Is it okay to eat animals???

[MaxWeiss]

I will always be a member of People who Eat Tasty Animals, but in a PM discussion, the issue was brought up. Assuming that it's not for survival, and that one can be healthy eating other stuff, I cannot defend the fact that I eat meat (and will continue to do so!). Can anybody provide a good reason with it is morally acceptable to eat animals when it is not necessary to survival??? And overpopulation of animals doesn't count, since we breed a lot of them just to eat them.

I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[Magic_Man]

Can you provide a reason why it isn't morally acceptable? My claim is that most animals are not self-aware, and it's ok to eat them if they aren't. Plenty of animals eat meat, although they could survive on plants alone. Are the predators morally reprehensible as well?

~MagicMan

[valenzuela]

The utility you gain by eating meat is more than the utility animals gain by the fact ure not eating meat anymore. In other words, the world is a happier place if u eat meat.

[JMa]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you provide a reason why it isn't morally acceptable? My claim is that most animals are not self-aware, and it's ok to eat them if they aren't. Plenty of animals eat meat, although they could survive on plants alone. Are the predators morally reprehensible as well?

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

well, breeding animals is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped eating meat we could probably help more starving people

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I am in the same boat as you.

I would likely not eat meat if I had to kill the animals myself. Yet I love a good cheeseburger and can't see myself giving them up. I suck.

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
well, making ipods is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped buying ipods we could probably help more starving people

[/ QUOTE ]

Are ipods morally reprehensible? This is a serious question.

~MagicMan

[JMa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, making ipods is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped buying ipods we could probably help more starving people

[/ QUOTE ]

Are ipods morally reprehensible? This is a serious question.

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

joke post, no?

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I am in the same boat as you.

I would likely not eat meat if I had to kill the animals myself. Yet I love a good cheeseburger and can't see myself giving them up. I suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whenever my fiancee sees chickens or other tasty animals on TV or farms and cringes at the thought of eating them, I comment on how delicious they must be. Likewise with the live lobsters in the tanks at seafood restaurants. She feels really uneasy about seeing the live animals, even though she loves meat. I would absolutely kill a chicken for dinner if I lived on a farm. IMO, those who wouldn't do it are in denial about meat. When you cook up that delicious spaghetti and meat sauce tonight, you have to realize that a cow died for it. I'm ok with that though. It seems to me like just another part of nature.

~MagicMan

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, making ipods is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped buying ipods we could probably help more starving people

[/ QUOTE ]

Are ipods morally reprehensible? This is a serious question.

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

joke post, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm intentionally being sensational (for humour and shock value), but my point is very serious. The fact that a process is inefficient or wastes resources doesn't seem sufficient to deem it immoral. Otherwise we'd have to condemn a lot of other stuff as well.

~MagicMan

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
I will always be a member of People who Eat Tasty Animals, but in a PM discussion, the issue was brought up. Assuming that it's not for survival, and that one can be healthy eating other stuff, I cannot defend the fact that I eat meat (and will continue to do so!). Can anybody provide a good reason with it is morally acceptable to eat animals when it is not necessary to survival??? And overpopulation of animals doesn't count, since we breed a lot of them just to eat them.

I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.

However, I must admit, I think is is highly immoral to serve a fine steak past medium rare /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I must admit, I think is is highly immoral to serve a fine steak past medium rare /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Serving a fine steak past medium rare is a waste of resources. Further discussion here may prove it immoral /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ZenMusician]

The physics of my body suggest
beyond reasonable doubt that
meat consumption is required
by my species.

What exactly should I regret?

Other omnivores can eat wide
varieties of diet as well. Is it
because they don't think
bunnies are cute and smart
and worthwile beings they
are "lower" animals or
"savages"?

-ZEN

[Sephus]

question: why do people post
like this? does
anyone else
find it difficult to
read?

[chezlaw]

The selfless componant of morality is getting satisfaction (+ve or -ve) from the satisfaction of others. That requires caring about them or empathising with them.

I find it very hard to care much about or empathise with chickens or cows being eaten. So there's a negligable selfless component and yes its purely selfish.

That doesn't make it immoral.

chez

[Metric]

It's hard to imagine that doing something your body was obviously designed to do, and designed to WANT to do is inherently immoral (unless you are being actively cruel in satisfying your desires -- e.g. boning your best friend's wife).

