"You can't love animal's if you're not a vegetarian"

[FluxCapacitor]

Okay, so this thread has attracted some rather caustic vegetarian voices, and some rather dismissive omnivorous ones - everyone feeling a little holier-than-thou. I suppose I side with the omnivores, but for a different reason than simple personal preference (though I do see that as a perfectly valid position), and I'm curious to hear what the more high-handed of the vegetarian/vegan community think of my reasoning. Given that all the vegetarians I regularly interact with are either accepting of alternate life choices, or cannot reasonably construct an argument beyond "I was freaked out by an abbattoir" (another perfectly valid position), I'd like to hear a counter-argument from someone kinda rabid who can articulate their objection. In short, come at me, bro...

Essentially, I contend that the best thing that ever happened to the species we eat was being favoured for eating. Evolutionarily speaking, it is every species' goal to best adapt to their environment in order to reproduce their DNA in their progeny, and in a closed biosphere this tends towards a zero-sum game, where species looking to reproduce MUST wind up competing with some species and living symbiotically with others. That's the whole ballgame. The emergence of a highly intelligent species such as mankind, able to reshape the playing field around it, is both a threat and an opportunity for all other species that mankind interacts with.

Being simultaneously tasty and tameable has guaranteed the survival of farmable types of food animals. Chickens, pigs, sheep, cows, goats and the like will go wherever mankind does - they have already spread across habitats and continents, and will come along with us when we eventually breach the biosphere bubble and move into space. By hitching their carriage to our train, so to speak, they have guaranteed their own ubiquity for as long as mankind continues to exist and want to consume them. It is by no means the most extraordinary trick evolution has pulled, and we see similar success for species that have adapted into companion roles for mankind, such as cats, dogs, horses and many more - they've got the "tameable", but not the "tasty". And as with any evolutionary struggle for survival of the fittest, some species had the misfortune of being tasty but not farmable - see whales, or sea turtles, or really anything that has been hunted to endangerment/extinction. I would usually oppose the mainstream consumption of these animals by anyone inhabiting a modern society, because doing so would eliminate their species altogether, but it seems to me that by this point stopping eating farm animals would place all these species' survival at risk as they have been domesticated beyond the ability to compete, and have been spread far beyond their natural environs. Continuing to eat them seems the only logical choice, if you REALLY care about these species' survival.


TL;DR - I eat meat because I have evolved to do so, and I eat the animals I eat because they have evolved to be eaten by me. That's the soundbite version.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

Snip.

You implied that I'm a Nazi because... because I'm not complicit in keeping animals captive, killing them, or justifying it with pseudoscience bullshit about my own superiority (oh my god, I'm eating lower down on the foodchain)? Yep, being vegan is really evil. Look at all the harm I'm not doing!

You casually brought the whole 'Aryan' thing into this not me. Like most of what you've posted, nothing you've said is facts-based. For example: I'm also not sure why you mentioned my grandfather or what he has to do with this. You don't fucking know him and you have no indication for the kind of person he is, so kindly fuck yourself in the neck.

If you think you're so rational, re-read your own post. I can't spot an argument you've made that isn't purely a fallacy or a personal attack.

 

[Filiecs]

As a vegetarian, that statement is completely untrue.
You can still love an animal, even if you eat animals. Love and the action of eating are two completely separate things. It's like saying that if you eat an animal you must hate it.

Only you really know if you love or hate something. If you love something, then you love it and no one can logically tell you otherwise.

 

[Mr F.]

Well...

Lets look at this from a different perspective.

Ignoring all of the USUAL arguments for vegetarianism (Animals have feelings too! Lets care about the welfare of chickens!), these dumbass intellectual debates that have caused Donkey Sanctuaries within the UK to routinely get more cash than charities which aim to alliviate child porverty and just think about this.

Meat costs a lot to produce. It costs a lot in terms of grain, land, you name it. All over the world people are starving. If we all became vegatarians we would be able to produce far more food for people. End of. It is as simple as that. You can love animals and still eat meat.

But you are either undereducated or careless if you believe you can love people and still eat meat.

Oh, and inbefore "But a Cow can feed X people!". The amount of grain and land it takes to feed that cow up so it can feed X people could feed far more people if it was being used for Grain.

