R_P_A_S]

I don't know if it makes a big difference. It's like anything else.. if lots of people do it, you will see a big change. I'm pretty much vegan. there are a lot of cool facts about being vegan that do make you wonder. People should eat whatever they want. I'm not big on trying to convert anyone.

You should try it. It's not bad... go for it and if you don't like it you can always stop. Try to stop eating red meat and then stop eating chicken and pork.. Only fish.. slowly work your way to no meat. try it. what's the big deal?

[Stand Your Ground]

I don't know if it makes a big difference. It's like anything else.. if lots of people do it, you will see a big change. I'm pretty much vegan. there are a lot of cool facts about being vegan that do make you wonder. People should eat whatever they want. I'm not big on trying to convert anyone.

You should try it. It's not bad... go for it and if you don't like it you can always stop. Try to stop eating red meat and then stop eating chicken and pork.. Only fish.. slowly work your way to no meat. try it. what's the big deal?
Agreed. I'm against forcing anything on anyone, as I want a free world everyone should be able to make their own choices about every aspect of their lives. And no one should be put down or thought of as less by making those choices (as I see in this thread).

[Comrade B]

Vegetarianism doesn't make you a better person, it just gets you high on morality.
You are a Stalinist, Trotsky ate meat.

[Comrade B]

Also, could I just add that the vegetarians have not actually attacked the people who eat meat, however the people that eat meat are being very angrily defensive of their diet and several are being dicks in response.

[Stand Your Ground]

Also, could I just add that the vegetarians have not actually attacked the people who eat meat, however the people that eat meat are being very angrily defensive of their diet and several are being dicks in response.
If I could rep you I would. :thumbup1:

[RHIZOMES]

All rights are invented concept design for our self-conservation. Every thing we do is to contribute to the survival and welfare of humans as a species---it has nothing to do with non-humans.

Pretending that animals or plants are sentient "just like us" does us absolutely no good, but instead presents various problems.

The very idea of giving animals rights (a human concept) is over-blown homo sapiens hubris---the idea that the entire universe could be ruled by rules invented by humans is ridiculous to say the least. Just because we see killing (some species) as bad, we assign "rights" to animals. If they do have "rights", don't they also have the right not to be killed by other animals? Are we going to sue those animals for rights violation?

If animals could speak, they'd mock you.

No, being a vegetarian won't change a thing except depriving yourself of a wide variety of good food---not just steaks, but other foods made of animal products. Cats will go out there and eat mice, and dogs will chase swallows, and kill them, if lucky. Animals will eat and get eaten.

At the end of the day, the only thing vegetarianism can achieve is feeding smugness all over the world.


Are you sure you didn't mean the exact opposite?

If vegetarianism is to be taken seriously, then I'm, indirectly at least, a "murderer". How's that supposed to make me feel more comfortable?

Damn you Chit-Chat for not allowing thanked posts. This is basically my position, although I keep it well hidden among the NZ far left, where vegan/vegetarian self-righteousness is so rampant if I said that I'd be verbally mauled by a pack of outraged vegetarians.


Also, could I just add that the vegetarians have not actually attacked the people who eat meat, however the people that eat meat are being very angrily defensive of their diet and several are being dicks in response.

We're venting all our rage on the internet at the amount of self-righteous vegetarians we encounter IRL. We wouldn't be so hostile to the very idea of being a vegetarian if you guys weren't (generally) such moralistic wankers.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

All rights are invented concept design for our self-conservation. Every thing we do is to contribute to the survival and welfare of humans as a species---it has nothing to do with non-humans.

Individual members have no reason to care about the welfare of the species. The evolutionary "species promotion" concept refers to biological mechanisms, not conscious attitudes. The only reason to legitimately care about the welfare of others is a respect for the pain and pleasure they are capable of feeling.


Pretending that animals or plants are sentient "just like us" does us absolutely no good, but instead presents various problems.

Animals are sentient. Are definition of sentience are you using? They clearly feel pain, feel pleasure, and have interests.


The very idea of giving animals rights (a human concept) is over-blown homo sapiens hubris---the idea that the entire universe could be ruled by rules invented by humans is ridiculous to say the least.


