Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Space

[Completed] Meating eat is morally wrong

Recommended Posts

Philosophically speaking, morals are usually a minor distraction towards progress. Progress is complicated since often progress is contrasted by tradition and funny enough humans have traditionally been eating meat, but I bring progress into my argument since it is progressive to continue consuming meat.

 

From common knowledge; meat is high in protein, a vital nutrient to the human body and it's muscle functions. Muscles are important; without muscles we wouldn't be able to lift things and we'd be heavily weak. You need muscles to walk, and perform pretty much everyday functions in general.

 

By stripping away meat as part of some sort of moral code that is purely fantastical by human minds, since morals were brought forth from human imagination for better or worse; you hinder progress. I believe society should be progressive so I think meat should continue to be consumed. 

 

In addition to these arguments, meat consumption is commonly observed in nature, as humans we should not be different. We are a living race, we need to live for ourselves (sometimes) at the cost of other species. I am not advocating for over-production or endangerment of animals however, that disrupts the food webs and food chains of many and causes more issues than resolved.

 

Overall, we as a HUMAN-RACE should not stop eating meat purely for the ideal of moral values. While the vegetarian diet is good for many things, taking meat from younger children can lead to MANY problems later and early on in life due to poor muscle development and whatnot.

 

I always tend to stand in the middle-ground of any sort of debate, it's strange. Any who, now realizing that plants contain higher trophic levels than meat, and thus more "energy" (i forgot the actual name i hated science); some studies are pointing to find the vegetarian diet helpful. But then, my previous points still stand. 

 

So with all of my concerns stressed, I feel like it should be left to the consumer populace to decide. Meat production companies should continue doing what they do, and it should be left to the choice of the consumer with full knowledge of the risks and benefits of each diet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Meat tastes amazing

2. Not all farmers

3. How do you expect me to hit 100g of protein a day without meat.

4. The only complete protein thing that isn't meat is quinoa to my knowledge, and all of these hip people who are eating it now are supposedly causing people in the countries it comes from to starve to death. 

Edited by Lord Sagan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately, it is the free market that will determine the rate of meat consumption I partake in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here comes the progressive parade coming to try and stifle the market. Guess what friend, there aren't enough farms in the world to feed the planet if we were all 100% veggies, you'd have to forest a lot of land and make it appropriate for farming if you wanted to feed the rest of the world on a non meat diet. Also your argument is morally subjective. People have different morals to authoritarian progressives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're animals, they don't have feelings, they don't have a complex society, we are earth's dominating species. To say that we're not "humane" for killing animals is stupid, seeing as animals aren't human. Eat meat folks.

It would also be impossible to simply release a bunchs of animals bread to taste good, they'd just die by the hands of nature seeing as they're not used to, you know, being wild. Not to mention that you'd have hordes of cows, pigs, sheep etc just grazing on our fields. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-07-06 at 11:25 AM, Sythan said:

I need my steaks for protein for gains bruh !!11

0
 

 

You can get vegan protein powder/protein from other food that is vegan.

 

On 2017-07-06 at 11:54 AM, Aelsioln said:

Plants are alive too and we do the same things to them that we do to animals. Is it suddenly okay because plants can't run from us or scream? 

0
 

 

Plants do not display the characteristics that animals do to make me deem them deserving of protection. Animals have complex nervous systems/brains and display wide ranges of emotions and some form of sentience or self awareness, where the largest you get from plants is reacting to stimuli i.e. retracting flowers or closing a 'cage.' That is comparable to humans having their 'reflexes' i.e. if you put your hand on a hot stove you do not have to have that sensation go to your brain to decide to move off, the impulses only need to travel to the spine. We don't say that arms have sentience.

 

Also, I think this is a bit of a disingenuous point that people bring up for some type of 'gotchya'-- 99% of people already have decided there is a difference between a plant and an animal, because you don't give a **** about cutting a tree down but I'm sure you'd give a **** about cutting an animal in half. You already have some sort of decision as to why plants and animals are different. Unless you think that animals are the same as plants and not deserving of any protection, which is a more interesting avenue to go down and something I can understand better.

