The moral argument of eating meat & dairy

[henryscat]

Consumers of meat consume. They do not take the lives of others.It is separate act.

If a person consumes meat, they are responsible for the death of the animal concerned, if they consume dairy they are contributing to the death of calves and the huge emotional stress caused to cows by a calf being taken off them. The problem is the psychological separation where most people don't properly make the connection - even if in some cases they think they have.

Whilst that separation exists and continues (and it will) and is not thought about to any great extent, bacon and all other meaty food stuffs will still "taste nice".

That separation needs to be challenged... Whilst it continues people cannot and do not make objective decisions about their food. The website www.carnism.com is well worth a look and Melanie Joy's book explains the principles very well. Carnism contends that consumption of meat is an un-named ideology, which I agree with entirely. It further contends that violent ideologies rely upon ignornance to be perpetuated.

I have long held the view that that meat as a wasteful product of consumption whilst others starve is a more convincing argument as it avoids the cloudy definitions of pain, senses and animal rights.

Feed fewer animals, eat less meat, feed more people.

This is another powerful reason not to eat meat and dairy. People are starving because a minority of the world's population are stuffing themselves with meat. There are also environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas from a billion cattle, deforestation because of soya being grown to feed animals, pollution caused by soil and so on.

All of this defies logic (which comes back to the Carnism stuff) since most people do not wish to see animals suffer nor other people suffer, yet this is exactly what they contribute to through their dietary choices in eating meat and dairy.

 

[henryscat]

I'm really struggling to come up with something less superficial. That's not to say that there isn't a reason other than "it tastes nice"; it's just that I'm struggling to come up with anything.

No doubt you'll have had similar discussions in the past with other meat eaters. Were they able to offer anything that I might consider signing up to, or were they similarly stumped?

Most meat eaters I have had discussions with have usually (often unprompted) said that they can only eat meat because it comes neatly packaged and that they can't think about what might have happened to the animal. Point is this is exactly what people need to face head on. Ultimately, a person's decision to eat meat or dairy is saying that their taste buds are more important than the suffering of an animal. Now, this may not be thought on a conscious level, but does it not boil down to this?

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

either you're lying when you say you "honestly don't understand why there was so much anger," or you're stupider than i give you credit for..

if you sat down to eat something that you were given to understand was vegan, and it turned out that it wasn't due to a cock-up on the catering front, i dare say you would be livid..

Yes, I bloody well would.

being a vegan, i'm sure you are very aware of the prevalence of evil, non-vegan food, and how it is considered "the norm".. people who eat this "normal" food don't feel the need to ask what they are consuming every time a meal is put in front of them, because it is so common and everyday, so they assume it conforms to "the norm".. as in, if someone puts spaghetti bolognese in front of you, you assume it is spaghetti bolognese..

From what I understand, the people eating the horse mince were the kind of people that enjoyed eating dead animals. A horse is an animal. I think it is safe to assume that the horse was dead. It was in spaghetti bolognese. Therefore I don't know why there was so much anger.

this isn't a criticism of vegan food or vegan lifestyle, incidentally - you are free to eat whatever crap you like - i'm just pointing out that you are patently lying when you say you honestly don't understand.. i know that you are cleverer than that, and i am confident that you honestly do understand (although not agree with - they are two different things)..

I might understand if there was some kind of religion that forbids the consumption of horsemeat, but I don't know of one.

it also isn't a criticism of/comment on horsemeat.. i haven't eaten it, but would have no problem doing so..

Exactly - so what was theirs?

 

[db]

hopefully, this will settle things once and for all:

 

[andy w]

hopefully, this will settle things once and for all:

View attachment 208

Shame on you db for you being so flippant and not posting an intelligent and serious post, Henrys Cat won't want to talk to you

 

[Glam]

Shame on you db for you being so flippant and not posting an intelligent and serious post, Henrys Cat won't want to talk to you

The only thing(s) missing on DBs post is, whether to have Daddies or Heinz with a really nice dippy egg or two. And maybe a couple of Pork/Beef sausages n all.

