I said I would do this, so here I go. I'm going to explain my reasoning why I see being vegetarian as… dumb. (not trying to offensive, just best word I could think of.)
Okay, first of all, humans are technically animals, right? I'm going to be working with that. We evolved to be omnivores, which means we eat meat and plants. When you refuse to eat meat, you're fighting nature. If you're vegetarian because of you abounding love for nature- you're a hypocrite.
Secondly, the animals are going to be killed whether or not you eat meat or not. And at the same volume. Which means if you don't eat it, it gets wasted. That means that that animals death was in vain if you're vegetarian because you love animals, then you're going about it the wrong way.
I am interested to know what your arguments are though. But I'm sure I could refute your reasoning.
:D I look forward to your... refutation.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, if we truly just did it out of "abounding love for nature"... we'd feed ourselves to the animals because we couldn't bear to eat a plant. I would be a hypocrite for saying that I did it out of the kindness to mother nature, from the bottom of my heart. So, I sorta lie to myself/am a hypocrite all the time. ;)
Also... it's not true that the animals would be killed whether or not we eat them. As demand decreases, so would the production of cows/chickens/turkeys/sheep/etc. Not all at once, because there's not some giant movement where in one day where a large amount of people decide to go vegetarian cold turkey (hahaha...). Yes, I am one person that has been taken out of the group of consumers of meat, but one person isn't really a lot. About 3.2% of Americans claim to follow a vegetarian diet, while about .5% of them claim a vegan diet. I know that whenever I was given a meal for marching band with meat, I had plenty of "meatitarians" around me that were happy to take the extra helping.
I became vegetarian more for myself than for the animals, though now I do it for myself, the animals, and other people.
I never really liked meat in the first place, so it wasn't going much against my personal nature. I ate meat if it was offered to me, but it wasn't usually my first choice. I grossed myself out by finding weird meat in chili and ham when I was younger, and my meat consumption slowed down until I decided to cut it out of my diet completely. I've gotten to the point where I had a nightmare last year wherein I got sick from eating meat. I hope I'm not forced into eating for pure survival anytime soon, because it would be really difficult to be forced back into eating meat, and I think I would get sick.
I can't allow myself to support the meat industry because the majority of the producers treat their animals badly, resulting in unhealthy animals, and therefore meat (and sometimes people). I do support independent producers that do treat their animals humanely, though, even though I don't eat their meat (the farmer's market is cool). I'm not out of the picture of consuming products from maltreated animals completely, since I'm not vegan, but if I ever have the money, I'll be sure to try my best to make sure it's local food from producers I can trust.
Also, animal production for the meat industry uses up _so_ many more resources than simple farming does. About 80% of the corn that is grown in America goes to being food for cows, because it is cheap to produce (also why corn products are among the most abundant in most processed foods). The cows often don't get the diet they need, and that's a whopping amount of corn that could be going to feed the hungry, not to mention all the water that they need. The land that's used for grazing (if they can) and raising animals is much less productive than it would be if used for crop. (If you haven't seen it, I suggest watching Food Inc.)
And, the people: the carbon emissions associated with the livestock industry (including meat/dairy) is about 18% of the *global* emissions. And any freed up land and water can go to combating hunger or thirst somewhere.
There have been plenty of cultures around the world that have been vegetarian for really long amounts of time, and they've survived alright. :)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, at the end of the day, it's just my personal decision that I didn't want to eat meat (the only thing I miss is tuna fish sandwiches, just because of the taste - I don't even miss marshmallows anymore :P ). And I'm totally okay with other people wanting to eat meat (though sometimes it makes for awkward initial conversations if I'm invited to eat with another family). I feel lucky in general to have just gotten past the, "OMG YOU DON'T EAT MEAT?? LOOK AT THIS BURGER YOU'RE MISSING OUT ON! YOU'RE SO DUMB, RACHEL!" (haha... Kenna) stage of people figuring out that I'm vegetarian. X)
And, in case anyone else reads this besides you, Garrett...
If you're interested in becoming vegetarian, don't do it without talking to a doctor/nutritionist! If you ever feel sick from it, you might not be getting the nutrition you need! Therefore... it's not an option for everyone.
Honestly, the animals would be killed whether or not the demand went down-at least initially. Because (I'm going to be speaking in the major if of there being enough vegetarians to have an impact), the animals are still living. They were raised for that purpose, and they would be killed, and packaged. Yeah, it's not pretty, but they're still there fore that purpose, and merely stopping the demand will not stop the supply.
