I never wanted to argue, and I’m definitely not here to set a Christian example. I’m not even sure why you mention Christianity.
I think you have taken my disagreement with the many articles you’ve posted as personal. Sorry, but I’m sure you were not expecting full agreements when you posted these.
I am not claiming I know a more ethical way of feeding people. I just happen to believe you can’t do that without meat.
Something to clear up quickly, my comments about ‘Americans’ are not meant to be taken as reference to all Americans anymore than they are reference to some Americans. I speak of Americans in general, the ones whose material comfort keeps them from seeing beyond themselves. I will be clearer should I mention them again.
If you didn’t want to argue, you countering the issue of resources must have given me a wrong impression. I felt a need to counter what I thought was your argument (meat takes less resources to produce), because it just wasn’t true.
I mention Christianity because peoples ideas of the ‘big picture’ of life often influence their concerns, and usually not in very good ways. I know certain Christians express an apathy for the future because of what they have pre-determined about existence. I wanted to know if this is how you felt.
The only things I took personal were the comments you directed at me, rightfully so. I felt that because you took offense to some of my comments, your motive was to try and get back at me. You obviously disagreed with me but couldn’t exactly say why. That is why I asked for an explanation of your views, and upon you not having any alternatives, it only made me think that your intentions were the same ‘slander’ that you accused me of.
I definitely wasn’t expecting full agreement, but the disagreement I did face I expected to have reason.
What does meat offer that nothing else can? Why is it necessary?
I don’t know much about cow sexuality, so all I can say is, maybe they do… maybe they do. 
But here’s a question - if cows didn’t want to be eaten, why would they make meat that is so tasty? I mean, they could have made some foul-tasting meat… so why tasty?
It might be because our tastebuds got used to it since our people in the past have been eating meats for so long that maybe our genes have adapted over time. And plus in the past, we used meat to survive. Yes?
We have a bit of animal instinct in us… we kill to survive if necessary… not something that you might like to hear… but we’re capable of kill to survive. If we don’t have a society, then we’d be acting completely on our animal instinict which isn’t “wrong.”
It might explain why we still eat meat even though we are aware that we killed an animal in order to eat meat, yet we still eat. We can continue to agrue how messy our world have gotten to, but in my opinion… we’re innocent in a way too. We have to eat to survive; therefore, we kill. Our lives are something we hold importantly in our heart. We need food to eat if we don’t kill… then we have no food to survive on.
See my point? We’re innocent… we’re just acting on our animal instinict to survive. Mmm?
I agree DM7, that is a very likely theory.
Like you said in your first paragraph, in the past we needed meat to survive. Our dietary animal instincts aren’t necessary in modern society. Holding onto this past time is more destructive than anything else. I strongly believe that the issue here is pleasure. Many Americans are addicted to what feels good, to the point that, in this case, it has precedence over our planet and the treatment of other forms of intelligent life. Getting past this animal instinct is a necessary adaptation to ensure a more positive future.
Biologically humans are still omnivores our bodies can’t produce all the amino acids it requires from vegetarian sources.
Having said that I have been a 99% vegetarian since I actually found out where the food came from. I have occasionally been able to force myself to eat meat inorder to not standout but I have had to divorce my brain from thinking about what I was eating. It made me feel sick.
My objection to eating meat is the thought of an animal being prematurely killed to produce food. So I sometimes wonder what I would do, if I was in a for example aircrash and the only source of food was someone who had died? As my main objection would then be removed…the person would probably be willing to be used to help someone else to live. Food for thought…(no pun was originally intended).
What is everyone elses views? 
Out of interest, abrickinthewall, why are you forever bringing the topic back to Americans exclusively? Even in the final paragraph of your last post, you made mention that Americans were all about doing whatever is pleasurable, and this was most likely the reason why they continue to eat excessive amounts of meat.
As far as I know, the entire world enthusiastically produces and consumes what you would consider an unhealthy amount of meat. I know the particular article you initially started the topic with was based on US statstics, but the reasons for this trend surely extend to all parts of the world.
I don’t want to sound like a heartless beast, but I’m not actually concerned with any apparent lack of ethics demonstrated in the meat industry. I don’t make the mistake of pretending animals have humanoid emotions and feelings. Sure, their robot instinct and evolutionary desire to avoid pain gives us the impression that they’re in terrible discomfort, but I just don’t believe that. It’s not like they’re sitting there wondering about what’s to become of their life, or how they’re going to teach their offspring to follow in their footsteps. They’re just animals.
