Is killing non-human animals for food wrong?

[Q]

While I have never been a vegetarian in the past, I find it harder and harder to morally justify eating meat. I suppose on the most fundamental level I have a problem with living things suffering, a condition readily apparent with the treatment of many cows, chickens, etc.

(1) Should humans avoid eating meat when the circumstances surrounding the animals' habitat cause suffering (e.g., baby cows kept in small confined spaces for purposes of veal production)? If it is okay, why?

(2) If animals do not suffer during the process (free range farming perhaps?), is killing them for food okay? Why or why not?

Please avoid discussing whether you think meat is necessary or not to a healthy diet, as I am really not concerned with that issue.

[Woland]

My problem is...I'm an old farm girl. I have raised and killed chickens. I've taken my bow and arrow, shot my buck and yes...I ate him--or at least, a fair portion of him. I've also been stalked by a bear, and scared silly by that...and avoided getting bitten by a mojave green.

I find that I much prefer being at the top of the food chain. Think I'll stay there.

I don't see how fancying yourself as "being at the top of the food chain" makes any difference to your ultimate well-being.

Your chances of being killed by a bear (for example) are the same whether you're a vegetarian or not. Vegetarians merely abstain from eating meat (even though theoretically could do such a thing as well as anyone) for a variety of reasons, compassion towards sentient creatures being a popular one.

Your reasoning seems to be "might as well kill animals because otherwise I won't be at the top of the food chain". Does abstaining from killing animals somehow remove from you the ability to kill them if need be?

If not, what does "being at the top of the food chain" have to do with anything?

-Woland

[dianaiad]

My problem is...I'm an old farm girl. I have raised and killed chickens. I've taken my bow and arrow, shot my buck and yes...I ate him--or at least, a fair portion of him. I've also been stalked by a bear, and scared silly by that...and avoided getting bitten by a mojave green.

I find that I much prefer being at the top of the food chain. Think I'll stay there.

I don't see how fancying yourself as "being at the top of the food chain" makes any difference to your ultimate well-being.

Your chances of being killed by a bear (for example) are the same whether you're a vegetarian or not. Vegetarians merely abstain from eating meat (even though theoretically could do such a thing as well as anyone) for a variety of reasons, compassion towards sentient creatures being a popular one.

Your reasoning seems to be "might as well kill animals because otherwise I won't be at the top of the food chain". Does abstaining from killing animals somehow remove from you the ability to kill them if need be?

If not, what does "being at the top of the food chain" have to do with anything?

-Woland

Simple;

A deer doesn't kill the wolf; he runs like crazy and hope he gets away. Vegetarian animals are (with the possible exception of Cape Buffalo, rhinos and elephants..once full grown, that is) generally not treated well by those who prey upon them.

Humans are, whether you like this idea or not, collectively in total control of pretty much every other animal out there. We ARE at the 'top of the food chain,' in that any animal that preys upon us only succeeds by accident, and then something is done about it. Something fatal, usually. We do not deal well with the feeling that we are appropriate prey animals.

What we do about those animals lower on the heirarchy is up to the individual, as you say...but in terms of pure scientific and nutritional fact, we are omnivores, evolved/created to BE omnivores, and it's not easy to be a vegetarian and stay nutritionally balanced. We need a little meat. Perhaps not as much as most people think, but some.

...and I see absolutely nothing horrifying in that, as long as we treat the animals we eat with..respect, I guess is the nearest concept.

[Q]

Dianaiad- I see what you're saying, but the way you phrase it makes it seem like many of the animals used for mass consumption are treated humanely. In reality, I would venture a guess that the overwhelming majority of cows and chickens in the U.S. are treated in confined, maddening (from the animals' perspective) conditions. Do you only eat free range animals?

Woland said: "Now I'm stuck being a vegetarian, and I don't think I can change anything to it."

While I understand your justifications, and taste preferences for being a vegetarian, does this include meat production from free range animals, which (hopefully) allows them to live a far more pain-free life?

[Ragna]

What we do about those animals lower on the heirarchy is up to the individual, as you say...but in terms of pure scientific and nutritional fact, we are omnivores, evolved/created to BE omnivores, and it's not easy to be a vegetarian and stay nutritionally balanced. We need a little meat. Perhaps not as much as most people think, but some.

...and I see absolutely nothing horrifying in that, as long as we treat the animals we eat with..respect, I guess is the nearest concept.

I'm not a vegetarian nor I think I'll become one, but I just wanted to say that for the same reasons we are "in control" of every other animal we are also capable of creating balanced 100% meat-free diets (yes, even without "a little meat" - you can put the nutrients from somewhere else, even though it's harder or more expensive).

I think when it becames much more viable in a lot of senses (like taste, culture, variety, economically) in the distant future we might stop killing animals for food. Who knows.

[dianaiad]

Dianaiad- I see what you're saying, but the way you phrase it makes it seem like many of the animals used for mass consumption are treated humanely. In reality, I would venture a guess that the overwhelming majority of cows and chickens in the U.S. are treated in confined, maddening (from the animals' perspective) conditions. Do you only eat free range animals?

