The Morality of Eating Meat

Off Topic
122

[quote]UkpairehMombooto wrote:

This thread could have ended HERE.

LiftSmart wrote:
We use animals because we can.

Some for food, and some for companionship or protection. This varies by culture.

IF there no foreseeable consequences of your behavior that you might disagree with - feel free to behave as such.
[/quote]

No, the thread couldn’t have ended there. We have to bring into play economics, politics, how said animals are treated up to the very instant they are killed, how they are killed, whether or not they got to eat their favorite foods all the time, the population of the earth, whether or not we have enough water, and many other things. Discussions here never end that easily.

123

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Meanwhile in place like the Pacific Northwest game was so scarce at times (yes, even before the white men) that tribes from what is now Oregon and Washington would travel hundreds of miles, arduously cross the continental divide into what is now central and eastern Montana and Wyoming, just to have a chance to harvest the buffalo. Sometimes they were successful; sometimes they went home hungry and empty-handed.

[/quote]

Wrong.

The tribes of the pacific northwest(such as the Tlingit and Haida) were not nomadic nor semi-nomadic. They did not need too. Salmon and fish was so abundant that they were able to sustain themselves on gathering alone, and never pursued intensive agriculture(let alone traveling thousands of miles east to the plains for food…).

124

[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
abcd1234 wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
how do you think vegetables feel? the are planted and forced to grow with no hopes of escape and then chopped down by those merciless farmers and eaten by zombie-like vegetarians. im sorry but that is disguisting i dont know how you guys can sleep at night.

Vegetables and plants lack a central nervous system and thus consciousness. The neurological activity of animals and humans in pain can be clearly seen via certain imaging machines.

are you fucking Dr Dolitte? you can communicate with animals? you know how they feel about shit? no you dont. you love animals so much well blame them for sucking so bad that were at the top of the food chain and can eat any of them.

you guys all wanna talk about feelings and caging things up. why dont you get all up in arms about jail? forcing people to subpar living conditions, isolation, etc. im mean thats what youre all mad about right? and it actually has the capacity to affect a person as we actually have a pysche. nah see you just want to whine about shit. guess what, no matter how many people you cry to no one is going to care because people are fucking hungry and im not going to slow down the human race because you have a problem with caged pigs…at least they arent getting raped and knifed in the laundry room. [/quote]

You get the prize for taking everything I’ve been saying the wrong way. Raising possible philosophical criticisms towards something I ACTUALLY PARTAKE IN should not threaten your fragile self to the point that you engage in vulgarity to someone to give what you’re saying credence.

The level of mean-spiritedness that goes on here astounds me. We’re all adults, aren’t we?

125

animal rights? what is that? that exists about as much as human rights. you violate the human rights the police will be against you if they find out. the same applies with ‘animal rights’. no more, no less. its just a ‘governmental right or wrong’.

idk whats wrong with raising dogs to slaughter… ive never eaten any, i dont know how much it would cost, how it would taste, how good it would be nutrient-wise. i dont see anything wrong with it compared to a cow. but as for domesticating dogs… they are fun, they just… do more than cows. cows just eat and sleep.

as for killing animals and such, i see it simply as getting higher and higher on the food chain. do i prefer it? personally, no, i’d rather eat more fresh, less unprocessed etc food. there simply isnt enough time to do that today anymore.

will it create imbalances? maybe, but we got noone to blame but ourselves.

put simply i see it more as something for survival, “evolution” of mankind, and cause and effect rather than right or wrong

126

This thread reminds me of the episode of The Simpsons where Homer rescues a lobster, and gives him a bath. The scene shifts to him crying as he stuffs his face with yummy lobster meat. Hmmmmmmmmm lobster meat hmmmmmmmmm

127

[quote]lixy wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Modern agriculture feeds a world that’s many times larger than the days of yore

True. But at what cost to the environment? Extinct species, dirty air, dirty water, overdrafting of groundwater , overgrazing, extensive slash-and-burn and resulting soil exhaustion and erosion have to be factored in.

We’re screwing up Nature at an alarming rate.

and the days of yore were not paradisaical utopias where fat, happy people had all the game they could eat.

Whoever said it was?

Our ancestors did not have plentiful food, but they treated the animals they ate with more respect than what we are doing right now. Animals were of course seen as food, but we had a much closer relationship with them that meant we didn’t treat them as burgers on feet. Go to some place where food production isn’t industrialized and watch the people interact with their livestock.

We are slowly turning the planet into a feedlot, and growth-hormone abused cattle just happen to be victims among many others.[/quote]

DO you grow all your food? DO you hunt all your meat? Are you completely absent in the modern food chain?

If the answer to any of those questions is “no” then you need to stop pointing the finger. You are as much a part of the problem as anyone.

