Ethical basis for Veganism or Vegetarianism?

[DennisK]

Asmodean,
Let me say first of all that I apologize for my agitated post.  I let things outside this thread effect the emotion of my rebuttal.  Second, I don't want this thread to get sidetracked any further, so I will be brief.

Water Cycle:  I do understand how a water cycle works.  What I thought would be clear after some reflection is contaminants and displacement of used water effect the cycle, no?  That's why water wars in the US will become increasingly more prominent.

Propaganda:  I am full aware of propaganda and it's effect on the masses, but don't jump so quickly to dismiss research solely on the basis of its source.  

Meat Producing Farm:  What did you feed the animals if not grain?  Do I want to know?

For the sake of argument, even if the environmental impact based on grain intake were even, there are a lot more environmental effects that raising animals for meat production have.

Listen, I still eat meat because I enjoy the taste.  I am a contributer to the problem, but I am trying to quit.  Whether we want to admit it or not, all who eat meat are contributers to the bigger problem.  Most want to put the blame for our environment on someone else and it's natural to do so.  At what cost, though?

[Will]

As I understand it, a lot of why vegetarians are vegetarians has to do with things like the way animals are treated before and during slaughter and what effect the meat industry has on the environment. I believe I understand both of these complaints, in fact I do what I can to buy responsible, locally grown, free-range meat. I even send out for grass-fed beef when I occasionally eat it.

Let's say, hypothetically, as time goes on more progressive elements in government can put in place legal protections for animals and more environmentally friendly procedures and practices. Animals are fed organic, locally grown grass and seeds instead of corn, live full and happy lives, are killed in a painless and un-frightening way, and are bought at the farm by local people. In other words, how would you feel about meat if the cruelty and environmental costs were reduced significantly or even removed? Would you still be a veggie?

[AlP]

I'm not a vegetarian so I can't answer the question. I have two points though.

In terms of practicality, the US already suffers from a trade deficit. It's imports exceed it's exports because the US dollar is so strong. America can buy commodities like livestock from other countries cheaply while other countries can't afford American. Your proposal would make it even harder for the US agriculture industry to be profitable. Actually, I suspect it wouldn't be profitable if it weren't for the state subsidy but I'm not an expert. I think the end result of an endeavor like this would be to increase meat imports, which seems like the reverse of buying local.

In terms of politics, I am for sure not a Libertarian but I'm also not a huge fan of unnecessary laws. Are these laws to allow vegetarians to eat meat at the expense of everyone else? Or is it more about animal rights? Would these laws be handled by civil or criminal courts and what kind of penalties would be appropriate?

Interesting idea.

[Whitney]

I know a few people who eat mostly vegetarian but will eat meat if they know it comes from an ethical source.

There are also some people who eat vegetarian because they have bought into the propaganda that it is healthier and some will even go so far as to claim it is the 'natural' human diet (which is why we have canine teeth   ).

[Will]

I'm not a vegetarian so I can't answer the question. I have two points though.

In terms of practicality, the US already suffers from a trade deficit. It's imports exceed it's exports because the US dollar is so strong. America can buy commodities like livestock from other countries cheaply while other countries can't afford American. Your proposal would make it even harder for the US agriculture industry to be profitable. Actually, I suspect it wouldn't be profitable if it weren't for the state subsidy but I'm not an expert. I think the end result of an endeavor like this would be to increase meat imports, which seems like the reverse of buying local.

In terms of politics, I am for sure not a Libertarian but I'm also not a huge fan of unnecessary laws. Are these laws to allow vegetarians to eat meat at the expense of everyone else? Or is it more about animal rights? Would these laws be handled by civil or criminal courts and what kind of penalties would be appropriate?

Interesting idea.

A key to international trade that economists love to ignore is forcing others to work by your standards. Every time we allow Walmart to import slave-created goods, we're not just allowing China to out-compete our workers, we're endorsing slavery. Just as we should require trading partners to have well-enforced workers' rights laws in place, we should require them to also have animal rights similar to ours.

[AlP]

I certainly agree with what you said with regard to human rights. I don't like exploiting other people's bad luck. Well actually I do but that's more about exploiting wealthy people's ignorance and greed. In my opinion economics is a profession for people who weren't so good at math but still want to be in the field. But I'm just a contrarian individual trader. What do I know? Anyway, I think we should focus first on ensuring that harm is not done to people before we start thinking about cows, sheep and chickens.

By what economic force (law doesn't work outside of its jurisdiction) can we make this progress profitable? I'm thinking more about the humans than the animals but the same principles might apply. I think you have to change the consumer. You could educate the consumer to the point where they can make a value judgement, whether its about the slaves that made their shoes or the suffering of the animals they are eating. Regulation of US agriculture would simply damage their profits (assuming no increased subsidy) and the trade deficit would take care of the rest.

