Eating meat and dairy vs. vegetarian/veganism

Booko said:

Yes, I've never quite gotten the vegetarian/vegan difference. In one case the objection is pretty clear: you're killing the animal. In the other you're not. In the case of Vegans, it's considered inhumane treatment, it's just that I don't always share that pov.

Sometimes I do, like the way eggs are mass produced. I don't see the objection for the eggs I eat though. The chickens are raised humanely as pets, and the eggs aren't fertile. So...uh...what exactly did I kill or harm? That's what I don't really get.

As for cheese, I'm limited to sheep's milk cheese anyway, so I barely eat any.

Click to expand...

I have read of great yogis who meditate on the skins of dead animals found in the wild which have died of natural causes. (The animals died not the yogis :bonk: . Sorry it's late.) Does anyone think this too is inmoral?

[FONT=&quot]I believe that as creatures able to discern what is or is not harmful, and what path is the least harmful, we bear or should bear the responsibilities of such [where we are able] and walk said path that is least harmful, or which causes less suffering. In conclusion, it is my opinion that adhering to a vegetarian or vegan diet helps to accomplish this.
[/FONT]

My objections to eating meat, dairy, eggs, &c are neither chiseled in stone nor universal. Philosophically my primary issues are: the infliction of physical pain; psychic distress; and imprisonment so as to prevent an animal from living a fulfilling life, or a life proper to its species.

There are farms where cows and chickens are allowed to run about freely in yards and pastures; to have a social life, and I have less objection to harvesting milk and eggs from these than I do from the factory farms that dominate the industry, in North America at least.

Vegan objections to milk and eggs:
Most people familiar with the beef and dairy industries say they would rather be a beef than a dairy animal. Most dairy cows are not treated humanely, nor do they last long. After a few years they're replaced with fresh, young cows and it's off to the slaughterhouse. And because they must be bred before they begin producing milk their unneeded calves are hustled off to the veal crates immediately upon birth, to face their own horrors.

The vegan objection to eggs is similar. Most commercial egg production involves multiple chickens crammed into battery cages, stacked to the ceiling, in huge warehouses containing tens of thousands of birds. Workers must wear respirators to counter the ammoniac air. The birds have bald patches, bleeding sores, often broken bones, their feet are torn up from the wire cage floors, if placed on the floor few can walk. After a short life of intense egg laying its off to the grinder and a new batch is moved in.
The new batches of chicks come from hatcheries where the male chicks are discarded. When the drums are full they're (living chicks) ground for animal feed or fertilizer. Often they're sold directly to farmers and poured (alive) into spreaders to be shredded and broadcast onto fields.

Seyorni said:

My objections to eating meat, dairy, eggs, &c are neither chiseled in stone nor universal. Philosophically my primary issues are: the infliction of physical pain; psychic distress; and imprisonment so as to prevent an animal from living a fulfilling life, or a life proper to its species.

There are farms where cows and chickens are allowed to run about freely in yards and pastures; to have a social life, and I have less objection to harvesting milk and eggs from these than I do from the factory farms that dominate the industry, in North America at least.

Vegan objections to milk and eggs:
Most people familiar with the beef and dairy industries say they would rather be a beef than a dairy animal. Most dairy cows are not treated humanely, nor do they last long. After a few years they're replaced with fresh, young cows and it's off to the slaughterhouse. And because they must be bred before they begin producing milk their unneeded calves are hustled off to the veal crates immediately upon birth, to face their own horrors.

The vegan objection to eggs is similar. Most commercial egg production involves multiple chickens crammed into battery cages, stacked to the ceiling, in huge warehouses containing tens of thousands of birds. Workers must wear respirators to counter the ammoniac air. The birds have bald patches, bleeding sores, often broken bones, their feet are torn up from the wire cage floors, if placed on the floor few can walk. After a short life of intense egg laying its off to the grinder and a new batch is moved in.
The new batches of chicks come from hatcheries where the male chicks are discarded. When the drums are full they're (living chicks) ground for animal feed or fertilizer. Often they're sold directly to farmers and poured (alive) into spreaders to be shredded and broadcast onto fields.