This is a common argument to excuse inaction. My Father works in mining, and he is connected to actions that greatly harm the environment. He is skeptical of trying to address global warming because "humans always fail to manipulate nature" (false). We can't do it. We're just being arrogant to think we can. I can easily conceive of us doing it. It involves doing X. It's not difficult to suspect such a thing is possible. Oh, and communism isn't possible because "it won't work."

You can't pass your math test. Actually, you can study and pass it. You'll never study. Actually, you could decide to study. The universe works according to physical laws. It's very plausible to believe humans could control and rule over a large portion of our planet (let's leave the universe alone).



Just because we see killing (some species) as bad, we assign "rights" to animals. If they do have "rights", don't they also have the right not to be killed by other animals? Are we going to sue those animals for rights violation?

As a matter of fact, they do have the right to not be killed by other animals. And no, we won't sue them for rights violations. We would separate them in such a way that it's not an issue. And almost every animal activist agrees that this is a very unimportant issue given other situations in the world. Keep in mind that most activists are motivated by the reduction of suffering and the demeaning of sentient beings. They care about humans. They're not worried about controlling animal murders when there are plenty of more effective ways to improve society right now.


If animals could speak, they'd mock you.

Now you're just being provocative for the sake of it. I don't know what they'd mock us for. I think they'd be quite thankful to vegetarians who decided not to eat them. I think they'd inform us of the fear and misery they experienced in factory farms. I think they'd be quite angry, in fact, with how they and others (including their family) were treated.


No, being a vegetarian won't change a thing except depriving yourself of a wide variety of good food---not just steaks, but other foods made of animal products. Cats will go out there and eat mice, and dogs will chase swallows, and kill them, if lucky. Animals will eat and get eaten.

This isn't true. Being a vegetarian indirectly leads to a reduction in the suffering of animals. I buy meat. The store notices that including me, 201 people by stakes on average. I stop. Now 200 stakes are bought. They give a new order to the slaughter house. The slaughter house stops unnecessary production. Vegetarians work together to add up to significant sums and save animals. What's that - putting the importance of collective good above the individual. Sounds like communism to me. Scary! If you think vegetarians don't reduce the suffering of animals, you don't understand market economies.


At the end of the day, the only thing vegetarianism can achieve is feeding smugness all over the world.


People should take pride in admirable actions. It encourages them to continue to act in such a way. See our friend Aristotle for more info.


If vegetarianism is to be taken seriously, then I'm, indirectly at least, a "murderer". How's that supposed to make me feel more comfortable?

Matters of fact don't change because they make people uncomfortable. Technically, you are morally equivalent to a murderer of both animals AND humans.

When you go out to a restaurant, you spend more money on food than you otherwise could've for the same nutrients. If you saw someone drowning in your new clothes, you would help them. Or should. A life is worth more than twenty dollars. Yet you can easily give this money to third world nations and spare that individual hunger pains and even death. But you don't. I'm just as guilty on this front.

Realistically speaking, people are murderers. Ethics is such a ridiculous realm of discussion because people adjust ethics to favor how they live their lives. Notice capitalists have a capitalist ethic? People think action and inaction are different without logical reason. People think that they shouldn't have to help the poor because "it's the rich who are the cause of poverty." We all make excuses.

It's better to admit to yourself that you're not perfect than adjust your worldview in accordance to how you live your life. Just commit yourself to improving in all aspects of your life. Then call yourself, relatively, a decent person. Ideally speaking, we're all terrible.

Sartre introduces the concept of bad faith. The approach people have towards ethics is a perfect example. Many people just throw ethics away entirely. Some people pick and choose values. Very few people are honest about how they are living their life contrary to how a perfectly ethical person would.

Vegetarianism is morally superior. We live in a cultural context where people think it is acceptable. It isn't. If a vegetarian has a smug attitude, give him the old "how much do you donate to charity" or "how much did that shirt cost." Vegetarians are just as guilty as having a terrible conception of morality. They think as long as you don't "hurt people" you're a great person. If you don't help people, you're a bad person. It's inconvenient, but oh well.

I am vegetarian and do not walk around feeling morally superior to others. Given how I live my life in other ways, I often think the opposite. However, if I had to choose who would live or die between two identical twins, I would pick the one who is a vegetarian assuming no other distinctions. And this would be the right choice to make.