 

On 2017-07-06 at 1:31 PM, Lark said:

You are correct in saying, we don't need it, so we can move off of it. That can be said for anything really. We don't need to eat any of the food that is provided by the Earth. We could easily begin researching synthetic foods that provide all our nutritional needs in a few servings and we'd have that as meals whenever we wanted. Of course we already have stuff like that but I'm talking about ONLY synthetic bars, pastes, tablets, etc that provide a full nutritional meal. I'm sure they could make it taste amazing too with the right research.

 

To say it is morally wrong however is subjective. In that I mean, morality is subjective. We all agree on different morals and have different ideas to what morality is and encompasses. Unless we all agreed on that same exact morals, which we do not (unfortunately), it is subjective. We cannot observe or test morality in a scientific setting. There is no way to measure morality. 

 

"Meat is murder" is just as subjective as "Murdering is bad" is subjective. Some people may agree with murder if it means to protect themselves or if they were raised in an environment where they weren't socialized and taught that murder is bad. If they were taught that murder is a means of survival, its morally correct to them to kill others to survive. "Kill or be killed" mentality so to speak.

 

However, it may be ethically wrong. I need to look into that more.

0
 

 

Maybe a better way to word it would be 'based on the morals of most of society eating meat is wrong.'

 

On 2017-07-06 at 2:22 PM, Jacobcraft04 said:

But most animals are born to be eaten, and it taste good.   

0
 

 

Most slaves are born to be slaves, and they do slavery good.

 

On 2017-07-06 at 4:53 PM, Farryn said:

Gotta have that balanced meal.

Telling us not to eat meat is like telling a cow not to eat a flower because it is alive.

0
 

 

You can have balanced yet vegan diets-- Many people do. There are many benefits, too, but I don't really think talking about benefits is worthwhile because there's lots of things people can do that are beneficial that we don't push. We value other things.

 

On 2017-07-06 at 5:13 PM, James2k said:

you need it for some of that HBV protein. can't just live off soy beans your whole life

0
 

 

Many very healthy people have found ways to be that healthy while eating vegan.

 

On 2017-07-06 at 5:49 PM, Master Sage Delaselva said:

I'm quietly holding out for lab-grown meat to become a more efficient and cheaper process so it can be mass-produced.

0
 

 

That would be the ideal

 

22 hours ago, Chorale_ said:

As an ex-vegan and present vegetarian I approve this message.

0
 

 

You are worse than most of these people, because you've thought about it yet still support the exploitation of animals :^)

 

22 hours ago, James2k said:

What you're saying here is basically that we can't treat anyone or thing differently because any boundary we might draw could be considered arbitrary. If we say that the justification of killing animals by our differences is the same as the justification of killing people by our differences, you're basically saying animals and humans(and much more so all humans) require perfectly equal and exact treatment. So uh, go ahead and **** a toddler because ******* an adult is legal and morally fine. Doesn't matter that kids and adults are different, any boundaries we might draw between them are surely arbitrary if the much bigger boundaries between man and beast are.

1
 

 

Not considered arbitrary, actually arbitrary. You need to justify the boundary. I can justify boundaries between a toddler and an adult. If you want to justify a boundary between human and other animal, by all means do, but the only way to do that that I've seen is some sort of moral axiom.

 

18 hours ago, Astraaeus said:

Philosophically speaking, morals are usually a minor distraction towards progress. Progress is complication since often progress is contrasted by tradition and funny enough humans have traditionally been eating meat, but I bring progress into my argument since it is progressive to continue consuming meat.

 

From common knowledge; meat is high in protein, a vital nutrient to the human body and it's muscle functions. Muscles are important; without muscles we wouldn't be able to lift things and we'd be heavily weak. You need muscles to walk, and perform pretty much everyday functions in general.

 

By stripping away meat as part of some sort of moral code that is purely fantastical by human minds, since morals were brought forth from human imagination for better or worse; you hinder progress. I believe society should be progressive so I think meat should continue to be consumed. 

 

In addition to these arguments, meat consumption is commonly observed in nature, as humans we should not be different. We are a living race, we need to live for ourselves (sometimes) at the cost of other species. I am not advocating for over-production or endangerment of animals however, that disrupts the food webs and food chains of many and causes more issues than resolved.