 

[henryscat]

Shame on you db for you being so flippant and not posting an intelligent and serious post, Henrys Cat won't want to talk to you

DB just proves my point about diverting attention from his own actions. He is not prepared to discuss them in a sensible manner because he knows that he risks his thinking being unravelled.

 

[tek-monkey]

I think his post shows he doesn't care what you think, and that he's happy with that. Lots of us don't see eating meat as wrong, just because you do doesn't mean we have to answer to you.

The vegan I used to live with had a dog, he fed it normal dog food because he believed that was the correct thing to do. A vegetarian I knew also had a dog, she fed it a vegetarian diet as she believed that was the correct thing to do. Both believed they were in the right, and neither would listen to the others opinion as it was wrong. Who was right and why?

 

[proactive]

DB just proves my point about diverting attention from his own actions. He is not prepared to discuss them in a sensible manner because he knows that he risks his thinking being unravelled.

Or maybe he simply doesn't feel any need to justify his actions to you or anybody else?

Just because you feel the need to ram your opinions down everyone's throat and behave in the manner of a crazed 19th Century missionary, proclaiming your way to be the only way, does not make it so!

I'm glad you are happy being a vegan and I respect your right to be a vegan. It's just a shame you are incapable of respecting other's RIGHTs to eat meat and enjoy it.

 

[Mikinton]

Shame on you db for you being so flippant and not posting an intelligent and serious post, Henrys Cat won't want to talk to you

Funnily enough, the OP of the previous incarnation of this thread was light-hearted, and my OP in this one wasn't out of kilter with it. (This thread is the back end of the previous thread, probably with a more serious heading. Certainly the content in this one is, overall, more serious from what I remember.)

 

[Withnail]

(This thread is the back end of the previous thread, probably with a more serious heading. Certainly the content in this one is, overall, more serious from what I remember.)

http://www.staffordforum.com/xf/index.php?threads/vegetarian-options.8144/

 

[henryscat]

Or maybe he simply doesn't feel any need to justify his actions to you or anybody else?

No, DB feels the need to attempt to ridicule to divert attention from the fact he can not or will not explain the basis of his actions.

Just because you feel the need to ram your opinions down everyone's throat and behave in the manner of a crazed 19th Century missionary, proclaiming your way to be the only way, does not make it so!

You ought to read recent pages and re-consider that accusation. I have (obviously) posted a lot on this thread, most of it asking questions of others (that repeatedly go unanswered - Tek for example) in the interests of furthering discussion or explaining my position at length because others have requested it of me (yet cannot do the courtesy of explaining their choices in the same detail). That does not constitute "ramming" opinions. Posts such as DB's about bacon actually do constitute that, along with posts by others. Your "crazed" accusation is without foundation, so how about taking it back or actually entering the discussion by posting constructively?

I'm glad you are happy being a vegan and I respect your right to be a vegan. It's just a shame you are incapable of respecting other's RIGHTs to eat meat and enjoy it.

I don't think you do properly respect it in light of your previous statements.

Is shouting about your "right", not ramming your opinion? I'd also question whether it is a "right". Eating meat, whilst not against any laws as such (though the law allows you to do things to a farm animal you couldn't do to a pet - so consider that inconsistency) is not a right. If meat ceased to be available for you to buy, the law would give you no recourse to take action against retailers since it isn't a right.

Whilst you are on about respecting rights - did you actually ever make a conscious choice to eat meat? I doubt you did, you probably just did what millions do and ate it because your parents told you to, then carried on doing it. Vegetarians and vegans have made a conscious decision about their diet.

 

[henryscat]

I think his post shows he doesn't care what you think, and that he's happy with that. Lots of us don't see eating meat as wrong, just because you do doesn't mean we have to answer to you.

