Is eating meat morally wrong

Dropped on you head as a child, hmmm? Okay the distinction is thatif a cow gathered the chutzpah to communicate their desires to us in a fashion we understand then I have no problem with them gaining their rights.

The present itself has no value. The thought behind it does. If I give a cow the same rights I have I am denying it's ability to seize those rights themselves.

I protect the weak humans and the meek humans will inherit the earth. However the rest of us with backbone will get better places.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No, eating is a necessity. Eating meat is also a necessity for the maximum health benefits from food. You saying different does not make your veiw true. Welcome to reality, hope you enjoy that cheeseburger.

First of all as I mentioned above most animals have no rights in our society. Since society determines right and wrong and society agrees with me for the most part, you are wrong.

No, like I said if an animal seives rights i will recognize them. Till then it's lunch time.

It's a pity you do not see validity in reality. Guess it is time you were commited.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If humans are meat, can we eat them?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You're not above that yourself, so maybe you should be less judgmental here.

:m:

 

Well it is not an insult to ask a question or make and observation. I mean it is not slander if it is true, right? Now I asked if you had been dropped on your head. I am assuming form your lack of answer you don't know. In which case the proper response is of course "I don't know" not a recrimination.

As for your other arguments, I see I have to expalin in great detail. Such a shame as normally you exhibit the ability to extropolate at least a little.

A one year old human child is part of the human race, which has already asserted it rights. The child is protected by virtue of the species rights. The same as any adult. If this seems elitest, it is. The reason is simple, the strong survive by preying on the weak. Animals are weak in mind and will as are plants thus we prey on them. of course we protect our own as much as we can and only an aberration goes against this order.

I fail to see how the need to eat is a straw man tactic. I mean you are comparing the eating of meat (a need) to the raping of minors (a sick desire to say the least. It is apples and rocks. They don't belong in the same thought process. Only a ver disturbed individual would think of them as similiar.

I could say just as easily that since a human can survive on eating just meat and meat by products that eating plant material is immoral. It is basically the same argument you are making. Plants suffer, they feel, they react to the environment. Why is it right to eat them? Now think on this paragraph for a while and you can wonder why we look at your argument and respond childishly. It is becuase your argument is childish.

For the record you have shown that some (a mall minority) of meat profuction is possibly cruel and in humane. However you have the wrong answer. We don't stop eating meat. We do our best to make sure what meat we eat is produced as humanely as possible. That is the answer.

Now when the day comes where we can have a vat that grows animal muscle tissue without the animal involved then I will switch to that. I want one of each kind. untill then you can take your opinion and go eat a salad.

 

Does a carnivore "need" to eat meat??? What difference does it make if one does not kill an animal himself? Another animal will kill that animal or that animal will die of old age. If the latter is the case then overcrowding due to overlapping lifespans would ensue and all the problems of overcrowding would follow.

You don't need to procreate and you don't "need" to create a family and you don't "need" to continue living. You want to....you could just jump off a tall bulding into a concrete grave because you don't NEED to do anything....so why not stop living, because you don't "need" to do it...

Animals are not helpless, they are merely lower on the food chain. And thus, we can eat them...that is the way Nature works. That is how the so-called "God" (or whatever you may call "him") intended it to be, otherwise no animals would eat meat, all animals would eat plants.... Sounds silly doesn't it???

 

Humans and animals are equal. (aren't humans animals?)

There is no real difference in the way humans act compared to animals. Just because we humans can experienece more emotions or have more complicated thoughts does not mean we are better.

Therefore, it is no more wrong for a man to eat meat than it is for a shark.

 

Why not? You are far too easy to bait. Much like my father when he invents facts. Perhaps why I am having such fun with this.

Members of the same species may of course speak for another to protect them. That is part of protecting our own.

Are you a cow, pig, goat, shark, deer, or lobster? No? Then why do you think you have the right to speak for them? Do you think you hear animal voices? Does a dog named Harvey talk to you?

I don't have a species bias for or against anything. Well I don't like mildew, but hey that is only fair.

I consider every species special. I just do my utmost for mankind first. Anyone who puts another species above their own has got some issues.

Obviously you missed the part in bold. I suppose it was an honest mistake that you forgot to delete it. After all it would make your comment completely nonsensical as well as these following one.

Well according you aberrant veiw perhaps not, but luckily your view only applies to you.

“

So you have a poor grasp of botany. True they have no spinal cord, but plant can and do suffer. Just becuase your ignorance failes to realize it does not change that fact. And i agree you are clutching at straw.

I thought all the voices in your head knew each other already.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Did i say humane killing? No I said humane treatment. I'm not sorry to tell you that locally the cattle have much better lives then they would in the wild. Somedays i swear they have better lives than I do.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

if you saw ranches like this you would not be so quick to judge all cattle rasing as cruel and barbaric.