That said, I do have a lot more respect in these discussions for pro-steak eating people (well, the males anyway) who have personally hunted, killed, and gutted their dinner before eating it at least once in their life. Pro-steak debaters SHOULD have some first-hand contact with the fact that steak isn't grown in cellophane, and truly know that they are comfortable with the implications.

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, I do have a lot more respect in these discussions for pro-steak eating people (well, the males anyway) who have personally hunted, killed, and gutted their dinner before eating it at least once in their life. Pro-steak debaters SHOULD have some first-hand contact with the fact that steak isn't grown in cellophane, and truly know that they are comfortable with the implications.

[/ QUOTE ]

i personally think hunting for sport is gross (i have nothing against those who don't). for some reason i value the lives of wild animals, but not those of livestock who are bred and grown specifically for food. i will admit to occasionally eating trout, but i hate killing them.

if i had to kill my share of the cows/pigs/chickens i ate, i think i would probably eat less, but i don't think i'd stop entirely.

[Metric]

Does that mean you feel worse about eating "free-range animals" than you feel about eating something that lived its entire life in a cage?

[keith123]

i think there are some legitimate issues related to meat eating, such as the way animals are treated/kept/killed, but ending the life of an animal is not immoral**. what is the purpose of a cow's life, or that of a pig or chicken? does it matter to them if they die in a week or month or year? is anyone upset (generally speaking) that some animals have a longer lifespan than other animals? is there a reason to think that the perfect lifespan for a cow is 15 years? should we be trying to figure out how to raise that number? is there a reason to think that it is better to let a cow's body to slowly die of old age or sickness than it is to kill them respectfully and painlessly? (i know we don't do that now, but that is a separate issue) if we look to nature to determine the way cows should die, then we would see that their "natural" death is being eaten by another animal. and is it okay for animals to eat other animals? maybe we should only eat carnivores/omnivores? additionally, our bodies are definitely made to eat meat. unless you live in a naturally bean rich area, it would be tough in nature to get the proper protein intake to live a healthy life, especially for men. (arguments that we now can survive without eating meat are relevant to the larger argument but not the specific point i just made).

** while ending the life of an animal isn't immoral, it can certainly be a sign that the person doing that is sick in some way, but again, that is a seperate issue from the eating meat point.

[thylacine]

[ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.


[/ QUOTE ]

As an atheist, I completely disagree. Religion is at best totally worthless. But morality is a very important and serious topic.

Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.


As to the OP and eating meat: think about all the issues and make your own choice.

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
Does that mean you feel worse about eating "free-range animals" than you feel about eating something that lived its entire life in a cage?

[/ QUOTE ]

no. i think it's the wildness. also, as i think about this, i don't really care about fish but i wouldn't want people to kill whales or dolphins. i think maybe it's the mammalness.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[speedfreek]

I might suggest using the "Mirror Test" recently in the news to decide what you should or shouldn't eat.

If an animal can recognise itself in a mirror (and very few do) then it can be described as self aware and maybe shouldn't be eaten.

So that cuts out a few types of monkey, elephants, dolphins and humans from a meat eaters diet! Nearly everything else is fair game!

(Note: Human children tend to fail this test until they are at least 1.5 to 2 years old)

Link to Mirror Test Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test)

And I should add that I am in fact a vegitarian, but not the evangelical type! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
I might suggest using the "Mirror Test" recently in the news to decide what you should or shouldn't eat.

If an animal can recognise itself in a mirror (and very few do) then it can be described as self aware and maybe shouldn't be eaten.

So that cuts out a few types of monkey, elephants, dolphins and humans from a meat eaters diet! Nearly everything else is fair game!

(Note: Human children tend to fail this test until they are at least 1.5 to 2 years old)

Link to Mirror Test Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test)

And I should add that I am in fact a vegitarian, but not the evangelical type! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Finally some moral justification for my infant consumption!

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.


[/ QUOTE ]

As an atheist, I completely disagree. Religion is at best totally worthless. But morality is a very important and serious topic.

Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.


[/ QUOTE ]

Heh...as an atheist, I'm not at all certain that religion is worthless, but i'm very sure that the concept of 'morality' is pretty much hogwash.

