Horizon: Should I eat Meat?

[ddraig]

If you found you had an infestation of rats in your house, what would you do about it?

really?

 

[joustmaster]

Yeah, but thing is its attitudes like yours that are the problem. You've admitted on the thread that you're not really bothered if animals suffer for your pleasure. Yet its my position that says inflicting avoidable suffering is wrong that's the silly one apparently.

I'd prefer them not to suffer. I don't care if they die.
It's just a chicken.

 

[ddraig]

Well, thats exactly the difference.
I find that statement so silly that it actually made me laugh.
Each to their own though.

so you've answered the thread title for yourself
animals being killed for your tastebuds and tummy are fine and even funny

 

[joustmaster]

If your neighbour was torturing their dog, what would you do?

the same thing I'd do if I came across anyone was needlessly hurting any animal.

 

[ddraig]

I'd prefer them not to suffer. I don't care if they die.
It's just a chicken.

why do you care if they suffer? is that not funny?

 

[Spymaster]

If your neighbour was torturing their dog, what would you do?

Stop or report them.

How's this relevant though?

 

[joustmaster]

so you've answered the thread title for yourself
animals being killed for your tastebuds and tummy are fine and even funny

sure.

 

[ddraig]

the same thing I'd do if I came across anyone was needlessly hurting any animal.

but you don't need to eat animals so you are causing them hurt needlessly
don't you see?

 

[Roadkill]

really?

Yes, really.

No need for the - it was a serious question. I want to see whether Jeff Robinson's prepared to take his argument to its logical conclusion.

 

[Roadkill]

If your neighbour was torturing their dog, what would you do?

Report them to the OB and the RSPCA. Your point?

 

[joustmaster]

why do you care if they suffer? is that not funny?

why would it be funny?

 

[ddraig]

why would it be funny?

because they're just a chicken and there for your pleasure
does it not taste as good if it has suffered or something? why else would you care if it is just a chicken/pig/cow/lamb etc?

 

[Spymaster]

WTF?

 

[joustmaster]

but you don't need to eat animals so you are causing them hurt needlessly
don't you see?

no. I want to eat animals. I enjoy it. so there is the need for them to be farmed and slaughtered.

 

[ddraig]

Yes, really.

No need for the - it was a serious question. I want to see whether Jeff Robinson's prepared to take his argument to its logical conclusion.

do you expect a unified answer?
you are hypocrisy hunting

 

[ddraig]

no. I want to eat animals. I enjoy it. so there is the need for them to be farmed and slaughtered.

i understand you think that
but why do you care if they've suffered or not?

 

[joustmaster]

because they're just a chicken and there for your pleasure
does it not taste as good if it has suffered or something? why else would you care if it is just a chicken/pig/cow/lamb etc?

there is some argument that a distressed animal tastes worse. I'm undecided.
my choices are to have my dinner be distressed through its life, or not.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

If you found you had an infestation of rats in your house, what would you do about it?

Given that rats carry potentially fatal diseases, I wouldn't have a problem with killing them as an act of self-defence. I've had mice in the past and I used non-injury inflicting traps to get them and then release them back into the wild.

 

[joustmaster]

i understand you think that
but why do you care if they've suffered or not?

erm, because i prefer animals not to be in pain?

 

[ddraig]

erm, because i prefer animals not to be in pain?

but they are only a chicken and going to die for your plate anyway
why does it matter to you?

 

[Roadkill]

do you expect a unified answer?
you are hypocrisy hunting

I've no idea what you mean by a 'unified answer.' All I'm doing - as I said before - is seeing whether Jeff Robinson is prepared to take his position to its logical conclusion.

I think you said yesterday this is an old argument, and so it is, but that's no reason to try and shut it down by throwing abuse and facepalms at anyone whose position differs from yours. In other words, butt out.

 

[joustmaster]

because they're just a chicken and there for your pleasure

I think you're trying to take the piss a bit with that line.
But its true. that chicken is there for my pleasure. the reason it has been born, fed, looked after, and killed, is just for my £7's worth of pleasure.

 

[Spymaster]

but they are only a chicken and going to die for your plate anyway
why does it matter to you?

He's answered that.

He has no problem with animals dying but prefers them not to live or die in pain and distress.

What's difficult about that?

 

[Jeff Robinson]

What do you mean by beings with similar interests irrespective of species?

I've a feeling you may be hedging again!

Not at all. For example, in so far as a non-human animal feels pain to the same extent as a human animal does, then that should not be given less weight morally merely because she is not a human.

 

[joustmaster]

but they are only a chicken and going to die for your plate anyway
why does it matter to you?

because i prefer an animal to suffer as little as conveniently possible, before its killed (or I kill it) for my meal.

 

[Roadkill]

Given that rats carry potentially fatal diseases, I wouldn't have a problem with killing them as an act of self-defence. I've had mice in the past and I used non-injury inflicting traps to get them and then release them back into the wild.

Fair enough.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

I'd prefer them not to suffer. I don't care if they die.
It's just a chicken.

Your exact words were 'You see, I'd prefer that all animals have a better life before being killed for food. But if they don't, I'm not too fussed.' You don't really care, lets face it.

 

[ddraig]

I've no idea what you mean by a 'unified answer.' All I'm doing - as I said before - is seeing whether Jeff Robinson is prepared to take his position to its logical conclusion.

I think you said yesterday this is an old argument, and so it is, but that's no reason to try and shut it down by throwing abuse and facepalms at anyone whose position differs from yours. In other words, butt out.

i've not abused you, it is just tedious
if a rat was threatening me and my imaginary family health then it would have to die, survival init
you do not need to eat meat to survive so you are making a choice based on your taste, desire, convenience etc

 

[ddraig]

He's answered that.

He has no problem with animals dying but prefers them not to live or die in pain and distress.

What's difficult about that?

because they still die a needless death

it's fine, you don't agree and i don't have time to go round and round in circles

 

[joustmaster]

Your exact words were 'You see, I'd prefer that all animals have a better life before being killed for food. But if they don't, I'm not too fussed.' You don't really care, lets face it.

As I said very early on in the thread - I care a bit. enough to only buy high quality beef and pork. barn raised hens and eggs. but when it comes to eating out, takeaways, milk and egg products in other stuff, leather and other animal products, I can't be arsed.