Now, some animals are economical and fair to eat. True. Some pasture land should remain, animals that are reared on grass and weeds are totally A-Okay! But animals that are reared on grain, soy, shit like that, that have been fed up on crops GROWN to feed them, well, that is just wrong. And most animals are in the latter category. Basically, what I am trying to say is if a field is left fallow after a season has changed and has, I dunno, a dairy herd on it, that is a good thing. Cause they eat the grass, fertilize everything and produce milk which humans can consume, preventing the annihilation of all the nutrients within the ground. But other then that, rearing animals to be eaten is unethical.

Not cause the cow has feelings. Who gives a fuck about the cow.

But because it means people die. And people do, quite frankly, matter more.

You were quite right until you got to that bit where you say "most animals are int he latter category"(i.e.: most animals live on grains raised in order to feed them).

That is simply not true in 5 of Earth's 7 continents. It can certainly be true, locally, to you... But that is the kind of thing worth making very explicit.

Well, if you read into it, No, it is far from "False". I am going to make this very, very explicit. Most animals reared for food are not reared on pasture land, only eating grass and weeds as part of a cycled agrarian system. Far from it. Those chickens, what are they eating? How about pigs being reared on fishmeal (Which is takin resources from other things). Most animals are reared in a way which is totally unsustainable.

And unethical when you consider the amount of people on earth who are starving. When you consider the fluctuating food prices, Mainly caused by assholes who trade on the futures of staple food crops but partially influened by areas of the world where it is more profitable to produce Soy to export to western markets to feed up cwos and the like than produce rice to export internally to the local population.

I am sorry, but it is hard to argue that the majority of meat on this earth is produced in ways which are far from ethical when you consider the HUMAN cost.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

As a vegetarian, that statement is completely untrue.
You can still love an animal, even if you eat animals. Love and the action of eating are two completely separate things. It's like saying that if you eat an animal you must hate it.

Only you really know if you love or hate something. If you love something, then you love it and no one can logically tell you otherwise.

Dear Sir,
Dear Madam,

This post you're looking at right now was assembled for the sheer purpose of expressing my gratitude for restoring my faith in the human race (involving vegetarians).

Thank you!

Yours sincerely,
-head.

http://twentypercentcooler.net/data/27/ab/27ab818b4f80203226dc816bba269b2c.gif?1313951361

 

[Riff Moonraker]

I used to hunt... often. I have killed my share of game, and used to be able to completely skin a deer, and harvest every bit of viable meat from it within 30 minutes. However, I can also tell you that I have sat up in a treestand and watched deer run around and play in the same fields without ever firing a shot, and still enjoyed the hunt just as much. Watching them play in their environment like that was a real treat for me. I appreciate and respect animals, and some of them I outright love. (My dog, for example!) Yeah, that quote was bogus.

 

[Sehnsucht Engel]

Haha, those crazy vegetarians and their bullshit. I think that you can love animals both as food and as companions, if you eat meat. Vegetarians can't love animals as much as someone who eats meat then. XD

 

[Driekan]

Well, if you read into it, No, it is far from "False". I am going to make this very, very explicit. Most animals reared for food are not reared on pasture land, only eating grass and weeds as part of a cycled agrarian system. Far from it. Those chickens, what are they eating? How about pigs being reared on fishmeal (Which is takin resources from other things). Most animals are reared in a way which is totally unsustainable.

And unethical when you consider the amount of people on earth who are starving. When you consider the fluctuating food prices, Mainly caused by assholes who trade on the futures of staple food crops but partially influened by areas of the world where it is more profitable to produce Soy to export to western markets to feed up cwos and the like than produce rice to export internally to the local population.

I am sorry, but it is hard to argue that the majority of meat on this earth is produced in ways which are far from ethical when you consider the HUMAN cost.

I don't know exactly where you're getting your information from. Chickens and pigs can live, to a significant degree, on refuse - and most everywhere they are raised, they are. That's actually one of the big pros for raising them.

Bovines are, really, mostly raised on free range-lands. The intensive methods used in the US, and to a smaller degree in Europe, are anomalies. I mostly have data on Brazil, so gonna roll with that as an example.