But this is sure to devolve into semantics if we continue the discussion. Plus, it will get skidoo all excited.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Heh...as an atheist, I'm not at all certain that religion is worthless, but i'm very sure that the concept of 'morality' is pretty much hogwash.

But this is sure to devolve into semantics if we continue the discussion. Plus, it will get skidoo all excited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another one of your "meatless" commentaries.

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heh...as an atheist, I'm not at all certain that religion is worthless, but i'm very sure that the concept of 'morality' is pretty much hogwash.

But this is sure to devolve into semantics if we continue the discussion. Plus, it will get skidoo all excited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another one of your "meatless" commentaries.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, that reply was pretty good! Extra points for irony, too!
Good job, man!

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heh...as an atheist, I'm not at all certain that religion is worthless, but i'm very sure that the concept of 'morality' is pretty much hogwash.

But this is sure to devolve into semantics if we continue the discussion. Plus, it will get skidoo all excited.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another one of your "meatless" commentaries.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, that reply was pretty good! Extra points for irony, too!
Good job, man!

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish to thank my agent and Hamburger Helper.

[Mark H]

If by m moral you mean that it reduces the amount of suffering in the world I think it is.
What would happen if every one stopped eating meat.
1 Farmer kills all his livestock. {this to me is the most humane}
2 Fix all the animals so they cant have offspring. Then what let them go? There wouldnt be enough crops left to harvest let alone feed the world. The animals are going to die an unplesant death at some point.Old age isn't pleasant in nature. The last year will most likly be a slow torture .
Sickness in nature often leads to a slow painfull death.
Accidents with cars would be bad for both humans and animals.Many animals when hit by a car do not die imediatly
but can suffer for long periods before tyey die.
3 Not keeping wild animal populations in check is the same as # 2

Mark

[BobOjedaFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, making ipods is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped buying ipods we could probably help more starving people

[/ QUOTE ]

Are ipods morally reprehensible? This is a serious question.

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

joke post, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm intentionally being sensational (for humour and shock value), but my point is very serious. The fact that a process is inefficient or wastes resources doesn't seem sufficient to deem it immoral. Otherwise we'd have to condemn a lot of other stuff as well.

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

I once knew someone like this. He's gotten so nutty now he won't spend any money on personal satisfaction. You can't go to a baseball game with him. Unless you pay for him, he'll accept THAT. lol, he thinks it's selfless.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
question: why do people post
like this? does
anyone else
find it difficult to
read?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to think that
they are making their point in
intarweb haiku.

[Borodog]

It's a deal we have. We feed, care for and protect animals in exchange for getting to eat them before they turn old and senile and end up in the old livestock's home.

There wouldn't be one ten thousandth as many chickens, cows, or pigs alive if we didn't eat them. In fact, the solution to the problem of endangered species is to allow private ownership of them and start eating them. Siberian tiger? Mmmm, delicious, and environmentally friendly too!

[Siegmund]

People seem to put the barrier between "acceptable/not acceptable to kill and eat" in different places according to how much kinship they feel for their food. You find people willing to eat anything including each other; people willing to eat anything except humans; people willing to eat anything except monkeys, dogs, whatever; people willing to eat fish but not land animals; people willing to eat plants but not animals; and so on... but you don't find too many people who believe that eating monkeys is OK while eating chickens is wrong.

I think that's a reasonable spectrum of moral views.

What I think is wrong is the assertion that there is something special about the one point on that spectrum that thinks the cutoff must fall between plant and animal. If it's wrong to kill a clam, let's say... then how is it right to rip a poor defenseless plant up by its roots and boil it alive?

We have to eat SOMEthing. And EVERYthing we eat was alive at some point fairly recently before we put it into our mouths.

[theblackkeys]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you provide a reason why it isn't morally acceptable? My claim is that most animals are not self-aware, and it's ok to eat them if they aren't. Plenty of animals eat meat, although they could survive on plants alone. Are the predators morally reprehensible as well?

~MagicMan

[/ QUOTE ]

well, breeding animals is very ineffective. it is a waste of resources. if everybody stopped eating meat we could probably help more starving people

[/ QUOTE ]
Animal foods contain all the essential amino acids required in our diet. Plants have incomplete proteins, so you have to be careful that you're eating the right combination so you get all the essential amino acids in your body in the right proportions.

[dinopoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will always be a member of People who Eat Tasty Animals, but in a PM discussion, the issue was brought up. Assuming that it's not for survival, and that one can be healthy eating other stuff, I cannot defend the fact that I eat meat (and will continue to do so!). Can anybody provide a good reason with it is morally acceptable to eat animals when it is not necessary to survival??? And overpopulation of animals doesn't count, since we breed a lot of them just to eat them.

I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the correct viewpoint. I don't feel the need to justify eating animals. They taste good and when I'm hungry I'll eat one, simple as that. If the roles were reversed, I'm sure no animal would hesitate to chow down on me.

I have no issues with eating plants either. For those who feel it is wrong to eat animals, is eating plants therefore okay? Why do animals have more claim to life than plants?

[keith123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will always be a member of People who Eat Tasty Animals, but in a PM discussion, the issue was brought up. Assuming that it's not for survival, and that one can be healthy eating other stuff, I cannot defend the fact that I eat meat (and will continue to do so!). Can anybody provide a good reason with it is morally acceptable to eat animals when it is not necessary to survival??? And overpopulation of animals doesn't count, since we breed a lot of them just to eat them.

I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the correct viewpoint. I don't feel the need to justify eating animals. They taste good and when I'm hungry I'll eat one, simple as that. If the roles were reversed, I'm sure no animal would hesitate to chow down on me.

I have no issues with eating plants either. For those who feel it is wrong to eat animals, is eating plants therefore okay? Why do animals have more claim to life than plants?

[/ QUOTE ]

why do other humans?

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it wrong? For you to eat, something has to die, whether it is a plant or an animal or bacteria, etc. Why should I care more about a cow than a carrot?

Even if you were a strict vegan, you'd still contribute to the deaths of billions of insects. I forgot, insects aren't cuddly, so we don't give a [censored] about them.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do animals have more claim to life than plants?

[/ QUOTE ]

why do other humans?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's genetics--valuing other human lives increases your chances of survival.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I am in the same boat as you.

I would likely not eat meat if I had to kill the animals myself. Yet I love a good cheeseburger and can't see myself giving them up. I suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

This sentiment always feels odd to me precisely because I spent the period of my life from ages 8ish-16 on a farm. Some true stories:

-We owned cattle. On a few occasions a cow would die giving birth (or from injuries related to giving birth). In every case we, and by "we" I mean every member of my family participated including my younger sisters, bottle-fed the calf until it was old enough to butcher. They had names and we could simply walk up and pet them, and then we ate them and didn't care.

-We always had at least one family dog that lived indoors with us. They were members of the family, they slept in our beds more often than not, and my sisters would cry for days when they died. Once we saw a segment on a news show about how in China or somewhere dogs were being raised for fur coats, and how animal activists were crying that they could be using coyote fur or something instead of "betraying" these pets. We were all rolling our eyes and agreeing that if the dogs were raised explicitly for fur, activist groups should just kindly shut up. This despite the fact that dogs are pets, and coyotes are common pests that sometimes attack livestock and pets, and almost always made a lot of noise during the night.

-We also had outdoor cats. Outdoor cats that would never live more than 5ish years because of forest predators. We tried to prevent this; on several occasions my father would throw open a door and start shooting from inside the house while the rest of us watched TV. Yet, if one of the cats caught a mouse, we wouldn't try to stop it from eating it.

-Rattlesnakes decide to nest near children's playing area, so my father protects his children by killing the rattlesnakes. Children play near wasps nest, wasp stings children to protect its young, father kills the wasps.

My point in all of this is that anyone who is actually exposed to these animals is going to become desensitized pretty quickly to the idea of animals dying, simply because there's no way to care about it without being maddenly inconsistent or making living almost impossible. That doesn't mean that we approve of things like cruelty to animals, only that I won't argue with what you eat even if it's your own poodle.

(BTW, I don't buy the argument something is automatically moral because animals do it. Male cats will kill the kittens of a female they haven't mated with; that's genocide in my book)

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or even if it did!

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or even if it did!

[/ QUOTE ]

So, the truth comes out. Your post is apropos, as usual.