Intrestingly, I had this exact conversation with a workmate while I was giving him a lift home this afternoon. He questioned my view on animal ethics, and explained that he was interested in hearing my opinion particularly because I was an atheist. He made a point that generally, people hold different opinions of topics like this, often in accordance with their religion. We’ve talk about all kinds of things to this effect, so it wasn’t unusual for him to ask.
I suppose that’s true to a degree. It’s easier to disregard ethics when you see everything as a mere logical construct of circuits.
Hi Atheist
I usually stay out of vege-discussions, but this one catched my attention.Didn´t you state some weeks ago that humans are just like robots, following their instinct to avoid pain and to get offspring?
So, in what way are we different?
Traumgänger
I sure did, and I said it again at the very end of my post just above. 
My original plan was to avoid posting in here, simply because my particular view of animal ethics isn’t a largely shared or accepted one. It extends to humanity as well, but that isn’t really the point of this discussion.
Hmm, Well we are omnivores, Any omnivore creature perfers meat over vegatables anyday. It’s really a question of if we can get meat. At the moment we can make enough meat through mass breeding of edible animals. Of course, being omnivores, we can’t eat meat 24/7. We need plants too. You could live off vegatbles your whole life, the same way a runaway, 2 legged dog can leave off grass and leaves becuase he can’t hunt other animals. If anything, animals would do the same too us if they could actually hunt us done. When availible food is around, the hunters will hunt until there is no more OR find a way to control the food suppl for their own purposes.
Also, those statistics don’t take into account, that if any other country could have as much meat as us, they would take it. Omnivores in general will take meat over plants anyday. Heck, the reason we probaly are omnivores is becuase we can’t hunt meat 24/7 efffectively like a lion and had to substitute plants to make up for not getting meat.
Scientific attitudes are often a product of social beliefs, rather than of any process of logic. If a dog is hit, he yells. If this is understood as some kind of reflex, the scientist can measure it, test it, and form a theory about it. If, on the other hand, the scientist starts to see things from the dog’s point of view, and to understand that the dog is in pain, he cannot measure this. An ordinary person would be able to empathize with the dog, but a scientist is forbidden from doing so, because this would compromise scientific objectivity. While this approach works well in physics and chemistry, it does not work well when one is trying to understand the behavior of other individuals. I could say just as easily say that you are mistakenly pretending that animals don’t have emotions and feelings.
In many cases of pigs having a gun aimed at their head, they avoid the bullet. Surely this is not merely an evolutionary instinct as they did not evolve with humans or weaponry. Cattle are very social animals that often form strong bonds with certain peers while incessantly avoiding others. Certainly the cattle harbor a range of feelings towards each other. My sister’s dog displays basic self-consciousness, a behavior that amazed me when I witnessed it. She puts a shirt on the dog, and while the family looks and laughs at him, he lowers his head and tail and becomes very rigid and still. He isn’t as much physically uncomfortable, (he doesn’t even attempt to get the shirt off and doesn’t mind it when lots of people aren’t around), as much as he is psychologically uncomfortable.
Both genetically, and in terms of behavior, humans are much more closely related to other great apes than these animals are to monkeys. Humans and chimpanzees have about 98.4% of their genes in common, whereas monkeys have only about 93% of the same genes as the apes. Gorillas are about twice as close to humans genetically as they are to chimpanzees. Compare this with the genetic difference between two similar birds such as the red-eyed vireo and the white-eyed vireo, which are 2.9% different genetically.
The genetic similarity between humans and other apes is reflected in their behavior. Recent experiments with gorillas and chimpanzees have shown that they can learn sign language, and use this to construct simple sentences. They express similar emotions to humans, and show self-awareness - for example, by recognizing themselves in a mirror. Using a variety of different intelligent tests, they have been shown to have IQs at the lowest levels of human ability.
The philosophical basis of objectivism comes from Rene Descartes. Descartes, a devout Catholic, had the bizarre belief that humans were the only animals who were conscious and had feelings, because only they had a soul. Thus an animal who was obviously in pain was in fact simply an automaton, exhibiting reflexes. Descartes’ ideas were used to justify the vivisection of conscious dogs by scientists. A very similar attitude is followed today. So long as we imagine that animals are inanimate objects which “show reflexes” rather than living creatures which experience feelings and pain, we can exploit them in the belief that no harm is being done.