Your fake superiority is nauseating. You couldn’t survive for 10 seconds without your parents’ money. Yet you want to preach how everyone else is fucking it up?

Please - even a retard can see your hypocrisy from a mile away.

The planet is in better shape now than it was in at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. More tress are growing in the US than now than at any time in its recorded history.

This is just another way for you to bash that which you fear the most: rich, successful, efficient americans.

Honestly -you have zero facts. It’s all propaganda. And it is painfully obvious.

128

I have the solution to the problem, Fellow Carnivores, we must rise up and eat the vegatarians!!!

129

Well with the additional requirements you saddled onto me, its gonna be a while before we can eat fajitas together.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
UkpairehMombooto wrote:

This thread could have ended HERE.

LiftSmart wrote:
We use animals because we can.

Some for food, and some for companionship or protection. This varies by culture.

IF there no foreseeable consequences of your behavior that you might disagree with - feel free to behave as such.

I was thinking the thread would end when we eat fajitas together.[/quote]

130

YES, THEY CAN END THAT EASILY.

IF people had the balls to say “I give a rats ass about shit that could block me from reaching my goals…so I don;t give a flying fuck about your peaceful planet bullshit. But don;t let me stop you from chaining yourself to a fucking tree right here and now. Have a super day”

Everyone wants to feel self-important to the point of expecting others to worship the path they choose to follow. They then spend hours looking for validation (both of their goals and the means they adopt to reach them) and this is the outcome.

I repeat, this thread could easily end with: “Its legal,ergo I can. My ethics do not forbid this act OR everything else is secondary to my goals…and if you don;t like it, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT”.

As a person who has consumed the meat of SEVERAL animals on this blue marble (including human, no joke) I feel the need to look past (if not barbecue) all the sacred cows that society keeps creating to keep people feeling holy.

EDIT:: In the past few years, I personally have shifted my focus towards reducing animal suffering to the extent possible without hampering my own progress. Spend the extra dollar andbuy kosher meat (like I do) and inspect slaughterhouses and meat farms every now and then.
IF you’re trying to go all out environmental commando, take a hint from captain fucking planet…GET THE HUMAN RACE TO MOVE TO ANOTHER PLANET.

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
UkpairehMombooto wrote:

This thread could have ended HERE.

LiftSmart wrote:
We use animals because we can.

Some for food, and some for companionship or protection. This varies by culture.

IF there no foreseeable consequences of your behavior that you might disagree with - feel free to behave as such.

No, the thread couldn’t have ended there. We have to bring into play economics, politics, how said animals are treated up to the very instant they are killed, how they are killed, whether or not they got to eat their favorite foods all the time, the population of the earth, whether or not we have enough water, and many other things. Discussions here never end that easily. [/quote]

131

lixy, just as soon as I’m convinced that you can’t write anything dumber, you come up with this idiocy:

[quote]Whoever said it was?

Our ancestors did not have plentiful food, but they treated the animals they ate with more respect than what we are doing right now. Animals were of course seen as food, but we had a much closer relationship with them that meant we didn’t treat them as burgers on feet. Go to some place where food production isn’t industrialized and watch the people interact with their livestock.

We are slowly turning the planet into a feedlot, and growth-hormone abused cattle just happen to be victims among many others.[/quote]

Seriously, wtf? Do you get your history from Disney movies?

You’re raging against the horrors of modern feedlots, yet turn around and claim that animals were “respected” in the past?

You’re in rare form with that one.

132

[quote]pushharder wrote:
To carry my previous post a little further, let’s use the example of the Native Americans. Now many of you have this Dances With Wolves image; the red man was “one with nature”, game was plentiful and revered, bliss and tranquility abounded, yada, yada, yada.

The facts are that for thousands of them every winter, starvation was rampant. And I’m talking before the white man populated their tribal roaming areas. It varied depending on the tribe but even Lewis and Clark and other early explorers had numerous entries in their journals regarding crossing paths with starving Indians. It was commonplace.

When buffalo were harvested, it was in the most - by our modern standards - heartless and cruel manner imaginable. Vast numbers of them were run off of “pishkuns” (buffalo jumps) where they lay in agony for hours and hours with broken bones waiting for the squaws to wade through the pile to finish them off with clubs and spears and still dying quite slowly even after that. Oftentimes, so many animals died that the tribe couldn’t possibly use all the meat and thousands of pounds of flesh rotted on the plains.

Meanwhile in place like the Pacific Northwest game was so scarce at times (yes, even before the white men) that tribes from what is now Oregon and Washington would travel hundreds of miles, arduously cross the continental divide into what is now central and eastern Montana and Wyoming, just to have a chance to harvest the buffalo. Sometimes they were successful; sometimes they went home hungry and empty-handed.

