You're an animal. We are all animals. I strongly advise you to agree with this point because the biologists are going to come down on you like a ton of bricks if you do not.
I still disagree with this notation. Yes, biologically I am only an animal. But I feel there is a lot more to being human than that.
Bullfuckingshit. You're a stack of fucking cells like anything else living on this planet. I don't give a fuck if you believe in a soul or not, point being here: You need the exact same shit to keep your meatsack warm as any other member of Domain Eukaryota, Kingdom Animalia.
EDIT: Can I get some fellow biologist backup up in this bitch?
1) I like meat. 2) I need protein. 3) Most other sources of protein besides meat and mushrooms give me terrible, terrible gas, so I eat meat.
I don't give a damn about the sentience of an animal in regards to food. I think some animals are sentient and others are not. If my survival came down to eating the flesh of another human or not, I would eat that too. Now, would I kill a person to make that happen? I don't know. It depends on the circumstances.
The way that food animals are treated is another matter entirely. I'm supportive of places that raise meat animals humanely. I just can't always afford their products while on a student budget.
Yeah, sorry. I was rather trying to say that it doesn't really matter concerning my argument.
If you want to get nitty-gritty, the amino acid composition of animal protein more adequately matches the amino acid demands of the human body. If you think about it, that sort of makes sense. Humans are made of proteins which are much closer in structure and function to animal proteins, not plant proteins, so it makes sense that you're going to be ingesting a greater proportion of amino acids that you need when you eat meat.
I find this very interesting. Does this mean that it is not possible for anyone who doesn't eat meat to get these amino acids or it's just a lot harder?
I find this very interesting. Does this mean that it is not possible for anyone who doesn't eat meat to get these amino acids or it's just a lot harder?
You can get all of the essential amino acids from non-animal sources, I believe. You just have to eat a lot more of them in order to do it. Soy is actually pretty goddamn amazing like that, but soy also has its drawbacks.
The point of all this is that the healthiest diet you can eat is a balanced one, and lean animal protein is one of those balancing factors.
EDIT: Lacto-ova vegetarianism is probably the most animal friendly you can get before you run the risk of health complications.
You're pretty much just wrong here. There's not even an argument for or against this. What have you got? Abstract thought? Awesome, lots of animals demonstrate complex problem-solving capabilities and have complex social structures. The only reason we think we're special is because we can communicate our thoughts to each other.
I think this would be a great argument on its own. Can animals possibly think of synthetic a priori propositions? But I am willing to say you are probably right, we are all animals. Does this give us the right to unnecessarily induce pain in other animals?
I haven't spent that much time thinking about the issue, but I personally must put human interests, my own included, far, far above those of other animals. I wouldn't say infinitely far, however.
Oh, also, I personally have no moral problem with killing animals of lesser intelligence. A plant is a living thing with a whole lot less apparent intelligence than an animal. Where do you draw the line? I draw the line at monkeys, dolphins, parrots, octopi, and whales, many of which are as intelligent as small children.
I wouldn't say there's a line per se, just a scale of exponentially increasing value.
Does this give us the right to unnecessarily induce pain in other animals?
Rights don't exist, they're just a construct of human thought.
OK, now that I'm done with silly reductionism, "right" doesn't really factor in. You need food. In order to get food, a living thing must die. Should we try to minimize apparent suffering in animals? Sure, I can buy that. Humane raising has other benefits that aren't just "feel-good;" animals that are raised humanely are less likely to get sick, and in turn the meat they produce is of a better quality. Plus, a healthy animal is less likely to get an infection which then either contaminates the processing environment or the rest of the herd.
Should we do so to the point that it is actually difficult for us to get the food we need? Fuck no. Come back to me when nobody is starving to death, and then we can talk about changing diets around.
Does this give us the right to unnecessarily induce pain in other animals?
Rights don't exist, they're just a construct of human thought.
OK, now that I'm done with silly reductionism, "right" doesn't really factor in.
Indeed. We just have to weigh outcomes of the world against one another and decide which we prefer. It's a great thing to reduce animal suffering, but you have to weigh this against any rise in the cost of or fall in the availability of proper nutrition, and, in turn, the human suffering this would cause.
OK, now that I'm done with silly reductionism, "right" doesn't really factor in.
I think it does."Right" may just be a construct of human thought, but so is being humanistic or treating everyone equal. Just because it's just a construct of human thought doesn't mean it can be neglected. At the point where we would suffer from not having enough meat I'd say o.k., you have a point. But we don't need the sheer amount of meat which is being produced today.
Come back to me when nobody is starving to death, and then we can talk about changing diets around.
I don't think Americans eating a lot of meat or little meat has a lot to do with people starving to death. Helping those people is a lot more important, but a different issue.
