Have you considered switching to plant based diet to....and reduce the suffering caused by your sponsorship of the meat industry?
You are commiting the fallacy of a false dichotomy. One which is very commonly committed on this topic.
It's not an either/or situation. You don't have to choose between supporting the immoral practices of the big meat industries or not eating meat.
You can buy meat from small produces who treat their animals very well and slaughter them with care for their comfort.
improve your health,
That's also a lie by itself.
If you take a standard American diet and simply remove animal products from it you are not going to be healthier.
A bag of sugar is vegan. But eating nothing but a bag of sugar will literally kill you.
So you can't say veganism is inherently healthy just because it doesn't have animal products in it.
If you just cut animal products out of a standard American diet you'll be deficient in various nutrients unless you proactively replace the animal products with a range of produce, nuts, and supplements for vitamin B12 that will make up for what you are no longer getting.
Raw veganism is different. You can almost get away with saying someone will automatically be healthier if they go raw vegan because this diet necessarily forces them to only eat things the way God intended them to be eaten. That automatically excludes a lot of unhealthy vegan options like bags of sugar, because it's not raw. Sure, you could eat fresh raw stalks of cane, but that's not going to be harmful to your health the way processed sugar is.
But even raw veganism is prone to fault on the part of the individual: You still need to have a balanced diet of raw produce, fruit, nuts, and seeds. You can't just eat bananas and expect to be healthy.
reduce your carbon footprint,
A load of satanic inspired BS. It's anti-life to try to pretend animals are inherently damaging to the earth and they should be killed off so they stop "contributing to carbon emissions".
God designed the presence of animals within the biosphere to play an important role which adds to the growth of the system and therefore it's capacity to support further life. Satan tries to kill, steal, and destroy, which is why his goal is to reduce the capacity for the earth to support life by convincing people to kill themselves and needlessly kill millions of animals, in the name of saving the earth.
Bison are what built the deep rich carbon-filled life supporting soils of the great plains. If you need to understand how that works, look up Joel Salatin or Alan Savory to learn about how large herding herbivores restore desertified land into good soil. Man killing the Bison, and then overtilling the soil with agriculture, is what lead to the destruction of that soil with the great dust bowl and the desertifying of states like Arizona (which use to be grassland in the early 20th century).
The great irony about the anti-life claims of animals being harmful to the earth is the fact that the presence of more (well managed) bovines on a desertified piece of land will actually INCREASE the fertility and water retention of the land which allows you to next year put MORE bovines on that same piece of land because the healed soil is producing more food for them to eat!
There were no doubt more animals in North America prior to the arrival of europeans than there are in North America today. Herds of Bison are estimated to have been anywhere from 30-60 million in 1600. It's insanity to then claim that somehow animals are a problem today when they weren't then.
The only difference is they were doing what they were designed to do instead of being confined to concentrated feed lots.
The animal isn't a problem, but their management can be.
Last edited: