User Controls
We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
-
2018-02-22 at 2:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick Cheetahs and panthers and tigers and wolves don't have the capacity for moral decisionmaking.
Lucky them.
Old joke:
"A missionary travels to a remote village and tells everyone about Jesus. He tells them, “If you do not accept Jesus, you will burn in hell for all eternity.” Before the missionary leaves, the tribal elder asks, “If we had never heard about this Jesus, would God have sent us all to hell?” The missionary replies, “No, I don’t suppose God would condemn you due to your ignorance,” to which the elder replied “Then why did you tell us about him!?”"
I feel the same way about the sort of universalist objectivist morality that causes symptoms like vegetarianism.
Maybe if people still lived in groups it would have a place, as people would be moral with each other, but in multicultural society it has no advantages, it just disadvantages the individual. It's a malignant mind-virus. -
2018-02-22 at 2:23 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-02-22 at 2:28 AM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick I do not advocate imposing my abstinence from meat upon animal life for several reasons. I'll start with three because I'm trying to smoke weed rn:
1) Depriving an animal of food is abuse, especially given that they are incapable of reasoning their way to a meatless alternative.
2) Many animals (i.e. cheetahs) are incapable of certain biologically necessary processes without ingesting meat.
3) My own vegetarianism carries an ecological point - the segregation of the world of humans and of animals is best for both groups at this time, so it's not ideal for them to be appropriating our morality (even if they could be forced to).
1) you dont think plants deserve the same rights?
2) humans...
3) plants... -
2018-02-22 at 2:32 AM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick Taste is not a very good point upon which to mount a defense for the practice of murdering millions of helpless animals every year, but ease of access is a real concern. The first world can, in my belief, afford to move to a completely vegetarian diet. Economically, this would be difficult to stomach but it would be possible. But in shitty countries where there is a scarcity of food (not just meat) and animal products are the most nutritious available options, it would help for Western governments to invest in them agriculturally. Animal well-being isn't the only reason we should do this; Americans in particular enjoy a very good lifestyle on the whole, and it's about time they gave a slice of that to the people struggling to swallow their cakes of dirt. There's absolutely no reason children should be starving over eggs in India when they could be given enriched rice or soy or some other easily cultivated plant-based protein source.
stfu you faggot
. -
2018-02-22 at 3:11 AM UTCFrom a moral and logical perspective, meat eating is almost impossible to defend. The ultimate argument essentially boils down to "I like eating meat enough that I will compromise on my morals", basically.
In time we will look back at meat eating as a sign that our times, as advanced as we think we are, still fostered pleasure-driven barbarism.
I think I will be 100% willing to switch off eating real animals when lab grown meat reaches the quality and flavour of real meat. At that point I will see no reason to compromise on my moral system and eat "real" meat. -
2018-02-22 at 4:06 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon From a moral and logical perspective, meat eating is almost impossible to defend. The ultimate argument essentially boils down to "I like eating meat enough that I will compromise on my morals", basically.
In time we will look back at meat eating as a sign that our times, as advanced as we think we are, still fostered pleasure-driven barbarism.
I think I will be 100% willing to switch off eating real animals when lab grown meat reaches the quality and flavour of real meat. At that point I will see no reason to compromise on my moral system and eat "real" meat.
stfu, handsome and well tanned individual. you have no idea what youre talking about. animals are designed to be eaten and humans are designed to eat animals. -
2018-02-22 at 4:21 AM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-02-22 at 4:24 AM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick For most people living in the first world, there is no good, rational defense to continue supporting the holocaust of animals. Discuss.
a buddhist monk once told me the same, so i told him that for every second that we live,
we're sending as much as six million of bacterium and other micro organisms that try to live in our body to the ovens.
is killing a bacteria less guilty than killing a cock ????The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-02-22 at 4:27 AM UTC
-
2018-02-22 at 4:38 AM UTC
Originally posted by Daily Zanick, do you actually believe domesticating an animal and then stunning it before quickly shooting it in the head is less moral than allowing a predator to rip it to shreds while it slowly bleeds out, suffering while it wonders what it could have been?
I think you should go out right now and get yourself a nice cheeseburger as a tribute to the cow that offered its labour and domestication for your consumption. Not doing so is objectively immoral.
1. False dichotomy.
2. Even if we ignore the false dichotomy, you are responding to his deontological objection with a consequentialist reply... Which doesn't even address his point. The personal moral ill in this case in not the death or suffering of the animal, but the part you or he might play in inflicting that suffering upon them. -
2018-02-22 at 4:38 AM UTC
Originally posted by Issue313 I feel the same way about the sort of universalist objectivist morality that causes symptoms like vegetarianism.
