Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Scoffing too much meat and eggs is ‘just as bad as smoking’, claim scientists

and if there was an industry 10% the size of the meat industry making it easier on economies of scale this would change.
not that you are arguing otherwise obv

I totally agree.
However, as we both know, under capitalism the name of the game isn't "give people what they want", it's "convince them that what they get is what they want, and milk them". Currently, their best route to our wallets is omnivorousness. When they believe that they can make more money convincing us to eat a more limited diet we can rest assured the tide will turn, 'cos they always follow the money.
 
Just did a quick google and it seems the evidence is mixed.

IIRC cats have to be given enzyme supplements, both to help them digest vegetable proteins, and to replace those they usually get from a meat diet.
Dogs are a somewhat different proposition, being that they're more naturally omnivorous anyway.
 
Lots of reasons. here are a few: 1. The lives of others belong to them and are not yours to take away. 2. Taking life often involves physical and psychological suffering. 3. Taking a life deprives the living being of any future positive experiences they may have had. 4. The taking of life deprives that being's family members, associates, dependents etc of the presence of that life. 5. The (non consensual) taking of life is an act of violence that could have negative psychological effects on the life taker.

Fortunatly for me, I'm a psychopath.
 
Lots of reasons. here are a few: 1. The lives of others belong to them and are not yours to take away. 2. Taking life often involves physical and psychological suffering. 3. Taking a life deprives the living being of any future positive experiences they may have had. 4. The taking of life deprives that being's family members, associates, dependents etc of the presence of that life. 5. The (non consensual) taking of life is an act of violence that could have negative psychological effects on the life taker.

1) This is subjective in the case of "food animals" and implies that animals have similar "rights" to humans. That in itself is potentially a huge debate but of course meat-eaters and those who are comfortable with using animals as a resource would disagree with you. To me the concept of "animal rights" is a strange one. I believe that as humans we have an obligation not to cause undue suffering to the animals we use or take, but I don't believe that a cow or a sheep has any more "right to life" than a fly or a fish.

2) Agreed. But once we have elected to use animals as a resource, our commitment should be to minimise this, which many, many, meat eaters seek to do.

3) See 1.

4) This could be used as an argument for "ethically sourced" meat. In which case I'd agree with you.

5) Probably more relevant to the taking of human life than the killing of animals for food?

Fair play to you if you disagree with any of the above and have elected not to eat meat or benefit from the use of animals in any other ways. I just think that a blanket "killing is wrong" requires far more analysis than you provided initially.
 
is it not bizarre that there are people who will quite happily treat one kind of animal as a member of their family and nurture it, protect it and cry when it dies whilst simultaneously eating a variety of other animals and even feeding bits of it to the safe one under the table?

:hmm: No, of course not.

Some animals are treated as pets and loved, others are eaten. Nothing odd there whatsoever.

It would be bizarre to eat the pet.
 
Vegan cats. is one of those paredy things though yeah. People who inflict vegan diets on pet cats, they're just caricatures. I respect vegeterains and vegans choice. All that but they're just pale and week, have some bacon... etc. is teadious. But vegan cats... Fuck off. :D
 
Well, if you chemically synthesise taurine and the dozen or so other essential cat-nutrients and balance the rest of the diet carefully you might manage it.
And how much energy would that involve? Pretty wasteful use of resources when what they need is already right there.
 
Millions (billions?) of animals killed every year for meat and the best argument you've got to defend it is the horrors of cat veganism. lolz.
Certainly billions. There are 50 billion chickens in the world.

I'm just trying to establish something that might be a baseline of minimal ethics. Vegan (certainly no dairy), no leather or wool, no obligate carnivore pets. There's probably more.
 
Back
Top Bottom