[RedStarOverChina]

???? An invented concept yes, but designed for our self conservation only? Pehaps you should look a little more as to what "rights" are.Done. Then what?



Speak for your self, some of us give a shit about beings that are not the same as us.Right, good luck befriending tapeworms.


No one here has said "just like us" senitient to us means the ability to experience pain and pleasure.Duh.

That's part of being a wild animal---They kill and get killed---this goes on and on for billions of years, nothing you can do about it.




So i can come over to your house and kick the shit out of someones pet, and tourture it to death in a depraved fasion and its ok because the rights of that animal are invented by humans? No, you can't kick my dog because I'd kick your ass. It's not because dogs shouldn't be killed, it's because it's my dog.

You can't come to my home and cut up my shirts. Is that so hard to understand?

Now if you go out and abuse a wild animal in an unnecessarily cruel way for no reason, then I probably won't kick your ass. Though that puts your sanity and moral judgment into question, and you should probably be isolated.

Who knows whether you'd pull something completely uncalled for like that on a human being?


No, they would more likely tell you to fuck off and stop abusing them.And then proceed to prey on other animals.


As a matter of fact, they do have the right to not be killed by other animals. And no, we won't sue them for rights violations. We would separate them in such a way that it's not an issue. And almost every animal activist agrees that this is a very unimportant issue given other situations in the world. Keep in mind that most activists are motivated by the reduction of suffering and the demeaning of sentient beings. They care about humans. They're not worried about controlling animal murders when there are plenty of more effective ways to improve society right now.Wow. So one of those days you are going to go out there, capture all the predators, lions, wolves, cats and raccoons---and isolate them so they won't kill other animals?

That's a great idea. What are you going to do next? Give them a quick death or starve them to death? Because you know, they do have to eat other animals.

On second thought, that's bat-shit-insane. It's just like I said before, animal rights activists are so blindly inspired by their human-devised moral values, that they would want to push those values onto animals.

A lion eating a rabbit is NOT immoral. Animals live outside the realm of our moral values and our rights.



Matters of fact don't change because they make people uncomfortable. Oh that was just in reply to a previous post saying vegetarianism is supposed to make people feel more comfortable about eating food.

I'm glad you refuted him.

As for me, I'm perfectly comfortable with being a meat-eater. I'm not a "sinner" and refuse to see myself as such. I don't eat crabs, because they gave me a particularly unpleasant reaction when I last tried to cook them some 10 years ago. I was young and impressionable.

But I would NEVER condemn others for eating them just because I have psychological issues with eating them.



Technically, you are morally equivalent to a murderer of both animals AND humans...When you go out to a restaurant, you spend more money on food than you otherwise could've for the same nutrients...A life is worth more than twenty dollars. Yet you can easily give this money to third world nations and spare that individual hunger pains and even death. But you don't. I'm just as guilty on this front. You raised a legitimate issue (albeit irrelevant to the discussion) about luxury in the face of third-world suffering, though I wouldn't call myself a African-baby-killer for enjoying some whiskey once in a while. As much as I may feel guilty about it, the African baby didn't die because I had some Jack Daniel. He died because of Capitalism, Colonialism, political and economic mismanagement, etc.

But that has nothing to do with animal rights; and I'm perfectly fine with directly or indirectly causing the death of animals for my consumption needs.

[Comrade B]

We're venting all our rage on the internet at the amount of self-righteous vegetarians we encounter IRL. We wouldn't be so hostile to the very idea of being a vegetarian if you guys weren't (generally) such moralistic wankers.
I haven't encountered that many moralistic prick on this one. Maybe it is because I am a vegetarian myself, but in a situation where there are none, it kind of offends the people who are being categorized with them

[Wanted Man]

I'm a vegetarian, although I suspect I will start eating fish again. My philosophy is "eat what you'd be comfortable killing yourself."

Why? Humanity has developed in such a way that not everyone has to gather their own food for ages now, so why should this consideration matter? Quite a few people would be unable or unwilling to grow wheat, mill it, and bake bread for themselves every day. Perhaps they should stop eating bread.


