Meat-Eating vs. Bestiality

[Iti oj]

We gain tangible benefits from eating meat that we do not gain from bestiality: nutrition, vitamins & minerals.

Sex with animals is immoral because:

1. It's a good way to pick up diseases or infections
2. It's unnecessary from a pleasure point of view. We don't need to have sex with animals for pleasure.
3. It's unnecessary from a genetic point of view. Most children off human-animal matings would not be viable.
4. It's seen as a sign of sexual degeneracy, lack of self-control etc.

1 eating animal products is a goof way of picking up diseases or infections cancer, salmanila, etc
2 and 3 its unnecessary from nutritional point of view since we don't need animal products to get those nutrients since we can get them else where.
4 Its a sign of social degeneracy lack of self-control etc,

 

[Valjean]

Do you mean the recieving end of the arrow?

Well, I suppose you could call a lingam an arrow...

 

[Debater Slayer]

We gain tangible benefits from eating meat that we do not gain from bestiality: nutrition, vitamins & minerals.

Sex with animals is immoral because:

It's a good way to pick up diseases or infections

Then you would have to argue that any harmful activity is immoral. Why should tobacco be legal, then, when it is a definite cause of cancer? Should it be illegal just like bestiality is in most places?

It's unnecessary from a pleasure point of view. We don't need to have sex with animals for pleasure.

But zoophiles exist. What of them?

It's unnecessary from a genetic point of view. Most children off human-animal matings would not be viable.

If they are not viable, they will die quickly. There could also be ways to prevent pregnancy from occurring. What's the problem?

It's seen as a sign of sexual degeneracy, lack of self-control etc.

"It is seen" is not a logical or objective answer; it is an appeal to subjective popular opinion. Premarital sex is seen as degeneration and lack of self-control in many parts of the world. That doesn't mean it is harmful or should be illegal.

 

[Aquitaine]

I'm a meat eater myself. Just a preemptive clarification in case someone thinks about accusing me of repeating vegetarian propaganda (whatever that is).

So, I have been thinking about why I and many others who have no religion oppose bestiality, and one of the most common reasons given is that one can't have the consent of animals to acts of bestiality. However, we also don't have the consent of animals to use them for labor or in industrial farming. We don't have their consent to slaughter them either.

With the above in mind, what makes meat-eating acceptable and bestiality unacceptable?

I too have thought of the same topic regarding animal consent, and you're correct in pointing out the inconsistency.

The way I see it, so long as the animals are treated, raised and slaughtered humanely, then I believe it is ethical to eat meat. I cannot say the same for Bestiality.
My distinction is that humans started eating animals in order to gain nutrients needed to survive, it is a "tradition" which we still do today, perhaps in time we will phase out meat eating all together.
However, there is no need for having intercourse with animals.

Bestiality also is an inhumane thing to do to the animal, which it will have to endure, whereas if an animal is instantly stunned/killed, then it will not have to endure any trauma.
Obviously, this hypothetical scenario also assumes the animals are raised humanely too, a good life and a good death.

 

[Iti oj]

Hunger is a more powerful desire, and starvation can kill you. That makes people think differently about food. Maybe its because of this that laws about food are weak laws. Laws can't feed people, but food can.

Peoples reacti

I too have thought of the same topic regarding animal consent, and you're correct in pointing out the inconsistency.

The way I see it, so long as the animals are treated, raised and slaughtered humanely, then I believe it is ethical to eat meat. I cannot say the same for Bestiality.
My distinction is that humans started eating animals in order to gain nutrients needed to survive, it is a "tradition" which we still do today, perhaps in time we will phase out meat eating all together.
However, there is no need for having intercourse with animals.

Bestiality also is an inhumane thing to do to the animal, which it will have to endure, whereas if an animal is instantly stunned/killed, then it will not have to endure any trauma.
Obviously, this hypothetical scenario also assumes the animals are raised humanely too, a good life and a good death.

If we can phase it out one day because it is a "tradition" then it's a want and not a need.

 

[Valjean]

Most objections to bestiality stem from the "ick!" factor. Ickyness may carry weight as a social index, but does it have a place in law, barring other, more relevant considerations?

 

[Aquitaine]

Peoples reacti

If we can phase it out one day because it is a "tradition" then it's a want and not a need.

That depends on our ability to feed the world's human population with healthy, nutritious and affordable food. I personally don't think we're quite there yet.
At its present, something may be a "need" that in the future will be a "want". Hunting is an example.

 

[Chakra]

I too have thought of the same topic regarding animal consent, and you're correct in pointing out the inconsistency.

The way I see it, so long as the animals are treated, raised and slaughtered humanely, then I believe it is ethical to eat meat. I cannot say the same for Bestiality.
My distinction is that humans started eating animals in order to gain nutrients needed to survive, it is a "tradition" which we still do today, perhaps in time we will phase out meat eating all together.
However, there is no need for having intercourse with animals.