Actually, i am more concerned with the quality of life before the death. Death is inevitable, wheter through old age and disease, slaughter, or predators. Worrying about the death is pointless. The quality of life before hand, however that makes more sense to worry about.

The difference would be that I wouldn't have to hunt through woods for venison when I want it. I wouldn't need to track down so buffalo steaks when i get the craving. That kind of thing. Another plus is shepards pie with veal and lamb and no idiot could complain. Not that I really listen anyway.

 

No.
The frontal lobe brain development has allowed man to experience a more complex range of emotions that I do not believe non-human animals can feel.

 

But it what you have implied all along. How fun it must be for you to be able to make an attack and yet honestly say "Well those aren't my exact words."

Oh you are that James R. Sorry I didn't know.

I'm sure you glad of it, James R. Actually i have no idea the average age, but I am sure they perfer death than what you have in mind for them.

Hmmmm, nice attempt at spin. Death is never premature. Death happens when it happens. In some cases it is sad, shocking, horrifying or upset, but it is part of life.

Of course not, Buffalo is illegal to hunt around here. That and hunting cattles is a bit odd. Not to mention chicken. Although you could probably try. Although i do not want to know what you do with the cow or the chicken if you do.

 

I'm exhausted reading this.

My quick opinions:

Humans don't need meat. Just take a nutrition class at your local community college. Complement your proteins, bitch.

Factory farming is disgusting; if you don't completely understand what it entails I urge you to do some research (Google). Other than that, I guess it's okay to eat meat.

I eat meat, but not a lot because I don't really care about animals that much. I believe my eating meat causes suffering, but that in the grand scheme of things, it's pretty inconsequential and insignificant, especially considering how much more human suffering there is in this world.

Africa. Greenpeace sucks.

 

Actually many are killed byt their owners for being sick, old, or even for protecting their turf from abusive people. True they are not often eaten but more becuase they are part of the family, not becuase of anything else. As for picking up the wrong impression form you, no I do not think I did . You were doing your best to convey a certian understanding. Then when you were called upon it you back pedal.

Actually, infamous around here is more the word. And you write like he talks, use some of his catch phrases, and even feign ignorance of your own meanings like he does. I could hope it is a coincedence, I suppose

Not a veiled insult at all.

If somebody arbitrarily shot and killed me, would it matter if I minded. I'd be dead and standing outside the pearly gates. I'd be dead with not much to say about it, except "Oh well."

 

James:

I believe there is a correlation between the complexity of organisms and their ability to suffer. This isn't something I know for a fact, but I believe it anyway and it makes sense. For example, there's no controversy about a person cleaning his/her hands, even though it entails the genocide of millions of germs (I know bacteria aren't animals -- but you get the point) because it's accepted that they don't suffer. We don't give them consideration. I don't think bacteria feel, think or even notice they're alive or when they die. However, it seems the more complex and intelligent the organism, the more potential it has for suffering.

For example, I think it would be much worse to harpoon and kill a dolphin than to say, torture a shew. Dolphins are much more intelligent than shews. They understand things more. And of course, humans are more intelligent than dolphins, and so it's much worse for a human to be killed than a dolphin.

I think this relationship of organism/complexity and the ability to suffer is also true of organisms of the same species, but at different maturity levels, and thus complexity. For example, kill a freshly conceived zygote and who cares? No complexity, no problem. As it develops, so does its ability to experience pain and hurt. Kill a fetus at 2 weeks, it gets more complex. Some people may sneer and cringe. Kill a fetus at 6 months with a coat hanger and it becomes an act of abomination.

There's no special threshold where it's okay to kill a fetus or not okay, but one thing is clear -- the earlier the abortion, the better. After all, what's so bad about killing a non-thinking, non-feeling zygote?

What's worse, killing a 1 year old baby or a 40 year old man? The man is much more developed and has much greater cognitive ability, so you can probably guess what I think.

Humans are more complex and have higher congnitive abilities and as such, have greater ability to suffer. If there was an animal of more complexity and more depth of thought than humans, it would be more immoral to kill it than a human.

I hope this explains why I think human suffering is more important than animal suffering. It should be noted, however, that the suffering of many is worse than the suffering of one.

So perhaps a factory farm of 20,000 cattle might be comparable to say, a concentration camp of maybe 1,000 humans (A random guess. I'm just throwing out numbers for a thought exercise.) -- which is still dispicable. I'm not sure how you can quantify suffering. Perhaps you could estimate the processing power of its brain (which may say something about its ability to suffer) and compare it to the processing power of the brain of a human. So for example, if we found out that one human brain has the processing throughput of 1,000 cattle, then killing 1,001 cattle would be worse than killing a single human. Not true, but just a thought exercise. However, it should be noted that
calculation of brains is, after all, what enables suffering.


It's all a sliding scale, in my opinion. Choose your suffering.