The "Veg Pledge"...

Quote:

Original post by Chris Reynolds So the point of this thread: I eat meat, and looking at pictures of slaughtered cows, pigs, and chickens doesn't bother me whatsoever. Then again, if I were to see pictures of dogs and cats and monkeys being slaughtered for food, I would be quite shaken. Is it immoral to make this distinction or just human nature?

Why can't it be immoral and just human nature?

Considering those small farms have to feed 300 million people ...

I don't think it's immoral to make the distinction. I eat meat. I make the distinction between the value of the lives of pigs and cows vs those of dogs and cats. Diet is an incredibly powerful part of human culture. Giving up meat, for a lot of people, myself included, would almost be giving up an aspect of one's cultural identity.

I would, however, be careful about trying to tie the value of certain animals' lives to some inherent trait, like intelligence. I don't think it really has anything to do with the animal's intelligence. It's more a function of how we are brought up as to why we value dogs and cats more than cows and other farm animals. Obviously, in other countries and societies these values are different than they are in the United States. For example, beef (and meat in general) is not something people eat very often in India, because of the value they assign to cows, specifically, and animal life in general.

After the bombing of Hiroshima some retaliation can be considered appropriate. [Source]

Its a cultural thing too. In certain countries they eat cat and dog, and in certain countries they would never eat a cow.

It also has to do with how close you are to it. The cow is killed in a factory somewhere by someone else. If you had to kill it yourself (like you kill the ant yourself), you might be a little more bothered.

The way chickens are treated is particularly horrific, I hear. However I still eat a lot of chicken...

Yes, I don't think intelligence really plays in to it. In general, pigs are more intelligent than dogs and cats, but as a culture, we eat pigs like crazy.

I eat meat. However, I don't like killing anything myself, not even bugs. Is it hypocritical? Maybe, but the difference is that someone else is killing my food for me, so that does not directly bother me.

Quote:

Original post by jackolantern1 someone else is killing my food for me, so that does not directly bother me.

Yikes.

Quote:

Original post by Chris Reynolds Dogs and cats are smart, cuddly, and affectionate, not very meaty, and so animal cruelty to these animals is widely frowned upon.

There, fixed.

Quote:

Original post by Sneftel Quote: Original post by jackolantern1 someone else is killing my food for me, so that does not directly bother me. Yikes.

What is wrong with that? Am I supposed to seek out the pictures of slaughter houses so that I can be scared-straight from meat? And besides, the idea that a picture and first-hand experience bother a person the same amount is ridiculous. It just doesn't work like that. I saw pictures of the concentration camps in Nazi Germany and thought it looked terrible and reprehensible, but am I losing sleep at night and needing daily counseling like the survivors who were there? No. I am only worried about what I am doing. The only person's actions I can control are my own.

Quote:

Original post by jackolantern1 Quote: Original post by Sneftel Quote: Original post by jackolantern1 someone else is killing my food for me, so that does not directly bother me. Yikes. What is wrong with that?

What's wrong with not caring about something because it is done on behalf of you, rather than directly by you? Quite a bit.

Personally, if I was hungry, had a cow, a gun, some knives, and a nice big grill, I wouldn't have any problem at all playing the butcher. So I don't mind that someone else is doing it for me.

(try thinking about this on a completely empty stomach btw)

Quote:

Original post by Chris Reynolds Personally, if I was hungry, had a cow, a gun, some knives, and a nice big grill, I wouldn't have any problem at all playing the butcher. So I don't mind that someone else is doing it for me.

See, one can argue the morality of that, but at least it's rational.

Well no matter what you eat, you're taking it's life away before you eat it, so why value the life of plants less than that of animals?

">related viewing

Don't kid yourself, Jimmy. If a cow ever got the chance, he'd eat you and everyone you care about!

Quote:

Original post by Sneftel Quote: Original post by jackolantern1 Quote: Original post by Sneftel Quote: Original post by jackolantern1 someone else is killing my food for me, so that does not directly bother me. Yikes. What is wrong with that? What's wrong with not caring about something because it is done on behalf of you, rather than directly by you? Quite a bit.

Don't get me wrong, it is not morality that makes me not want to kill anything. I just prefer not to. I don't give a crap about the chicken and cows that I eat, I just don't want to do it myself. Makes pretty good sense to me. I think most people who eat meat could not slaughter the animals themselves, and just about all of them would prefer not to.

What is irrational about this?

I believe that learning how not to kill one another would be a more prudent priority than protecting poultry. Why would we expect to be able to treat other species well when we can't even treat ourselves with any respect? It's like people who complain that video games don't handle sexuality well enough... as if the rest of the planet had reached consensus on the subject.

Talking about morality is a convenient way to distract people from the fact that you have priorities that don't make any goddamn sense. PETA is the poster boy for this with their disregard for human life and all vegetarians get to suffer for it by extension.

Does not eating meat somehow prevent the slaughter of animals even when no sane person could ever possibly expect the majority of the population to stop doing it? No. Not in the slightest. It's absurdly futile.

Meanwhile, we have seen very promising gains in our ability to not kill other human beings (despite what the fear-mongering media may tell you) so that seems like a much better place to invest effort since it's already proven that effort can make a difference.

When that effort succeeds, and we learn to respect human life, then maybe we can start seriously thinking about not eating animals.

Very well said. -cheers-

The new Wing Street wings from Pizza Hut are awesome by the way.

Chris, the answer is that humans are capable of rationalizing anything their group does. It feels normal to you to eat the flesh of dead animals just like it felt normal to the Aztecs to sacrifice people, for the Māoris to consume their enemies bodies, for the Nazis to make leather jackets out of Jews, and so on.

Is it right? I'd say that it's definitely not fucking right. But are you bad a person for it? I don't think so, just acculturated, and maybe not that introspective.

Were there Germans who thought maybe the whole race thing was wrong? Yeah, sure, but they are rare. It takes a different sort of person to look at part of their culturally enforced worldview and despite the biases and despite the probable backlash, say: "wait a minute, this is insane. I'm not going to do this. I'm going to choose to live my life the best way I can, and I don't care if it's inconvenient or I catch flak for it."

The difficult part is actually getting to the point, despite your culture, to be able to identify the insane things in it. The easy bit is deciding to live morally as a result of your realization.

I'd be happy if you were one of those people. I think the world would be better with more of those people. But, do I blame you for (maybe) not being one? No, that's just part for the course.