Bestiality also is an inhumane thing to do to the animal, which it will have to endure, whereas if an animal is instantly stunned/killed, then it will not have to endure any trauma.
Obviously, this hypothetical scenario also assumes the animals are raised humanely too, a good life and a good death.

Humane slaughter doesn't exist.

 

[Iti oj]

That depends on our ability to feed the world's human population with healthy, nutritious and affordable food. I personally don't think we're quite there yet.
At its present, something may be a "need" that in the future will be a "want". Hunting is an example.

yet the eating of animal products leads directly to that problem not away. It's a poor use if resources.

 

[Aquitaine]

Most objections to bestiality stem from the "ick!" factor. Ickyness may carry weight as a social index, but does it have a place in law, barring other, more relevant considerations?

It would have to be from an Animal Rights perspective, but that would also mean drastically altering the way we commercially raise animals and slaughter them.

 

[Aquitaine]

Humane slaughter doesn't exist.

Sure it does. Instantly render them unconscious, then slaughter them. You could gas them with Nitrogen and they wouldn't feel a thing,

yet the eating of animal products leads directly to that problem not away. It's a poor use if resources.

People like meat though, and we are omnivours. Until we can artificially grow meat from labs and sell them at a competative cost, people are going to eat meat.
So long as the animal's life and slaughter is humane and minimally traumatic, then I think it is ethical.
At present, most of the time we don't provide them with either.

 

[Chakra]

Sure it does. Instantly render them unconscious, then slaughter them. You could gas them with Nitrogen and they wouldn't feel a thing,

Sure, the method of killing was humane, but the act of killing was not. I could go up to a sleeping child and kill her, and she wouldn't feel a thing. Everything was humane, but the act of killing was not. She wanted to live, and that is what made the act inhumane. Similarly, animals also want to live.

 

[Nietzsche]

It's unnecessary from a genetic point of view. Most children off human-animal matings would not be viable

...do..do you have pictures of, what, sterile offspring between a human and some other creature? And you just haven't told anyone yet? Don't hold out on us here, goddamn it. It's your duty as a Scotsman...wait, no. Sorry. I was thinking of the Welsh.

Still. Most of my point remains.

 

[Nietzsche]

Sure, the method of killing was humane, but the act of killing was not. I could go up to a sleeping child and kill her, and she wouldn't fee a thing. Everything was humane, but the act of killing was not. She wanted to live, and that is what made the act inhumane. Similarly, animals also want to live.

Lots of things want to live. Doesn't mean they will.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

My impression is that the prohibition against beastiality exists because it is an example of deviant sexual behavior, not necessarily because it violates animal rights

 

[Chakra]

Lots of things want to live. Doesn't mean they will.

Uh, okay. No one is arguing that sentient organisms won't die. The point is that they don't want to die.

 

[Aquitaine]

Sure, the method of killing was humane, but the act of killing was not. I could go up to a sleeping child and kill her, and she wouldn't feel a thing. Everything was humane, but the act of killing was not. She wanted to live, and that is what made the act inhumane. Similarly, animals also want to live.

In nature they are brutally eaten alive. I don't see the problem with letting animals mature in a safe, artificial enivornment without threat from predators, and then humanely slaughtering them when their time has come. Unless you'd rather them stroll into the wild and get savaged prematurely?

 

[Chakra]

In nature they are brutally eaten alive. I don't see the problem with letting animals mature in a safe, artificial enivornment without threat from predators, and then humanely slaughtering them when their time has come. Unless you'd rather them stroll into the wild and get savaged prematurely?

Cows in the wild can live up to 20 years. How many years do organic cows live before being slaughtered?
If we go by your logic, it's best for us to kill ourselves now, because later on in life, who knows what could happen to us? We could get a terrible disease, car accident, etc.
And, btw, animal sanctuaries exist.

 

[Aquitaine]

Cows in the wild can live up to 20 years. How many years do organic cows live before being slaughtered?
If we go by your logic, it's best for us to kill ourselves now, because later on in life, who knows what could happen to us? We could get a terrible disease, car accident, etc.
And, btw, animal sanctuaries exist.

So, hypothetically if a Cow happens to stray from a "high welfare" farm and get viciously eaten alive by a predator,that would be a more ideal scenario than having it humanely slaughtered and eaten later?
Either way, the Cow is gonna get eaten, may aswell give it a decent quality of life, and a decent death.

 

[Nietzsche]

Uh, okay. No one is arguing that sentient organisms won't die. The point is that they don't want to die.

I don't see what this has to do with anything.

It's not my job or responsibility to keep anything alive.