About the ‘logical construct of circuits’, the other day I was thinking about free will and came up with something. I don’t have much knowledge at all on the subject and this is a largely undeveloped idea, so let me know if something is wrong.
According to the belief that free will does not exist, choices are the result of random electric brain charges and memory, correct? Well, consider this scenario: Joe, who has not been happy with the impressions he feels he leaves on other people, makes a conscious decision to transcend personality and become selfless in order to be as positive as possible for others and himself. In this scenario, all of Joe’s actions are the result of a pre-determined outcome, only with the mechanisms differing from one situation to the next. The fact that Joe has a goal that is only achievable through his actions (choices) being a calculated response to the actions of others, seems to demonstrate free will to me. (I hope this is making sense). It seems that free will can be doubted only because of the time that we experience being linear, but time moving in one direction is the very process that gives free will the value that it has. What I mean by this is that, if the only way to prove free will would be through going back in time and making an alternative decision, free will wouldn’t necessarily exist anymore because the decision isn’t entirely free as it is based on the experience of one of the outcomes.
America produces the most beef in the world, about 11.7 million tons in a year. About 1.15 million of these tons are exported, but then about 1.5 million tons are imported, making total American consumption of beef about 12.2 million tons for a population of about 292 million people.
fas.usda.gov/dlp/circular/20 … rview.html
Total exports for the largest beef exporters in the world are projected at 6.5 million tons in 2003, almost half of what is consumed in the United States alone.
Now compare these numbers with other wealthy nations:
The European Union produces about 6.9 million tons of beef in a year. About 570,000 of these tons are exported, and about 530,000 tons are imported, keeping beef consumption around 6.9 million tons for a population of about 378 million people.
Australia is the world’s number one exporter of beef, producing about 2 million tons a year and exporting 1.4 million tons of it. Australia imports a minuscule 4,000 tons, putting their consumption at about 600,000 tons for a population of about 20 million. If the numbers stayed at the same ratios but the population was 300 million, they would be consuming about 9 million tons.
Canada produces about 1.2 million tons of beef a year. About 600,000 tons are exported, and about 320,000 tons are imported, putting Canada’s beef consumption a little less than one million tons for a population of about 31 million people. This would give them less than 10 million tons for about 310 million people.
Japan exports little or no beef, and imports 860,000 tons for a population of about 128 million people.
Russia exports little or no beef, and imports about 740,000 tons for a population of about 146 million people.
Mexico, a not so well off with country with no significant exports, imports about 445,000 tons of beef a year for a population of about 105 million people.
What we see here is that with population as the control, America consumes several million more tons of beef than all other wealthy countries. I could not find consistent worldwide statistics on any other kinds of meat. But cattle are the most destructive to the environment and the ones that take up the most resources and produce the most waste.
Being an American citizen I feel I can only rightfully demean the materialism that I personally experience. I do not think that materialism only exists in America but I think it is heaviest here. If meat isn’t about pleasure what is it? Like I said before, meat provides nothing that can’t be derived from another source, it even wastes protein.
The animals would eat the humans with the most meat on them, the obese ones that are easy to catch. The prime hunting grounds for this type of prey would be in, its the truth, America. 
Do you have any idea how ridiculously unhealthy it would be to eat all meat and never any vegetables?!?! Your digestive system would be very dysfunctional, you would be extremely lucky to not develop cancer and serious heart problems, and in modern times, you would be loaded with all kinds of animal hormones and unnecessary antibiotics. This is not even taking into account the health problems that would arise as a result of meat quality.
There were a few species of early hominids, Australopithecus robustus and boisei, that had heavy molars and small incisors, as they would be adapted to a vegetarian diet. A. robustus had strong jaw muscles and large, heavily cusped molars. This hominid may have specialized in chewing seeds, nuts, and other tough plant material
This is CRAZY! I was in another forum a while ago and the veie topic turned into a huge rant about stuff, much like this one!
To whoever it was that said some vegans go and preach about how other people are a bunch of sinners…
As (I think) the only vegan here, I couldn’t help taking this a little personally. Why pick on vegans specifically? I’m sure many veggies go and do the same, and surely there must be some omnivores who go and preach about how veggies and vegans are sinners! Also, highly religious people will go and preach about how people of other religions are sinners. It just seemed to me like you thought of vegans as weirdos on soapboxes who are 
(can’t think of a word, that pic sums it up).
People will have many different perspectives on the matter! Why bother arguing about it if there are so many different views and beliefs. Arguing will not be of benefit to anyone, listening to what other people have to say however may be of more use. I can kind of understand where omnivores are coming from, it’s just that for me it doesn’t make sense.