[gull]

[ QUOTE ]

I once knew someone like this. He's gotten so nutty now he won't spend any money on personal satisfaction. You can't go to a baseball game with him. Unless you pay for him, he'll accept THAT. lol, he thinks it's selfless.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this nutty? This is the course of action that logic leads you to if you accept that you should treat the lives of others as no less important than your own; i.e., you subscribe to utilitarianism.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or even if it did!

[/ QUOTE ]

So, the truth comes out. Your post is apropos, as usual.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif Would "your post is mystifying as usual" be the appropriate snippy response?

I guess my question was, why does your explanation solve the problem rather than simply push it back a frame?

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or even if it did!

[/ QUOTE ]

morality came from evolution.

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I will always be a member of People who Eat Tasty Animals, but in a PM discussion, the issue was brought up. Assuming that it's not for survival, and that one can be healthy eating other stuff, I cannot defend the fact that I eat meat (and will continue to do so!). Can anybody provide a good reason with it is morally acceptable to eat animals when it is not necessary to survival??? And overpopulation of animals doesn't count, since we breed a lot of them just to eat them.

I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is easiest to wash away the dilemma if you simply realize that the notion of morality is as silly as religon.

However, I must admit, I think is is highly immoral to serve a fine steak past medium rare /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Morality has it's place. But it is subjective.

[Skidoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't let religious propaganda trick you into thinking that morality somehow comes from religion, because it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If morality didn't come from God (note I don't say "religion"), then by what authority would it be imposed or enforced?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or even if it did!

[/ QUOTE ]

So, the truth comes out. Your post is apropos, as usual.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif Would "your post is mystifying as usual" be the appropriate snippy response?

I guess my question was, why does your explanation solve the problem rather than simply push it back a frame?

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, if I ever give a "snippy" response, it is in an obviously humorous mode and not in the context of the serious and scholarly exchange for which SMP is justly renown.

As to your question, my post does not attempt a resolution. Insofar as you concede that the issue falls under the jurisdiction of a higher authority, it is there that I must refer you. Between our two sides alone, the dispute cannot be resolved.

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'm just going to have to admit that I am being selfish when I eat meat and accept that it is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I am in the same boat as you.

I would likely not eat meat if I had to kill the animals myself. Yet I love a good cheeseburger and can't see myself giving them up. I suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

This sentiment always feels odd to me precisely because I spent the period of my life from ages 8ish-16 on a farm. Some true stories:

-We owned cattle. On a few occasions a cow would die giving birth (or from injuries related to giving birth). In every case we, and by "we" I mean every member of my family participated including my younger sisters, bottle-fed the calf until it was old enough to butcher. They had names and we could simply walk up and pet them, and then we ate them and didn't care.

-We always had at least one family dog that lived indoors with us. They were members of the family, they slept in our beds more often than not, and my sisters would cry for days when they died. Once we saw a segment on a news show about how in China or somewhere dogs were being raised for fur coats, and how animal activists were crying that they could be using coyote fur or something instead of "betraying" these pets. We were all rolling our eyes and agreeing that if the dogs were raised explicitly for fur, activist groups should just kindly shut up. This despite the fact that dogs are pets, and coyotes are common pests that sometimes attack livestock and pets, and almost always made a lot of noise during the night.

-We also had outdoor cats. Outdoor cats that would never live more than 5ish years because of forest predators. We tried to prevent this; on several occasions my father would throw open a door and start shooting from inside the house while the rest of us watched TV. Yet, if one of the cats caught a mouse, we wouldn't try to stop it from eating it.

-Rattlesnakes decide to nest near children's playing area, so my father protects his children by killing the rattlesnakes. Children play near wasps nest, wasp stings children to protect its young, father kills the wasps.

My point in all of this is that anyone who is actually exposed to these animals is going to become desensitized pretty quickly to the idea of animals dying, simply because there's no way to care about it without being maddenly inconsistent or making living almost impossible. That doesn't mean that we approve of things like cruelty to animals, only that I won't argue with what you eat even if it's your own poodle.

(BTW, I don't buy the argument something is automatically moral because animals do it. Male cats will kill the kittens of a female they haven't mated with; that's genocide in my book)

[/ QUOTE ]

The male cat kills the kittens because the kittens drink milk from the female, during this time the female cannot go into heat. So evolution dictates the kittens must die.

[arahant]

Not eating meat may turn you into a pussy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DVesLAqF5o)