Brazil currently supplies 44.5% of the world's meat export (source in portuguese: http://www.agricultura.gov.br/animal/exportacao) and almost the entirety of Brazil's meat production is, indeed, based on grazing on open fields. Only a tiny, tiny fraction of the meat produced is not free-range, and that is generally for the minuscule "Luxury meat" market.

Brazil is also the third largest producer of soybeans, producing 90.6 million tons of it. The vast majority of the production is for national consumption, with small amounts going towards national livestock feed - animal ration association data indicates 13.3 million tons of soybeans consumed per year. Of that amount, 70% goes towards dairy farms. (source in portuguese: http://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/agronegocio/conteudo.phtml?id=1262122&tit=Industria-de-racao-pisa-no-freio)

Most other non-BRIC third-world countries probably have even less intensive farming, for one simple reason: It is seriously expensive to set up. People just can't afford it.

So, to correct your original statement:
Most animals in first-world countries are reared in a way which is totally unsustainable.

Even that statement may not be true, as fairly significant chunks of the first world are not into that.

Do agree, though: Non-free-range agriculture is pretty retarded and has to go. Only point of disagreement: Only a tiny fraction of humanity does it, or live off of it, or eat it.

It does, indeed, still harm the rest of humanity to a noticeable degree.

 

[samahain]

Cows are nice and peaceful animals. If you don't bother them.

My belly tells me filet mignon is awesome.

I also made peace with the fact that one day, I'll be worm food.

So all in all, I count on the butcher to do his job correctly.
Like I buy coffee that's, as far as I can tell, NOT harvested by mexican slaves
This is the 21st Century fo crying out loud.

But it's no excuse to eat astronaut food. Filet mignon FTW.

 

[Savryc]

Lol no. Who is he to tell me what I can or can't love? I eat meat, I love animals. Some more that others obviously, I'm an unrepentant moth slayer.

 

[Agent Cross]

So if I repent my evil omnivore ways, I can then love my dog?

I have no problem with vegans/veggies. Hey, it's your choice. However, this is a weak AR argument. Even if my diet consisted of 99% vegetables, I'd just fall short of loving my pets. So it's either 100% or no dice? Holy shit guys! Th...th...the Vegans/Veggies are the Sith.

I mean no offence. This is just how silly it sounds in my head. This is more of a vegan topic though. Sorry to imply that vegans and vegetarians are the same.

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

Speaking as a rabid animal rights activist and vegetarian . . .

Yes, you can like animals and eat meat. Or to elaborate, you can like 'certain' animals. Though there is clearly a double standard going on here. But oh well, to be completely honest I for one don't give a fuck about the following animals:

All forms of apes/monkeys
Pandas
All forms of fish

But in spite of that, I still wouldn't bring any suffering towards them or promote it. In fact, I'm just as much of an rabid animal rights about animals I don't like as the ones I do. If you don't believe in completely changing your diet to help animals then just please don't be a douche that goes around ranting on about how animal rights is supposedly a detriment to society. Seriously, just don't. You can always help animals even if you do eat them.

You can always support charities that are against brutality towards animals. And don't let someone tell you that you're being hypocritical because you eat animals. Yes, you are a hypocrite. But that shouldn't hold anyone back from doing what's right. Easing suffering is always a noble goal, regardless of your diet.

You can always support ethics to ease the suffering of animals that are slaughtered for food. That way you can help animals without any double standards and without being called a hypocrite by someone that's trying to demean the issue of animal cruelty.

Sign petitions, complain about people that do this kind of horrible shit, and support artists/musicians/actors/athletes/politicians that don't support forms of animal cruelty.

And again, just don't be a douche. Don't try and be that guy that rationalizes some forms of animal cruelty by comparing it to another and saying 'But this practice is more cruel!' And if you are one of those people, then maybe we should legalize dog fighting. Because last time I checked, that was definitely not any more brutal are cruel than factory farming.

So yeah, you can like animals and still eat meat. Just don't be a dick about it, I guess.

 

[grey_space]

I love animals, but I'm not IN love with animals....