The vegan I used to live with had a dog, he fed it normal dog food because he believed that was the correct thing to do. A vegetarian I knew also had a dog, she fed it a vegetarian diet as she believed that was the correct thing to do. Both believed they were in the right, and neither would listen to the others opinion as it was wrong. Who was right and why?

No answers to anything on page 24? Thought not.

 

[tek-monkey]

I couldn't possibly answer, I'm on a phone.

 

[Trumpet]

Whilst you are on about respecting rights - did you actually ever make a conscious choice to eat meat? I doubt you did, you probably just did what millions do and ate it because your parents told you to, then carried on doing it. Vegetarians and vegans have made a conscious decision about their diet.

Way off topic I know, but unfortunately the same goes in many cases for starting families. "it's what you do isn't it?"

 

[proactive]

Whilst you are on about respecting rights - did you actually ever make a conscious choice to eat meat? I doubt you did, you probably just did what millions do and ate it because your parents told you to, then carried on doing it. Vegetarians and vegans have made a conscious decision about their diet.

As with so much you have written in this thread, once again you are dead wrong. In fact you have helped me identify exactly what it is about the way you come across in this thread that bugs me. It's your obvious belief that you hold the moral high-ground and can look down on the rest of us. The same attitude that comes across from fanatics of all persuasions.

I spent about five years in my early 20s as a vegetarian. Not because of the animal welfare side of things, but because I thought it would be better for my health, combined with giving up smoking. On balance I think it was probably better for my health but I really missed the taste of some meat - beef and lamb in particular- so made my decision to go back to eating meat.

So I actually did make a conscious decision to eat meat. No doubt you will think I was wrong but it is my decision, I am breaking no laws and contrary to what you might think the world isn't going to end as a result. I like the taste of meat, simple as.

Not been tempted to go back to the fags though.

 

[AA Silencers]

Henry, I've had a scan over the Carnism link you've posted and although I'll openly admit I haven't read every post word for word I've kept a keen eye on this thread. I am genuinely interested in your opinion on my situation. I am an animal lover and have genuine concerns for the standards in which our food is raised and slaughtered. My partner and daughter are both vegetarian for animal welfare reasons and I entirely support that. I have tried just about every vegetarian food both natural and synthetic (substitute bacon, chicken, beef etc) and find them entirely unpalatable. I have offered to my partner to switch to foods I can stomach such as breads, cheeses, fruit, a few vegetables (as sides not as the main substance for a meal), noodles etc and remove meat from my diet. She, as a vegetarian has said that seeing as I have a physical job there would not be enough substance to feed me adequately given the limited things I find palatable excluding meat. Because of this I always attempt to source ethically raised meat and given that there is no clear standard or markings on packaging indicating how an animal is slaughtered I can only hope that if a farmer sees fit to ethically raise his animals he will have the care to ensure it is slaughtered as responsibly as possible. I know it is a massive assumption but until the government improves legislation on packaging information it is all I can do.

Would you still say I have given no thought for the meat that I eat, and the animal that it once was?

 

[Mikinton]

Personally, I've got more interesting things to do than gen up on the provenence (?) of whatever I'm eating (or anything else for that matter). Provided the government and the EU are happy with it, and the shops are selling it, that's good enough for me. If that was to change, then that's fine as well - I'm sure I can live off salad in the summer and vegetable soup in the winter. I can think of only one case where I might shy away from buying something 'on principal', and that's more to do with the vendor (though having said that, if they were the only one selling an object I needed, then I'd be prepared to buy it from them).

 

[henryscat]

Provided the government and the EU are happy with it, and the shops are selling it, that's good enough for me.

I think that statement demonstrates complete and utter naivety bordering on stupidity. I'm sure you can think of a myriad of examples of the government failing to legislate against something that is harmful.

 

[henryscat]

I couldn't possibly answer, I'm on a phone.

I'm sure you could find a keyboard at some juncture and furnish some answers.