 

Overall, we as a HUMAN-RACE should not stop eating meat purely for the ideal of moral values. While the vegetarian diet is good for many things, taking meat from younger children can lead to MANY problems later and early on in life due to poor muscle development and whatnot.

 

I always tend to stand in the middle-ground of any sort of debate, it's strange. Any who, now realizing that plants contain higher trophic levels than meat, and thus more "energy" (i forgot the actual name i hated science); some studies are pointing to find the vegetarian diet helpful. But then, my previous points still stand. 

 

So with all of my concerns stressed, I feel like it should be left to the consumer populace to decide. Meat production companies should continue doing what they do, and it should be left to the choice of the consumer with full knowledge of the risks and benefits of each diet.

1
 

 

I don't advocate for destroying farms of eco-terrorism. That would be silly. I think that moving to a vegan based society would be better though, for many reasons.

 

We can achieve all these benefits by eating vegan diets. Atleast, for the average person-- Maybe professional athletes cannot, but none of us are at that level. We can all live in an equal way to how we live today, which is more ethical and morally justifiable, yet choose not to. Seems silly!!

 

And idk what you're going on about these progress memes seems like some dumb **** reply if you want to actually get deeper into that

 

16 hours ago, Lord Sagan said:

1. Meat tastes amazing

2. Not all farmers

3. How do you expect me to hit 100g of protein a day without meat.

4. The only complete protein thing that isn't meat is quinoa to my knowledge, and all of these hip people who are eating it now are supposedly causing people in the countries it comes from to starve to death. 

0
 

 

1. Sex feels good, sexual assault is justified because it feels good

2. Any sort of enslavement and murder is unacceptable

3. Vegan alternatives

4. Beans, lentils, soya, tofu, are all things that have protein that are vegan

 

14 hours ago, Catostrophy said:

Ultimately, it is the free market that will determine the rate of meat consumption I partake in.

1
 

 

yeah no actually this is the one that convinced me guys debate over

 

8 hours ago, Will (TauFirewarrior) said:

here comes the progressive parade coming to try and stifle the market. Guess what friend, there aren't enough farms in the world to feed the planet if we were all 100% veggies, you'd have to forest a lot of land and make it appropriate for farming if you wanted to feed the rest of the world on a non meat diet. Also your argument is morally subjective. People have different morals to authoritarian progressives. 

0
 

 

Your argument is that we do not have enough farms to feed everyone with them, yet we have enough farms to sustain a society dependent on meat? You don't see that as pretty absurd statement to make? If we can afford to feed everyone with lots of meat, we can afford to feed people with plants.

 

6 hours ago, TheAmazingPheonix said:

They're animals, they don't have feelings, they don't have a complex society, we are earth's dominating species. To say that we're not "humane" for killing animals is stupid, seeing as animals aren't human. Eat meat folks.

It would also be impossible to simply release a bunchs of animals bread to taste good, they'd just die by the hands of nature seeing as they're not used to, you know, being wild. Not to mention that you'd have hordes of cows, pigs, sheep etc just grazing on our fields. 

 

 

If you believe this, are you ok with me skinning a dog alive? Your argument is basically one that nothing matters but humans (which you need to justify), which would mean that anything we do to an animal is ok, right?

 

Right by might justifies many things I'm sure you are uncomfortable with, like... Murder, genocide, thievery, etc.

 

And I don't claim to know the best way to 'fix' the situation if everyone went vegan. That's definitely an interesting conversation though.

 

 

 

I went away and forgot about this thread so yay

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Space said:

 

 

 

0
 

You neither have enough to feed on either or. You require both to feed the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Will (TauFirewarrior) said:

You neither have enough to feed on either or. You require both to feed the world. 

0
 

 

Oh ok that is a more interesting way to think about it. But these same arguments were made to prevent the abolishment of slavery; 'the south will be destroyed economically.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Space said:

 

Oh ok that is a more interesting way to think about it. But these same arguments were made to prevent the abolishment of slavery; 'the south will be destroyed economically.'