[karadan]

I know a veggie who doesn't eat meat simply because she doesn't feel she has the right to be instrumental in the taking of another life, no matter how humane the death. I posed a similar question to her a while back. I asked her if we could produce synthetic or vat grown meat which was indistinguishable from real meat, would she eat it? Her answer was yes because she could still remember the taste of bacon from when she was a child. So for her, it was the life being taken for our consumption which was the issue. I guess there are many reasons to be a vegetarian.

Personally, I've not knowingly eaten supermarket meat for years and years. I'm lucky enough to live just down the road from a superb butchers.

[Pineapple]

I myself am Vegan, and believe that the taking of dairy from animals, or it's life for my gain is morally unjustified in the society that I live in. I don't require the death of an animal for me to live, so I shouldn't have to have it die. And honestly after thinking this way for a while, I find meat to be especially gross (dairy too, considering most of it is bodily fluids). I consider equality to be of high morality, so I get pretty strict about this sort of thing.

[LoneMateria]

I myself am Vegan, and believe that the taking of dairy from animals, or it's life for my gain is morally unjustified in the society that I live in. I don't require the death of an animal for me to live, so I shouldn't have to have it die. And honestly after thinking this way for a while, I find meat to be especially gross (dairy too, considering most of it is bodily fluids). I consider equality to be of high morality, so I get pretty strict about this sort of thing.

Plants are just like animals.  They are alive, you eat their juices which is tantamount to bodily fluid.  Sorry it's part of being an animal.  You gotta eat.  I see a lion gut a zebra on national television and it isn't considered cruel even though the lions cubs are eating the things organs while its still alive.  At least when you get the meat its dead and it isn't coming back.  It's our nature to eat meat.  Sorry.

[MariaEvri]

Plants are just like animals.  They are alive, you eat their juices which is tantamount to bodily fluid. .

not just that, they breathe and MOVE too. Have you ever seen plants in a time-lapse photography? They move their leaves according to the light, they "sleep" and wake" too

[LoneMateria]

Plants are just like animals.  They are alive, you eat their juices which is tantamount to bodily fluid. .

not just that, they breathe and MOVE too. Have you ever seen plants in a time-lapse photography? They move their leaves according to the light, they "sleep" and wake" too

Those poor poor plants ... can you imagine being asleep and someone wakes you up by digging you out of the ground and after baking in a hot sun for an few hours you get shipped off to a factory where they drown ... err soak you in water and cut you into pieces and you are still technically alive in all those different pieces as humans (and their pets sometimes) consume you and while you are just barely awake being digested then finally you die and get turned into poo ... and thats your funeral?

[LARA]

I'm a part time vegetarian.  I try it out occasionally for health and environmental reasons.  I've found it to be impractical, expensive, difficult to get the protein I need and I question the environmental impact of producing vegetables and soybeans as well as livestock.  All agriculture has environmental impacts, we might as well get used to it and learn to adjust so we don't end up living in a cesshole.  As far as the treatment of the animals, I am far more concerned with how they live than that they die.  As long as they are treated well, are healthy and die very quickly with the most minimal amount of pain and suffering realistically possible, I have no problems chowing down an occasional charcoal-grilled T-Bone.

[Jolly Sapper]

Anyway, I think we should focus first on ensuring that harm is not done to people before we start thinking about cows, sheep and chickens.

But wouldn't ethical, well regulated agri markets be keeping people from being harmed?  

Slowing down the production pace on the kill floor would help to keep the workers from getting injured and reduce the chance for puncturing the intestines during slaughter and processing that causes bacterial contamination.

Allowing the cattle to be slaughtered to spend the last two weeks of their lives eating grass (instead of corn) is supposed to greatly reduce the amount of e.coli in their digestive system.  This should reduce e.coli contamination in the processing plants since there are already forms of e.coli that are resistant to the PH in the cow's stomachs witch I think are also resistant to some of the anti-biotics used in conventional meat production.

Enforcing workers rights in production plants, reasonable hours/wages, medical benefits, etc are also a part of ethically produced meat.

Seems like moving toward a less conventional form of food production might do more to help people than harm them as well as keeping the animals healthy as well.

Just my    though.

[coltcat]

LOL, I just finish my meal, and had some shark's fin
and hear some ridiculous argument from my vegetarian friend.

"eating shark's fin is awful for our environment, you might become a shark and get ya fins chop off in your next life"

"well, at least I'll be a happy predator before my fins are cut of."
 
"oh yeah? then you will born as a finless handicapped shark"

[OldGit]

I've no qualms about eating meat, but we probably eat far more of it than we need.  I'm told that 2 or 3 meat dishes per week would provide all the nutrients we need.  If we did that we could free up vast amounts of land in our rich countries and grow more of our own fruit and vegetables, instead of flying them in from the third world.