This is a contradiction amongst meat eaters that I find amusing. They're all like "I love eating animals!" but when you ask if they'd eat a dog or cat or guinea pig (all delicacies in other parts of the world) they're like "Ew wtf!"

So people from "other parts of the world" who eat dogs and cats are not "meat eaters"? Curious.

[Invincible Summer]

Why? Humanity has developed in such a way that not everyone has to gather their own food for ages now, so why should this consideration matter? Quite a few people would be unable or unwilling to grow wheat, mill it, and bake bread for themselves every day. Perhaps they should stop eating bread.

I'm not really talking about the literal killing of an animal yourself (e.g. hunting). Just the principle that you should be comfortable with killing a cow if you're going to eat steak, because really you're just paying off someone some miles away to do it for you. The steak comes to you as steak, not necessarily as part of a cow.

I guess what I'm getting at is that people need to appreciate the food they have for what it is. It's disturbing to have witnessed children and teens not knowing what animal their meat comes from, just because they're so disconnected from production.




So people from "other parts of the world" who eat dogs and cats are not "meat eaters"? Curious.
Um, I didn't say that.

[Wanted Man]

I'm not really talking about the literal killing of an animal yourself (e.g. hunting). Just the principle that you should be comfortable with killing a cow if you're going to eat steak, because really you're just paying off someone some miles away to do it for you. The steak comes to you as steak, not necessarily as part of a cow.

I guess what I'm getting at is that people need to appreciate the food they have for what it is. It's disturbing to have witnessed children and teens not knowing what animal their meat comes from, just because they're so disconnected from production.

Why is it disturbing? Makes sense to me. We can't all be involved in the production process of everything we consume. Are you reading any books at the moment? It's disappointing that you don't seem to appreciate how many rainforests are being cut down for them, and that you are paying off someone else to do it for you. The book comes to you as a book, not as a rainforest the size of a football field.


Um, I didn't say that.

Then what's the point? It's a "contradiction" to say "I like meat" when you don't eat all meat? Why? Would you eat every kind of vegetable in the world?

[bricolage]

We're venting all our rage on the internet at the amount of self-righteous vegetarians we encounter IRL. We wouldn't be so hostile to the very idea of being a vegetarian if you guys weren't (generally) such moralistic wankers.

Yes yes people always go on about this but my experiences in my life have always been the other way around. While there are some vegetarian/vegans who believe in it very strongly and will act very angrily towards meat eaters (Morrissey...) it most often tends to be the other way around. The amount of jokes, abuse, sneering that people dish out against people who don't eat meat (especially when eating out) has always seemed to outweigh it going in the other direction.

[Wanted Man]

For me it's exactly the opposite of AB's experience. I'm always nice and considerate of vegetarians when out or whatever, but I really dislike the ones on the internet for some reason.

[Stand Your Ground]

Yes yes people always go on about this but my experiences in my life have always been the other way around. While there are some vegetarian/vegans who believe in it very strongly and will act very angrily towards meat eaters (Morrissey...) it most often tends to be the other way around. The amount of jokes, abuse, sneering that people dish out against people who don't eat meat (especially when eating out) has always seemed to outweigh it going in the other direction.
Agreed. Nothing like discrimination for our choice of lifestyle. :rolleyes:

[Invincible Summer]

Why is it disturbing? Makes sense to me. We can't all be involved in the production process of everything we consume. Are you reading any books at the moment? It's disappointing that you don't seem to appreciate how many rainforests are being cut down for them, and that you are paying off someone else to do it for you. The book comes to you as a book, not as a rainforest the size of a football field.

I'm aware we can't be involved in the production process. I'm not saying we should all be involved in the production process. I just think that we all need to be a bit more aware of what we eat, where it comes from, etc




Then what's the point? It's a "contradiction" to say "I like meat" when you don't eat all meat? Why? Would you eat every kind of vegetable in the world?
I'm mainly referring to people who are "proud" meat eaters that basically say that "animals are for us to eat!" When i ask them if they'll eat ___ animal, they say it's gross and "You don't eat _______."
The point is not in actually eating it or not - obviously people have taste preferences - but the recognition that a guinea pig is just as much "food" as the "real" pig that one eats.