ReplyDeleteYeah, animals are mistreated. But guess what, that's life. Humans are mistreated too, and we should be focused on furthering our species rather than other species. And, if you think about it, you'd realize that the animals raised for meat would really do no better on their own, without human intervention. These animals have been raised for their docility, which means here stupidity. Cows and sheep would go extinct within 50 years of humans disappearing (if not sooner) most domestic animals would go extinct. Life without humans for those animals would be just as bad, if not worse for those animals. Fighting a necessary evil is like fighting the government. What I mean is, if the government passes a law that you don't agree with, (maybe not a good analogy, pre-warning) but you're way of stating that disagreement is by not letting that law apply to you. There's a reason transcendentalism isn't that popular of a philosophy. Yeah, I don't like what they meat people are doing ethically, but, governments do worse with humans. Yeah, we all need to find our own way to deal with things. Yeah, not buying meat can be a way of dealing with it, but is it the best way? No, there are much better ways to express your disapproval. You can write letters to your government officials, asking this issue to be presented in Congress, to actually have an affect.
Yeah, those cultures can survive for a long time. But, how healthy were the people? Yeah, meat in large quantities is unhealthy, but having some once in awhile is good for you. More than likely, those cultures (I'm guessing) were peaceful cultures. Their culture then would have been conquered, and added to that of another culture, and yeah, their culture is still there, but it's not the same. And slowly, that culture would disappear and become part of another culture, and that addition to the world would be lost.
Honestly, being Vegetarian for yourself is the only logical reasoning I can see behind being Vegetarian. Because if you're an 'eco-nut' you're going about things the wrong way. There are much better, and effective ways for your voice to be heard.
Yes, I realize it wouldn't stop the supply immediately. But there are still plenty of meat-eaters, so I also don't think vegetarians have any impact on that - I've been a vegetarian for at least a year, and in that time, I don't feel personally responsible for the death of any animal raised for slaughter; I am much more personally responsible if I were eating it. For the supply to go down, they would have to slow the reproduction of the cows. If you make a bajillion pencils for a billion people, and then you only have 1/2 of a billion people buying pencils, you'll have 1/2 of a bajillion pencils too many, initially. But that's a lost profit, and the pencil company would realize they need to start making only 1/2 of a bajillion pencils. Yes, it is wasteful, and I don't approve of that - but what about all of those people who can't get food anyway? Why don't they get this "extra meat"? And... the animals were "raised" (grown, I say) for that purpose, but to them, I don't think it matters much if they're eaten or not. The cycle of life goes on as they're eaten by other organisms instead of humans, so none of their life energy is lost (I hope this doesn't turn religious).
ReplyDeleteIt wouldn't be pretty, but that's not the fault of vegetarians for not eating meat in the overall - the meat industry is a business, and I guess I'm just a boycotter. Boycotting goods made by child labor doesn't make me responsible for child labor. And boycotting the mainly bad conditions of *animals* doesn't make me responsible for those conditions either. (As I think I said, if I wasn't vegetarian, I would still not support where we get most of our meat from - I would just choose to eat meat from the producers that I trust. This is in no way an attack on the humane producers. Most people don't like to think about where their meat *actually* comes from, though.)
AGH. "That's life." That's like saying that NOTHING MATTERS BECAUSE WE CAN'T CHANGE ANYTHING. We shouldn't worry about rape, because there's no way to prevent it - it happens. We shouldn't worry about finding a cure for AIDS, because it's their own fault because they had sex, or their parents did. We shouldn't stop animal abuse - they own those dogs anyway. We shouldn't care about the cholera outbreak in Haiti because they're responsible for not having clean water. I'm literally shaking with rage right now. I see that you *didn't* intend it that way, but that's the way your argument comes out from the get-go of this paragraph...
The advancement of the human species over all other species... I can't think of when that's really helped the world. Would we be no better off if we hadn't driven hundreds of species of animals to extinction? The Native Americans that the United States wished extinction upon? That if all of the world had not participated in these activities, even though the government said we should, it wouldn't have a good effect? Yes, we can write letters. There *are* groups of people writing letters and *suing* the industry for doing these *inhumane* things. But, if they did that while still buying things from the industry, that makes them the ultimate hypocrite. Like, saying we shouldn't use nuclear bombs on other countries, but donating money to nuclear bomb research. It's just *stupidity of the highest degree*.