You don't though because you don't accept the premise (being "you'll burn in hell" or "eating animals is morally indefensible"). You don't seem particularly bothered by being told about a possible moral obligation you have because you don't think you actually have it.Maybe if people still lived in groups it would have a place, as people would be moral with each other, but in multicultural society it has no advantages, it just disadvantages the individual. It's a malignant mind-virus.
Why on earth are the only things "with a place" the things which have advantages to individuals? You can't even try some kind of naturalistic argument because that's not even what we see in nature. -
2018-02-22 at 4:39 AM UTCI do think factory farming in the West is fucked up too. All the meat I eat in America (aside from restaurant food, which I rarely eat any more because I can generally cook better than them) is relatively ethically sourced. The killing isn't the worst part of animal suffering, it's the way they live. Remember that there's a scared little living creature in that head, which is out under the knife because it's tasty.
-
2018-02-22 at 5:29 AM UTC
-
2018-02-22 at 6:14 AM UTCSerious question, how do you guys feel about the morality of eating something like this:
(start at 1:13)
(start at 1:13 bitch) -
2018-02-22 at 6:30 AM UTCAffordable and delicious source of important nutrients, hard as the MORALLY SUPERIOR BEINGs might try it is impossible to replace with vegetables/seaweed. I'm naturally skinny and I hate when the store doesn't have whole milk or only has fat-free broth etc. I'm not about to give up some meat calories when they have already stolen a bunch of nutrients/calories from half the stuff I buy.
The typical modern way of raising and slaughtering the animals is pretty gruesome, sure. Humans are omnivores and most people aren't going to renounce their true nature, so if you h8 seeing animals in pain then come up with more humane ways to raise and slaughter them.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-02-22 at 8:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by A College Professor Affordable and delicious source of important nutrients, hard as the MORALLY SUPERIOR BEINGs might try it is impossible to replace with vegetables/seaweed.
Obviously not trueI'm naturally skinny and I hate when the store doesn't have whole milk or only has fat-free broth etc. I'm not about to give up some meat calories when they have already stolen a bunch of nutrients/calories from half the stuff I buy.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of the ethics of the meat industry.The typical modern way of raising and slaughtering the animals is pretty gruesome, sure. Humans are omnivores and most people aren't going to renounce their true nature, so if you h8 seeing animals in pain then come up with more humane ways to raise and slaughter them.
As a society we've renounced a lot of things in the name of civilization and morals. It doesn't seem any more unreasonable for a person to give up meat for the sake of their ethics than for a christian to donate to charity or abstain from alcohol. -
2018-02-22 at 8:49 AM UTCJust cause the MORALLY SUPERIOR BEINGs haven't keeled over and are able to subsist on kelp and worm-meal doesn't mean they are doing their body any favors.
I believe the plants and animals are on this planet for my sustenance and enjoyment, how are u gonna tell me a swine's life is more important than my well being.
Giving up meat is unnatural , it would be like an able-bodied person resigning themselves to life in a wheelchair cause they are lazy/ don't want to have to be buying shoes all the time ( sewn by little kids in asia in nasty factories! ). Unhealthy and silly!The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-02-22 at 8:54 AM UTCthey're gonna be making meat in labs in the near future. no animals killed.
everything will work out. -
2018-02-22 at 9:09 AM UTC
Originally posted by A College Professor Just cause the MORALLY SUPERIOR BEINGs haven't keeled over and are able to subsist on kelp and worm-meal doesn't mean they are doing their body any favors.
So do you have any particular idea what, exactly, the dietary issue with vegetarianism is or is "no meat no good" the limit of your critique here?I believe the plants and animals are on this planet for my sustenance and enjoyment
It's nice you believe that and all, but that doesn't really say anything about it being true.Giving up meat is unnatural , it would be like an able-bodied person resigning themselves to life in a wheelchair cause they are lazy/ don't want to have to be buying shoes all the time ( sewn by little kids in asia in nasty factories! ). Unhealthy and silly!
So it's true that voluntary vegetarianism isn't really something we find in nature very often. Neither is your car or your phone, your clothes or your ability to read, or most of your diet. The fact that something isn't natural is stupid and hypocritical of anything using a computer to communicate with people.
On the topic of being unhealthy and silly, you're just wrong there.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-02-22 at 9:10 AM UTCIn the bible God required people to slaughter lambs. Are you saying God is morally incorrect? InB4Athiests.