Game comes and game goes. Indian populations were relatively sparse in North America before the white man arrived and it was precisely because the food supply was not plentiful, was generally hard to come by, and difficult to harvest. Again, all of this is relatively speaking.

If indeed the opposite was true, the Americas would have had vast aboriginal populations and early Europeans would have been easily driven back into the Atlantic.[/quote]

Good post.

The populations in Central America were pretty significant because they ate corn.

133

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Game comes and game goes. Indian populations were relatively sparse in North America before the white man arrived and it was precisely because the food supply was not plentiful, was generally hard to come by, and difficult to harvest. Again, all of this is relatively speaking.

If indeed the opposite was true, the Americas would have had vast aboriginal populations and early Europeans would have been easily driven back into the Atlantic.

Good post.

The populations in Central America were pretty significant because they ate corn.[/quote]

Kind of off topic but as said, relatively speaking; The North Eastern Tribes of North America were indeed farmers. They are the only reason the European settlers did not starve but giving them food and or teaching them how and what to plant…

The Planes Tribes were nomadic and lived off the land by moving with the herds of game…

ditto good post…

134

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Good post.

The populations in Central America were pretty significant because they ate corn.[/quote]

Corn was also eaten by Southwest peoples, and after the fall of the Anasazi, the native population there was not comparable to the state-level societies of Mesoamerica and South America.

135

forgive a little girl for interrupting your little debate here, but i had to chime in… to me this seems just like darwinism in overdrive… survival of the fittest, boys… as one of many species in the animal kingdom we instinctually do things to make survival easier for us, with complete disregard and most often at the expense of other species… therefore we mass produce our natural food and make a shitload of fake, processed food to ensure our survival… the flip side of this is somewhat like the economic principal of diminishing returns, though… the more we do the worse off we are

136

It’s not interrupting if you’re discussing the original point…

And you’re right. We consume far too much of our natural resources and produce unnatural processed crap. The human species is one of incredible intelligence and stupidity.

I note that we are one possibly the only species that throws out the ecosystem so violently.

137

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I note that we are one possibly the only species that throws out the ecosystem so violently.[/quote]

Not quite. No other species possesses the ability to comprehend the notion of extinction. They will consume until there is nothing left to consume, and they will die off.

It happens all the time.

No other being on the planet gives a flying fuck about the damn ecosystem besides humans.

138

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I note that we are one possibly the only species that throws out the ecosystem so violently.

Not quite. No other species possesses the ability to comprehend the notion of extinction. They will consume until there is nothing left to consume, and they will die off.

It happens all the time.

No other being on the planet gives a flying fuck about the damn ecosystem besides humans.

[/quote]

no offense man, but show me proof “WE” as a group of beings gives a flying fuck… WE are the species fucking it up… WE are the ones that are consuming until there is nothing left…ozone, forests, thousands of other species, oil… other species only consume what is needed, we are the ONLY species that is gluttonous and hedonistic to no end.

The fact that we are the only ones able to comprehend what we’re doing yet do nothing to halt it makes it even worse…

139

Good point RJ, but you have to admit, while we might understand extinction, not that many people even care. And with regards to animal understanding of the ecosystem, most of what they do is instinct as opposed to social conditioning. I’m sure humans would be much the same if a lot of our so-called ‘civilization’ was stripped away.

Example: I see that certain un-named countries still go whaling because of a technicality in international whaling law. They planned to hunt a substantial amount of a species that was near extinction not so long ago.

140

[quote]Lady_J wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I note that we are one possibly the only species that throws out the ecosystem so violently.

Not quite. No other species possesses the ability to comprehend the notion of extinction. They will consume until there is nothing left to consume, and they will die off.

It happens all the time.

No other being on the planet gives a flying fuck about the damn ecosystem besides humans.

no offense man, but show me proof “WE” as a group of beings gives a flying fuck… WE are the species fucking it up… WE are the ones that are consuming until there is nothing left…ozone, forests, thousands of other species, oil… other species only consume what is needed, we are the ONLY species that is gluttonous and hedonistic to no end.

The fact that we are the only ones able to comprehend what we’re doing yet do nothing to halt it makes it even worse…

[/quote]

The mere fact that you can post about extinction is all the proof needed.

How many fucking meals have you missed in your short life time? I’d wager a big fat fucking zero. If you missed any - it wasn’t because there was no food. It was because you either chose not to eat, or you didn’t have the $1.89 required to buy a gut-rot burrito.

Who is doing nothing? You are the dipshit saying we are spiraling towards extinction. How about you prove your bullshit before making me prove something you have already proven for me?

Where in the fuck did these know-nothing asswipes come from? Did someone leave the fucking door open?