And yes, I know that the animals can't live on their own because this literally is the purpose they are raised for - but they don't deserve bad treatment during their lives because it's what they're raised for, and they can't fight it. You said in your first argument that humans are basically animals - therefore, if a girl was born and sold immediately into being a sex slave, she doesn't deserve any better treatment than she receives because she knows nothing else, and at least she's alive. Is it really preferable to live in that situation, though? I bet the argument would be that other animals and humans are still different, though, but I disagree with this *to a point* - we shouldn't treat them worse than we'd treat each other. I'm not against animals being raised for their meat - when it's done right. I am against it now though because for the VAST majority of the producers, they *don't* do it *right*.
ReplyDeleteNow, I realize from your argument that this doesn't apply specifically to you, because you still like meat. Even if you disapprove of what happens to them, it doesn't matter enough personally to you to stop consuming it. For meat-eaters not willing to give up meat, the most logical reasoning *is* to bring it up with the industry/ the government (because the government protects the industry... Seriously. Watch Food Inc.) while buying meat from *trusted* sources (we have meat producers in Utah that treat their animals well). If it's impossible to get meat from ranchers/farmers who treat their animals well, that's the only excuse I can see to oppose the meat industry while still consuming their meat, though I find it weak.
Yes, there are studies that say meat in regulated amounts is healthy, and I don't disagree with that. Vegetarians need to be careful that they are getting enough of the nutrients that meat provides for most other people. The problem is, it isn't often that people eat just what they should (as you can see by the stereotypical picture of Americans). Though, yes, some, perhaps many, do. Where I really don't like it, though, is that people still believe the meat that the national industry provides is healthy. It has *some* of the stuff it might have had 100 years ago. But the animals are raised without their own health - just to get as big as they can as fast as they can. This involves inappropriate diets, medicine to prevent diseases because of the inappropriate diets they have, and chemicals to enhance them in desirable ways. I won't lie - the same thing is happening with many crops now too. (Really. I suggest watching Food Inc.) This is why I don't care so much if people eat meat if they get it from a reliable place, where the animals are raised on a healthy diet in a healthy environment, because then the people would also be more healthy. If you are what you eat, then those producers are making the poor chickens and cows make us disgusting. The industry is for monetary profit alone, not health.
I am NOT a social Darwinist, therefore, I completely disagree with most of what you say after "having some once in a while is good for you." The fact that the culture changes doesn't matter to my argument - the fact that the people survived successfully does. What you eat has nothing to do with how "peaceful" you are.
And finally...
ReplyDeleteAGH! I CAN'T SUPPORT THOSE BAGS OF SCUM BECAUSE THEY ARE BAGS OF SCUM. THEY ARE THE ONES DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENT, THE ANIMALS, THE PEOPLE, NOT ME. Petitioning the scum to not be scum, in a world where they've learned they can be scum veeerrryyyy successfully - haha. We *can* work towards it, and we *do*. But it's not immediately effective, and I would be the biggest HYPOCRITE if I still ate meat while *I* knew I didn't approve of it, or its production. It is *all* for myself that I am vegetarian - because *I* can't allow these things to happen when I know they *don't have to*.
Also... I'd prefer not to be called "eco-nut". It has a bad connotation. And in retrospect... I think I kind of ally myself with the transcendentalists to a point.
I posting this before I read any of your comments. I've looked at the first one, but I haven't finished it, but I feel like this needs to be said. Know this, I am an animal lover- I have been my whole life. I don't agree with what the meat companies are doing, I just think there are different, better ways of handiling it. Also, I don't necessarily agree with or. Eli's e the things I'm saying. I have a more moderate view on things. But this is a debate of 'radical' (I'm using the term loosely) ideas. What I'm doing is 'refutating' your arguments with possible opposing points. Just know I dont believe everything I'm saying.
ReplyDeleteOkay, what do you believe about it then?
ReplyDelete("Eli's e"? I assume this is "realize", right?)
And looking back at that one paragraph I posted about "that's life"... my conscience is telling me it was harsh. But, I still agree with all of the points I brought up.
ReplyDeleteAnimals can't think. And steak is tasty. That's how I feel about it.
ReplyDeleteSigh. Ah, human supremacy.
ReplyDelete