And yeah I'd be up for trying any vegetable that wouldn't kill me

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I'm aware we can't be involved in the production process. I'm not saying we should all be involved in the production process. I just think that we all need to be a bit more aware of what we eat, where it comes from, etc

I'm sorry, but I can't afford trendy bijou organic free-range whatever-the-fuck meat, and I like the taste too much to give up.


I'm mainly referring to people who are "proud" meat eaters that basically say that "animals are for us to eat!" When i ask them if they'll eat ___ animal, they say it's gross and "You don't eat _______."
The point is not in actually eating it or not - obviously people have taste preferences - but the recognition that a guinea pig is just as much "food" as the "real" pig that one eats.

Unfortunately nobody seems to stock guinea pig in my area, so...


And yeah I'd be up for trying any vegetable that wouldn't kill me

Fuck that. Parsnips make me want to puke.

[Wanted Man]

I'm aware we can't be involved in the production process. I'm not saying we should all be involved in the production process. I just think that we all need to be a bit more aware of what we eat, where it comes from, etc

That would be nice, but I don't think that "people need to", as you put it before. I think most people with an elementary education are aware that the meat used to be a cow, but they will still eat it. Some people may wish to find out more, and they can watch those PETA infiltration videos and decide to become vegetarians as a result, but the majority probably won't. Too bad for vegetarians who feel strongly about this kind of awareness, but the way you framed it is a bit dramatic.


I'm mainly referring to people who are "proud" meat eaters that basically say that "animals are for us to eat!" When i ask them if they'll eat ___ animal, they say it's gross and "You don't eat _______."
The point is not in actually eating it or not - obviously people have taste preferences - but the recognition that a guinea pig is just as much "food" as the "real" pig that one eats.

And yeah I'd be up for trying any vegetable that wouldn't kill me

Well fair enough, but people who bang on about how great it is to eat all animals are probably just taking the mickey out of you anyway. ;) Don't be that guy who spends all his time seriously rebutting every statement that is simply made to provoke someone's sensibilities.

Of course the animal products that we eat depend on cultural boundaries as well. I'm not even talking about cats or dogs in China here; some people here (Netherlands) would be genuinely shocked that they eat haggis and black pudding just across the sea. Shame, because both are quite nice.

[AntiReactionZero]

Well it really depends on your personal choice, I personally eat meat. There's evidence that plants communicate with each other, try to defend themselves and such, so it's no better to just eat plants. But it is your choice, you choose your criteria.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Well it really depends on your personal choice, I personally eat meat. There's evidence that plants communicate with each other, try to defend themselves and such, so it's no better to just eat plants. But it is your choice, you choose your criteria.

Don't be foolish. It's clearly different. Make a real effort to defend your position instead of resorting to nonsensical arguments such as "plants have rights."

Plants respond to stimulus. I can make two computers that communicate by exchanging data, in theory, and I could also give them defense mechanisms. They are not animals, human beings, sentient, or deserving of rights.

If you actually want to defend the idea that plants have rights, you should read Paul Taylor's arguments for biocentric egalitarianism.

[AntiReactionZero]

I never said plants have rights :p Where did I even say the word right or imply it. I think you think I was implying plants shouldn't be eaten. I wasn't. I was simply saying plants are just different than animals, as in they don't scream and have eyes, so they don't invoke the same emotions, but they clearly have a drive to live. I think you're getting angry over nothing! As for plants communicating and defending themselves, you can read about it here: (I didn't realize new members can't post links so I'll just have to do this: NY Times: Sorry, Vegans: Brussels Sprouts Like to Live, Too ) Also, I don't see I was defending anything, with "make your own opinion and position." Lol I think you took it a bit too seriously.

[Comrade Gwydion]

Meh. I am starting to dislike people on the radical left more and more, even though I share their stances.
Because we all think that 'lifestyleism' isn't enough, many of us use this as an excuse to join in with all the excesses of consumer capitalism. I think the Radical Left has 3 jobs:
a) Argument the Theory. Develop argumentation and win discussions
b) Push politics. Be an activist, do demonstrations.
c)live the lifestyle.
Although arguments 'ad hominem' are a logical fallacy, you loose al lot of credibility when you are a greedy mass-consumer yourselve. And fuck it, many of us are.
What a fucking shame, to see red flags poised against a Kentucky Fried Chicken during the Copenhague demonstration.