I kill the odd moth when commanded by the girlfriend but other than that I'm fairly live-and-let-live.

For my own diet I try to eat as much non-processed organic meats and veggies as possible. Not a moral decision, just a health one.

 

[willsham45]

Well there is different kinds of love for different animals.
I look at a pig and think yum.
I look at a dog and I go arrrr.
We eat plants and animals, It is hard to get everything we need from just one and it seems only in a few key areas in the world where being vegetarian is normal. Most of the world it is a luxury.

 

[bluerocker]

I love animals and I love eating animals. What I don't care for is the cruelty that is taken in slaughterhouses when it comes to the preparation of their meat, or mistreated pets.

 

[Nieroshai]

I love my dog. I eat bacon. My dog eats bacon. I don't see the problem here.

It's not hypocritical to play favorites here, some animals are prey.

 

[the December King]

I think what annoys me the most about this is that usually quotes like " I love my cat and I love steaks" or "I love animals... in my belly" and such all make people who do eat meat sound like psychos. Sure, you can love your pets and enjoy eating meat, I just think there are better ways of saying it.

Also, there is a wonderful ability to remove one's self from the reality of the animal that was killed to make food, and the delicious steak on a plate. It's where I'm at most of the time.

For the record, I have the utmost respect for farmers, for the people who do the killing, so I may eat meat. I couldn't do it myself, and owe them for it.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

That?s just bullshit militant vegetarianism. I love animals, and I eat meat. Although I do admit that animal-loving meat-eaters such as myself can be interpreted as being somewhat hypocritical, as I actually don?t have a valid reason for eating meat other than ?it?s convenient and part of what my mum cooks for me, it?s tasty, and I just don?t think about it?. I don?t really stick to any kind of moral or health code. I eat what I like, and some of those might be healthy, and I might have the odd banana or two. It?s damn lucky I have a fast metabolism.

I don?t love humans, but I don?t eat them. I love animals (scared shitless of snakes, though), but I eat a couple. I?m pretty sure cats and dogs aren?t in my diet, though. However, in the past few years, I?ve taken it upon myself to not kill any flies or spiders in my house, unless I?m in a foul and flippant mood. And I once did a temporary boycott on KFC in light of its alleged mistreatment of its chickens, but that failed the minute my mum bought KFC for us for a birthday or something, and I was just like, ?Who am I kidding? I have little morals, and I?m a hungry bastard.?

 

[bauke67]

I think the issue here is that the term "animals" is a little too broad.
I love dogs, and don't eat them. Love cats too, don't eat them.
Cows? I don't effin care. Pigs? Kill 'em all I say, doesn't really matter that much to me(emotion-wise, and it would be sad that we'd run out of bacon soon)

Maybe you could even make it more specific.
Like: "I love this particular dog, because it is my pet".

 

[Catrixa]

This argument is silly. If the human brain was designed to work on such all-encompassing black-and-white levels, we'd all be freaking out all the time. For fun, if you want to take this to the logical extreme: they're saying you're incapable of loving your fellow humans if you eat animals, which is pretty much insane to suggest (and also unforgivably rude). Unless they're in the "well, humans aren't animals!" camp, in which case I'd just give up.

Honestly, I like to eat fish. I also have some as pets. I enjoy SCUBA diving, because I get to see awesome fish. I do not eat the fish I keep as pets, because I care about them (and highly doubt they would be tasty anyway), just as I would not want to eat a cat, dog, cow, sheep, or chicken that I had named and kept as a pet. If I actually had to process the animals I cared about in the same way as the animals I eat, I would barely function, as I would be saddened by their deaths all the time. If I had to actually process all human life in the same way I process my close friends and family, I'd be in the same damn boat. Everything dies all the time. If I felt awful about a specific type of thing dying (AND I'm eating it!), I'd be a wreck. Hell, humans can kill other humans, because they don't register as actual humans. They're just "enemies."

Honestly, I feel like you can only really make statements like that if you have very little self awareness (knowledge of how a Monkeysphere works can help too). We don't eat the specific things we love, because we love them and want them to stay alive. We are incapable of processing things of an entire type (e.g. animal, plant, inanimate object, etc.) in terms of love.