Click to expand...

Very good post, Seyorni; I concur.

Seyorni said:

Vegan objections to milk and eggs:
Most people familiar with the beef and dairy industries say they would rather be a beef than a dairy animal. Most dairy cows are not treated humanely, nor do they last long. After a few years they're replaced with fresh, young cows and it's off to the slaughterhouse. And because they must be bred before they begin producing milk their unneeded calves are hustled off to the veal crates immediately upon birth, to face their own horrors.

The vegan objection to eggs is similar. Most commercial egg production involves multiple chickens crammed into battery cages, stacked to the ceiling, in huge warehouses containing tens of thousands of birds. Workers must wear respirators to counter the ammoniac air. The birds have bald patches, bleeding sores, often broken bones, their feet are torn up from the wire cage floors, if placed on the floor few can walk. After a short life of intense egg laying its off to the grinder and a new batch is moved in.
The new batches of chicks come from hatcheries where the male chicks are discarded. When the drums are full they're (living chicks) ground for animal feed or fertilizer. Often they're sold directly to farmers and poured (alive) into spreaders to be shredded and broadcast onto fields.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Seyorni. That's pretty much what I thought.

I have many problems with "modern" agricultural practice, these being just some of them.

It is human nature to eat meat. We have fangs for God's sake! If all humans were to stop eating meat, what do you think would happen? First many people who farm these things would go hungary, and possibly die. Then, an overpopulation of the animals themselves would cause them to go hungary. So unless you are will to let your government use it's time to 'save the cows' or 'give the pigs food' it could never work.

Maxist said:

It is human nature to eat meat. We have fangs for God's sake!

Click to expand...

"human nature"? This opening doesn't usually go well...unless we're talking about nudity.

First many people who farm these things would go hungary, and possibly die.

Click to expand...

Or they could, i don't know, grow vegetables. Farmers do that, right?

Then, an overpopulation of the animals themselves would cause them to go hungary.

Click to expand...

The animals wouldn't have been bred in the first place if not to harvest. No animal farms = no farm animals.

Maxist said:

It is human nature to eat meat. We have fangs for God's sake! If all humans were to stop eating meat, what do you think would happen? First many people who farm these things would go hungary, and possibly die. Then, an overpopulation of the animals themselves would cause them to go hungary. So unless you are will to let your government use it's time to 'save the cows' or 'give the pigs food' it could never work.

Click to expand...

OK, I'll concede that humans, historically, have been carnivores/omnivores. The rest of your assertions make no sense, though.

We don't have "fangs." You've been hanging out in too many Goth bars -- those things are fake.
Seriously, some species of deer have huge, protruding upper canines. They look like smilodons, (for God's sake). But they are not carnivores.

If everyone stopped eating meat there would be less starvation in the world. Meat production is not calorically efficient. It takes twelve or more pounds of grain to produce a pound of meat (USDA statistics). In the US most grain -- that is, >50% -- is fed to animals.

This "animal overpopulation" thing never ceases to dumbfound me.
If we stopped eating animals the same thing would happen that occurred when we stopped consuming Model T Fords and spats. They would largely die out and become curiosities.
Our food animals are a product of economic engineering. They are not the hardy, wild-adapted species they were derived from (even these are dying out). They are artificial, manufactured creatures designed for maximum meat yield and docility. They do not do well on their own. Indeed, if we hadn't also wiped out most of the natural predators, they wouldn't have any chance in the wild at all.

Seyorni said:

This "animal overpopulation" thing never ceases to dumbfound me.
If we stopped eating animals the same thing would happen that occurred when we stopped consuming Model T Fords and spats. They would largely die out and become curiosities.

Click to expand...

I was equally dumbfounded. Is there no sense of how an ecosystem works to balance itself?