0
 

It is also probably more beneficial to get your protein, fats etc from meats than it is from pills. There is also the argument that many livestock might potentially go extinct as there would be no further use for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Will (TauFirewarrior) said:

It is also probably more beneficial to get your protein, fats etc from meats than it is from pills. There is also the argument that many livestock might potentially go extinct as there would be no further use for them.

0
 

 

If it presented a severe health risk to go vegan, I would not support it pragmatically. But it doesn't seem to.

 

And the human race would have to develop ways to deal with all these livestock.

 

But that's sorta another debate-- The debate of whether it's possible to have an entirely vegan world. I would prefer this thread to be simply about whether you should be vegan or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You speak in many absolutes, stating things such as 'you can't support animal rights if you eat animal meat'. Sure I can; I don't think that an animal should be raised in a cage, fed food genetically modified to make the animal as fat and meaty as possible(which is unhealthy and kills the animal slowly), and bred to be food. I do believe that it's fine to, when the animal is of the appropriate age, kill the animal quickly, and eat its meat. I could go on for more, but I think my point is clear enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Space said:

 

If it presented a severe health risk to go vegan, I would not support it pragmatically. But it doesn't seem to.

 

And the human race would have to develop ways to deal with all these livestock.

 

But that's sorta another debate-- The debate of whether it's possible to have an entirely vegan world. I would prefer this thread to be simply about whether you should be vegan or not.

0
 

There are quite a few scientific studies that state that humans consuming the meat of animals helped in our evolutionary brain development or was at least a contributing factor more so than the consumption of plants, crops etc. I've yet to see anything from the Vegan Argument than liferstyle and potential weight loss. For instance if I went Vegan I'd likely lose a lot of weight and become somewhat unhealthy because the pill supplements of protein wouldn't have the same fats etc to keep me at a healthy weight. Veganism and meat eating is a lifestyle choice, do not shame people for either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Space said:

Not considered arbitrary, actually arbitrary. You need to justify the boundary. I can justify boundaries between a toddler and an adult. If you want to justify a boundary between human and other animal, by all means do, but the only way to do that that I've seen is some sort of moral axiom.

go ahead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey guys did you know im a vegan just thought I'd mention it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Star Platinum said:

You speak in many absolutes, stating things such as 'you can't support animal rights if you eat animal meat'. Sure I can; I don't think that an animal should be raised in a cage, fed food genetically modified to make the animal as fat and meaty as possible(which is unhealthy and kills the animal slowly), and bred to be food. I do believe that it's fine to, when the animal is of the appropriate age, kill the animal quickly, and eat its meat. I could go on for more, but I think my point is clear enough.

0
 

 

I very intentionally speak in absolutes, because I A) Think it's better for a discussion if your points do not have much leeway and are as concrete as possible without being stubborn B) Genuinely believe that.

 

I would respond that your beliefs are contrary.

 

There is no justification that you can make for accepting the murder and enslavement of animals that don't also apply for literally anything else to an animal.

 

If the situation was changed to a human, I think it can better show the absurdity.

 

I am ok with enslaving and murdering a human but am not OK with beating them.

 

1 minute ago, Will (TauFirewarrior) said:

There are quite a few scientific studies that state that humans consuming the meat of animals helped in our evolutionary brain development or was at least a contributing factor more so than the consumption of plants, crops etc. I've yet to see anything from the Vegan Argument than liferstyle and potential weight loss. For instance if I went Vegan I'd likely lose a lot of weight and become somewhat unhealthy because the pill supplements of protein wouldn't have the same fats etc to keep me at a healthy weight. Veganism and meat eating is a lifestyle choice, do not shame people for either. 

0
 

 

I think it's pretty much fact that meat and cooking meat was an important part of human brain development. I never said that primitive societies should be vegan.

 

If you went vegan and ate appropriately you would be healthier and not lose weight. Maybe if you did not adjust accordingly and you would lose weight, but overall it is a healthier option.

 

I am not trying to shame people. We are debating what is the better choice ethically and morally.

 

Just now, James2k said:

go ahead

0
 

 

A toddler cannot consent to a sexual relationship like an adult can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...