Meat industry is bad for climate, and influences the polical parties, and bad for the food for the third world.

[An archist]

There's only one good reason to eat meat and that's because it tastes good.

[Tower of Bebel]

Vegetarianism (as a choice) is only better in opposition to overeating (i.e. the 'culture' of fast food and fats). You should do it for health reasons.

[RHIZOMES]

Meh. I am starting to dislike people on the radical left more and more, even though I share their stances.
Because we all think that 'lifestyleism' isn't enough, many of us use this as an excuse to join in with all the excesses of consumer capitalism. I think the Radical Left has 3 jobs:
a) Argument the Theory. Develop argumentation and win discussions
b) Push politics. Be an activist, do demonstrations.
c)live the lifestyle.
Although arguments 'ad hominem' are a logical fallacy, you loose al lot of credibility when you are a greedy mass-consumer yourselve. And fuck it, many of us are.
What a fucking shame, to see red flags poised against a Kentucky Fried Chicken during the Copenhague demonstration.

Meat industry is bad for climate, and influences the polical parties, and bad for the food for the third world.

Mmmm, KFC...


Yes yes people always go on about this but my experiences in my life have always been the other way around. While there are some vegetarian/vegans who believe in it very strongly and will act very angrily towards meat eaters (Morrissey...) it most often tends to be the other way around. The amount of jokes, abuse, sneering that people dish out against people who don't eat meat (especially when eating out) has always seemed to outweigh it going in the other direction.

We've had a different experience of vegetarians then.

There are a few vegetarians I'm friends with who don't treat me like I'm some sort of mass murderer for eating chicken and steak but I've found, for me personally, they're far and few between. The best line I get is when it's implicating I'm some sort of hypocrite for being a Marxist and eating meat... for some reason.

[AntiReactionZero]

B12 is most readily provided by meat, and not everyone has the luxury of eating pond sludge to readily supply their nutritional needs :D. But that's my two cents, I'm not trying to tell people how to eat.

[Reuben]

I definitely reccomend my article on why meat DOES NOT cause world hunger: http://thethirdestate.net/2009/09/meat-does-not-cause-world-hunger/

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I definitely reccomend my article on why meat DOES NOT cause world hunger: http://thethirdestate.net/2009/09/meat-does-not-cause-world-hunger/

That reasoning is rather manipulative. Causation is a vague concept that is easily exploitable. The article says that eating meat does not cause world hunger. Why? Because if resources were distributed properly, people would not starve.

The article attacks semantics. The point is that eating meat is inefficient, and we could "more easily" maintain the current state of affairs "AND" solve world hunger if people were vegetarian. That likely wouldn't happen. They'd just use the extra produce for profit in some way.

Many vegetarians are simply trying to provide reasons for people who don't care about animal welfare to become vegetarian. Realistically, animal welfare is the reason people should become vegetarian. That an environmental impact.

And you can say environmental damage isn't caused by the meat industry. It's caused by capitalism and we could maintain the meat industry in other ways. Unlike the world hunger issue, where vegetarianism is unlikely to help people as long as profit-driven people control the market, environmental impact is decreased by a vegetarian diet.

I don't really take personal issue with non-vegetarians. Ideologically, I think I should. I just don't worry about personal judgments in general. I think there are a vast number of things we can criticize ourselves for that are just as serious - if not more - than the treatment of animals. Though I do think animal welfare is one of the most important social issues today.

I don't see the obsession with defending meat. I don't defend myself when I fail to give money to the homeless person I walk buy. I kept it because I'm not a perfect person. I act selfishly.

So you do something wrong, why worry about it? People aren't perfect. Half the things we buy in everyday life probably harm not only animals in some way, but people. I could stop shopping at a store owned by a nice person who I know shops at Company X that I know deals in child slavery. I could extend this chain to friends of friends of friends. And with modern technology, this would be easier than you think. But I don't, and I'm likely not willing to go through the effort.

[Stand Your Ground]

That's why we need world communism, to distribute the food evenly.