I know people who have said that if they stopped to think about it for long enough they would probably become vegetarian. So why don’t they??? I think that people are just too lazy to put in the effort and prefer to hide themselves from the truth. SOME poeple, not all 
Oh yes, and to Moogle…
WHAT? that’s crazy! You shouldn’t have to go against your beliefs for the sake of other people!! If they can’t understand you being veggie then that’s their problem. Being vegan I can’t help but stand out. I can accept that to some people it may seem a bit extreme (I used to think so!) but people seem “scared” of it and try to challenge it. I think the only reason that people think you are different is because what you stand for makes more sense, and they don’t like that. 
I dont think ppl should worry about standing out, its when people try to hide in the background that the problems start…
As a non-ideological-ethical vegetarian (have been my whole life). I wear leather shoes and eat cheese/gelatine/whatnot though. I have to say that Sleepy summed it up pretty well. We are controlled by instincts that tells us to eat as much fat and proteins as possible. I have never felt that instinct about meat, probably because i have not eaten much meat. But i like other high-fat/protein foods and would eat as much as i could if my instincts had complete control.
My point is that we know that we know better. We can think rational thoughts and consider problems from different perspectives, in a way we could not when our instincts were first developed. We can consider the problem of world hunger or water pollution that comes from agriculture. Or the problem of your ass becoming fat from too much junk food and too little exercise… 
It is rational to think of meat as a food you only eat sometimes, because that would ‘simulate’ how our ancestors ate when they were hunter/gatherers. they would fiest on meat and fish some days and eat vegetables and roots on other days. They also got natural excercise from the hunting, fishing and gathering that was proportional to how much they ate.
I think im too old to ‘convert’ to eating meat. I don’t think cooking veggie food is a problem, and i rarely leave for less civilized places where it would become a problem. Even restaurants in rural parts of my country has vegetarian dishes these days, though they still give you a weird look sometimes. It does not hurt to know that i am not responsible for doing as much harm to animals either. You often hear ‘normal’ people saying they feel guilty when they see pictures of that.
Atheist: According to your point of view there must have been a point in evolution when an animal mother with no feelings or sense of counsciousness at all gave birth to a modern human like us. Right? Because if it was a slow process you would expect to find different animals on the different stages of counsciousness, between us and say for example the insects. I would have thought that such an advanced feature as counsiousness would take longer to evolve than most other features, but i don’t know a thing about biology so i think i’ll leave it at that.
Evolution did take a long time, and during that process there were varying stages of consciousness before that which we see today. However, this process only seemed to have occurred as part of our own evolution, and not that of any other species. Don’t think of intelligence/emotion as being the ‘highest’ level of evolution which everything aims to achieve - evolution is all about what allows a species to survive, and intelligence comparable to that demonstrated by humans is in no way a requirement for most other species.
Look at rabbits. Why would they evolve to a higher level of intellect? As we can see, their current design certainly isn’t holding them back from reproduction (the objective of life) - so what would have encouraged further development of their mind? In our case, it was probably due to our fragile physique. The most intelligent and logical humans survived long enough against dangerously equipped predators to actually reproduce, and hence the next generation carries on this trait.
When talking about evolution, you have to keep in mind that no ‘being’ consciously guided the process. It sorts itself out using the “if it doesn’t work, it doesn’t exist for very long” ideology.
While I don’t doubt science’s ability to explain a great deal about brain function, I do not believe it is possible to fully understand the conditions of thought or emotion. There is a flaw in the logic of a subjective perspective forming an objective understanding, especially in regards to ethics. Animals are machines, like all configurations of cells known as life; but this ‘conclusion’ is much too simplistic. I see it as more of a convenience, requiring no respect, than an accurate understanding.
veggie all the way 
I haven’t got the time right now to read through this post right now but I will just say this. I am not vegetarian although I do not eat meat if it is in non-meat form. For example, I recetly went to Pizza Hut. I ate a meat feast pizza but then opted not to eat the chocolate cake as it said it wasn’t suitable for vegetarians. I don’t care who you are, who wants to eat meat in their chocolate cake?!
I’m a vegetarian but my cat has eaten several cows, horses, sheep, kangaroos, birds and half the ocean’s fish.
Cats are fortunate that they don’t taste any good. Or at least that’s what I’ve been told. Some countries do eat dog though. It’s a dog eat dog world.