Should we try to minimize apparent suffering in animals? Sure, I can buy that. Humane
That was kind of what I was trying to say. The way I try to do so is by not buying any meat, especially from places where animals were suffering unnecessarily
Humane raising has other benefits that aren't just "feel-good;" animals that are raised humanely are less likely to get sick, and in turn the meat they produce is of a better quality.
This. My best friend from grade school's family raise cows and pigs one or two at a time. I have never had better sausage, bacon, whathaveyou than from those animals.
I've been doing a lot of research on the animal rights movement for college and this has been kind of a conundrum of mine for a while. After giving it a lot of thought I've realized that I'm not so much concerned about eating meat as I am about the treatment of the animals themselves in factory farms and whatnot. I'd prefer it if the animals were treated better but I understand that's mostly my own empathy from years of being a pet owner and animal lover. I agree with Scott at drawing the line at animals that are very intelligent (calamari is not cool). I also won't eat foods I find needlessly cruel (veal), but I am not going to stop eating meat entirely.
This will all be made moot in the far future when we can grow meat directly without the need for the animal.
Once I can grow a steak that's just as good as a "real" one from a cow, "real" meat becomes a whole lot less justifiable (and I get my meat faucet next to the water faucet).
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." [/atheistirony]
I worked on a dairy farm (primarily milk and free-range eggs) in high school that also raised calves to be sold for slaughter to make veal. I, personally, do not eat veal because it really impossible to raise calves to a standard that I (again, personally) would consider humane. However, I have no moral problem consuming dairy products or free-range eggs, because those cows and hens were treated incredibly well. There was an Angus beef farm down the road that I was familiar with as well, and again, I have no qualms about eating beef after seeing how well those animals were treated and knowing their slaughtering process.
More than half of my meals are vegetarian or vegan (for health concerns and because free range meats and eggs cost a lot), but I eat meat for taste, convenience, and nutrition.
Just a note to the vegetarians, here in PA we have a serious deer problem. There population has exploded to over 5x what they should be at (in the valley forge area) they are literally without a natural predator other then cars which of course don't eat them and usually leave them horribly wounded on the side of the road. Would it not be better to have hunters come through and thin the herd (which also would help with disease) and use that meat to eat?
Proper French foie gras geese do not struggle or act uncomfortable during the feed, according to two different chefs whose books I own and have read. Veal is usually not too nice, but is too goddamn delicious for me to not eat.
I am all for vat-grown meat. Everybody wins!
Except the Catholics. Something tells me they wouldn't be so happy about that.
Cows don't have souls under Catholic doctrine; it'd be fine with them. Vats imply scaffold-based tissue growth, so you wouldn't even be growing a complete living being. They'd be even more down with that.
Comments
EDIT: Can I get some fellow biologist backup up in this bitch?
2) I need protein.
3) Most other sources of protein besides meat and mushrooms give me terrible, terrible gas, so I eat meat.
I don't give a damn about the sentience of an animal in regards to food. I think some animals are sentient and others are not. If my survival came down to eating the flesh of another human or not, I would eat that too. Now, would I kill a person to make that happen? I don't know. It depends on the circumstances.
The way that food animals are treated is another matter entirely. I'm supportive of places that raise meat animals humanely. I just can't always afford their products while on a student budget.
The point of all this is that the healthiest diet you can eat is a balanced one, and lean animal protein is one of those balancing factors.
EDIT: Lacto-ova vegetarianism is probably the most animal friendly you can get before you run the risk of health complications.
OK, now that I'm done with silly reductionism, "right" doesn't really factor in. You need food. In order to get food, a living thing must die. Should we try to minimize apparent suffering in animals? Sure, I can buy that. Humane raising has other benefits that aren't just "feel-good;" animals that are raised humanely are less likely to get sick, and in turn the meat they produce is of a better quality. Plus, a healthy animal is less likely to get an infection which then either contaminates the processing environment or the rest of the herd.
Should we do so to the point that it is actually difficult for us to get the food we need? Fuck no. Come back to me when nobody is starving to death, and then we can talk about changing diets around.
Also, it tastes good.
Once I can grow a steak that's just as good as a "real" one from a cow, "real" meat becomes a whole lot less justifiable (and I get my meat faucet next to the water faucet).
I, personally, do not eat veal because it really impossible to raise calves to a standard that I (again, personally) would consider humane. However, I have no moral problem consuming dairy products or free-range eggs, because those cows and hens were treated incredibly well. There was an Angus beef farm down the road that I was familiar with as well, and again, I have no qualms about eating beef after seeing how well those animals were treated and knowing their slaughtering process.
More than half of my meals are vegetarian or vegan (for health concerns and because free range meats and eggs cost a lot), but I eat meat for taste, convenience, and nutrition.
The way I look at it, if I don't have a problem with lamb, than I really shouldn't have a problem with veal. Plus, veal parmigiana is tasty.