Our food animals are a product of economic engineering. They are not the hardy, wild-adapted species they were derived from (even these are dying out). They are artificial, manufactured creatures designed for maximum meat yield and docility. They do not do well on their own. Indeed, if we hadn't also wiped out most of the natural predators, they wouldn't have any chance in the wild at all.

Click to expand...

Indeed they would not have much of a chance. I am annually peeved when fools buy Easter ducks for their kids and then when they get too big and stinky, let them go in just any body of water.

There's another name for a domestic duck that's been let loose. It's called "dog food."

Domestic ducks have been largely bred for meat, which means they are too heavy to fly away from predators. At most, they can coast down the yard a bit.

Even my runner ducks (bred for eggs mostly) can't fly, and they're not overweight.

We have a wild chicken near a church here. But then, there's a leash law, so few dogs are running loose, the church secretary puts out food, and it has 13 acres of wooded stream to hide in. If it weren't for that, a hawk would've gotten him very soon.

Nah, if we stopped eating meat, people would keep some of the animals alive that we have now, as pets. There are already people who do this.

I'm going to flip-flop and argue the vegetarian/vegan side on this one.

Maxist said:

It is human nature to eat meat. We have fangs for God's sake!

Click to expand...

The fangs of primates are not for tearing meat. That is a common misconception. Primate fangs are an indication of strength and used to intimidate other males and to attract females. Primates (besides humans) that eat meat only do so in extreme cases when other food sources are no longer available - thus, it's seen as a last resort.

Of course you'd like to drop the term - the definition I've provided doesn't serve your interests.

Click to expand...

nutshell,

Sorry can I just make sure I understand this right. During the course of this debate, a difference in opinion over what the term "suffering" encompasses has been identified. Therefore both sides explicitly stated what they meant when they said suffering. Seyorni, and I apologise if I have interpreted this incorrectly, recognised that this disagreement was holding up the debate unnecessarily and so rather cleverly pointed out that a banana is still a banana even if you wish to call it an apple. Having defined very clearly what he objected to, he then went on to say, that the connotations which you brought with your definition of suffering were not ones that he had a problem with and therefore it was meaningless to disagree over something he had not intended to bring into the debate. Don't you think it is totally unfair to accuse him of dodging the issue when he has clearly done no such thing?

To put it more clearly, when I say suffering I am referring to "the infliction of physical pain and psychic distress". The fact that your definition of suffering is different to this is essentially irrelevant. However, bringing in that definition and asking why vegetarians object the implications contained within that definition when it is very clear that they only objected to the content of the one discussed previously is surely a debating fallacy on your part?

I have read of great yogis who meditate on the skins of dead animals found in the wild which have died of natural causes. (The animals died not the yogis :bonk: . Sorry it's late.) Does anyone think this too is inmoral?

Click to expand...

As far as I'm concerned, when something is dead, it is dead. I don't believe in paying respect to a body since I don't believe that it is the person whom I knew. However, I will do so to accomodate the emotions of a grieving family. Since this isn't an issue with animals, I don't consider it immoral.

It is human nature to eat meat. We have fangs for God's sake! If all humans were to stop eating meat, what do you think would happen? First many people who farm these things would go hungary, and possibly die. Then, an overpopulation of the animals themselves would cause them to go hungary. So unless you are will to let your government use it's time to 'save the cows' or 'give the pigs food' it could never work.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by human nature? As in what the majority of humanity tends to do? This, for me, is not a good enough test for my morality. Additionally, your post-vegetarian-apocalypse scenario makes the rather adventurous assumption that everybody will stop eating meat in a split second.

This "animal overpopulation" thing never ceases to dumbfound me.
If we stopped eating animals the same thing would happen that occurred when we stopped consuming Model T Fords and spats. They would largely die out and become curiosities.

Click to expand...

Regrettably it is this latter scenario that I find most commonly thrown at me... it often makes people think of me as a hypocrite since they can't understand why this just does not bother me.