(grin) if you can call deer hunting season 'free range'...

On the other hand, I don't know if everything I eat is 'free range', no.

..........and though I almost hate to admit this, given that I've taken the 'pro-meat' stand, I really don't EAT that much meat. Not that I have a problem with doing so, it's just that I don't.

Woland said: "Now I'm stuck being a vegetarian, and I don't think I can change anything to it."

While I understand your justifications, and taste preferences for being a vegetarian, does this include meat production from free range animals, which (hopefully) allows them to live a far more pain-free life?

[ArtanBraeden]

Having an aversion to consuming meat is a sociological trait. (in reference to lifestyle choice vegetarians.)

We are omnivores, anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

If you think not eating meat is more than just a fab lifestyle choice of the times (not to include those who cannot afford the meat in poor environments) than I invite you to find an isolated place from which you cannot escape and bring with you only water and meat.

Most people's ideals wont make it a week. That being said, my hat is off to those of you who can resist the sweet, sweet lure of bacon.

I am for free range, and humane treatment on the other points though, no need to torture animals just because we want cheeseburgers.

[Q]

It seems pretty clear that everyone favors the humane treatment of animals. But if it is possible to obtain meat that has been produced humanely- why would someone be a vegetarian? Other than not liking the taste of meat or having particular health preferences, I don't see why one would have an ethical dilemma with eating meat that wasn't produced through cruel techniques.

[Ragna]

It seems pretty clear that everyone favors the humane treatment of animals. But if it is possible to obtain meat that has been produced humanely- why would someone be a vegetarian? Other than not liking the taste of meat or having particular health preferences, I don't see why one would have an ethical dilemma with eating meat that wasn't produced through cruel techniques.

They consider animal life "holy" as a type of cult and reverence to nature, exaggerated (from my PoV) respect. It's not unlike some religious policies. But most vegetarians I've met are vegetarian because of the treatment.

Some get even further.

Jains usually do not consume root vegetables such as potatoes, garlic, onions, carrots, radishes, cassava, sweet potatoes, turnips, etc., as the plant needed to be killed in the process of accessing these prior to their end of life cycle.

[Jacob Simonsky]

It's OK to kill and eat meat. What is not OK is the way our society treats animals prior to their deaths. That's really all there is to say except that this topic is addressed in the movie Avatar in the correct way.

[FinalEnigma]

I'm a vegetarian on moral grounds. Note however, that I do not condemn others as immoral for eating meat. I'm not one of the preachy annoying vegetarians.

I became one after talking to somebody I knew online who was vegan. I'd always been curious and then I met, and came to know fairly well, someone who was one, so we talked. What I found out was that it is a lot easier than you would think. If you know how to cook tofu, it can taste quite good (many people don't cook it well), and I regularly eat the same foods as I did before, and they taste just as good. Curry, chicken nuggets, hamburgers, chicken sandwiches, ribs, and on and on. These are, of course, non-meat versions. I'll admit they haven't pulled off just-as-good bacon yet, but maybe someday they will.

Now, regarding the morality of it, I'm a vegetarian, but not an idiot. If stranded somewhere and it was eat a pig or die...sorry, pig. My stance is that so long as I do not need to kill sentient being to survive, I shouldn't. It's that simple. beyond this, I very strongly disapprove of the way food animals are treated in this country - it's utterly disgusting. not only morally, but just plain disgusting in some cases.

For example, in many places, cows are packed so tightly they are standing ankle deep in feces their entire lives, until they are killed and ground up - without being washed - to be put into your food. Of course, then the ground up meat is sent through half a dozen chlorine baths to kill most of the germs, but even so, if you raise them properly, let them free range and eat grass instead of the corn we crazily overproduce and therefore put in every processed food, you will still end up with not only better quality meat, but safer meat as well. (watch food inc for my source. it shows a lot of stuff that will very much turn you off the food industry in America)

But even with meat that is raised and fed well, I still would hesitate to kill and eat them, because, as has been recently pointed out to me, I have a somewhat Buddhist view of the world (I refuse to squish bugs - I take them outside if they're bothering somebody)

Further, I would like to point out the that the argument against universal vegetarianism that speaks of the problems of suddenly releasing millions of cows and pigs into the wild in specious. nobody is suggesting we knock down the fences and walk away - it'll never happen like that anyway.

as a random note, land used to raise meat for human consumption is something like 17 times less efficiently used than land used to produce vegetables. This should be obvious - especially since we feed most of our livestock corn anyway. if you took the corn you are feeding to the cow and fed it to people, it would feed more people than the cow you're growing (not that I'm suggesting corn-only diets, only making a point).If we stopped eating meat, there would be more than enough food to end world hunger.


addition - vegetarianism is not exactly a lifestyle choice of the times. Buddha himself was a vegetarian, as are most Buddhists...