It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Immorality Of Eating Meat When There Are Vegi Alternatives Do People Care?

page: 32
34
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
This is necessary.
Life feeds on life.




posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 03:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shadytloc
This may horrify the OP.



I do a lot of thinking about your topic but in a different way. When I see an animal, any animal, i tend to wonder how it tastes. This is not limited to "normal" food animals like cows and pigs and i am sure im not the only one. I would absolutely like to try dog, cat, dolphin,whale, whatever. Im sure that our society is missing out on a lot of deliciousness. Do you really think our neolithic ancestors got choosey? Look! Animals! Dinner! I propose the opposite of stopping the consumption of meat. Lets eat all meat (except humans)!



Let the flames begin.


At least your on topic with a statement I read as you just dont really care. . . .



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 06:28 AM
link   
I found this alternative , instead of killing animals for meat you can have this type of meat :


www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 06:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Shadytloc

I do that also.
Which would you most like to try?
Myself it's deep fried baby panda
.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 06:36 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I congratulate you for being a vegetarian all your life.



But I had tried and can not do it, I love meat too much and my body loves it too.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



I congratulate you for being a vegetarian all your life.





But I had tried and can not do it, I love meat too much and my body loves it too.




Its not hard if you never even tried it, never had a piece of chicken, meat or fish.

I dont really have the desire to try meat, fish or any other animals for that matter.

However some people may eat anything. . . .



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

I had never been fat in my life, I have exercised all my life also and still going strong.

I am in great shape, but while at my age I look way younger than my peers, I always get great compliments on my skin, those women around me that are on low fat diet and in my same age rage, look way older and their skin dry, is always a down side to low fat or none fat diets the same way that goes for high fat and animal base diets.

I do a lot of research and I know the ups and downs of certain diets.

But for those that opting certain foods works for them I applaud their choices.

I just don't feel guilty when eating meats, fish and poultry.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: charles911
I found this alternative , instead of killing animals for meat you can have this type of meat :


www.youtube.com...


scientists in japan can turn feces into meat. since we are on the topic of alternatives...
edit on 3-2-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 05:36 PM
link   


These turd burgers are most likely what NASA has great interest in, note they are not at all vegitarian, but made from whatever the general population eats. Dont be suprised if your drinking water comes from the toilets around the country, as water sewage purification is a trend people arent really aware of these days.

In a disaster type scenario if people ran out of food I shudder to think of what people would do to continue to eat, my guess is people if given enough time would eat each other, but something like sewage meat could prevent such a scenario. Soylent sh## its made of peoples sh##!




posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
These turd burgers are most likely what NASA has great interest in...


So if McD's picks it up, would they have to rename the Ham Burglar to be the spokes'person'?



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Dear OP:

On the off chance that your apparent (and somewhat pathetic) confusion is real, I shall endeavor to help you out. You've made two mistakes:

1. You've asked people to respond to a question which links two things that have no real link: eating meat and morality.

2. You've consistently ignored the very large elephant contentedly eating peanuts in the corner.

Allow me to elaborate:

1. The so-called golden rule, which you have several times repeated and seem to think is the embodiment of morality, implies that the the "them" (Do unto others as you would have THEM do unto you) have the capacity to choose how to treat you. I.E., it infers equality. Now, if I could sit down with my local deer herd and have a nice discussion about how things should be, such as "You stop eating all my persimmons and I'll stop eating venison," this question of morality might be valid. But I can't, and it isn't. Animals do what they do and never think about right or wrong. They have no morality or ethics. Polar bears, given the opportunity, would eat you just as happily as they eat a seal, and a lion would consider you easy prey and good eating - after all, you have no tough hide or scales, no horns or hooves or feathers, etc. Once the clothes are disposed of, it's almost all soft tasty flesh.

Morality and ethics are about how we treat our peers - that is, beings who are roughly equal to us in moral capacity. We don't call birds immoral for stealing and eating the chicks of other birds - it's just Nature. We don't question the ethics of the male lion who kills all the lion cubs which were fathered by another lion - his instincts drive him to perpetuate HIS genes. Animals - especially prey animals - don't choose how to treat us, or even other animals. They just do what they do to survive by following their instincts. Therefore, the "golden rule" can not be applied to them in any meaningful fashion.

2. That elephant is called "sentience," a very important concept which you repeatedly sidestep, ignore, and avoid. We, human beings, are (mostly) sentient. We are self-aware and can comprehend abstract concepts such as love, peace, morality, and ethics. The morality of killing sentient beings for food, as in your example of aliens eating us, is a very different issue than the morality of killing non-sentient prey animals. It is not a question of intelligence or technological or cultural advancement as you seem to imply, rather it is a clear-cut line between sentience and non-sentience. Your concept of morality (i.e. the aforementioned golden rule) can not and does not apply to non-sentient beings.

Also, you have avoided another important issue. Most of the livestock animals we eat today do not "naturally" exist. We have created them, both in the broader sense of domestication and generations of selective breeding, and in the more immediate sense of artificial insemination or deliberate breeding of two domestic animals to produce offspring for the purpose of slaughter for consumption. Humans made these animals for the purpose of being eaten by humans. They aren't out there just living their happy little lives until some human comes along and kills them.

How we treat domestic animals which, although they are not sentient, do feel pain and theoretically (as far as we know and believe) suffer, is in my humble opinion a moral and ethical issue, but eating the meat is not.

Furthermore, as several have tried to point out, the planetary balance of life only works with predation. If the herbivores have no predators to eat them, they reproduce until they consume all of the available food and then starve to death. How is that any better than being killed and eaten?

And finally, bleeding heart vegetarians who don't want humans to kill and eat anything are indirectly putting other human lives at risk. Guess what animal is the #1 killer of humans? DEER! They're so overpopulated because we've killed off all the predators and restricted hunting, that they kill a couple of hundred people every year in traffic accidents - and that's just in the US.

Whether you believe in evolution and science or in creation by God, the system of predator and prey has either been carefully designed or is the culmination of a lengthy process of cosmic trial and error, and it works! For predators - even omnivorous predators like humans (yes, we are predators - our eyes are front and center for a reason) - to attempt to buck the system by eating only plants will destroy the system in 2 ways: 1) the herbivores will reproduce out of control leading to mass starvations and 2) if we eat up all the plants the herbivores won't have anything to eat and will starve.

Either way, the herbivores are doomed so we might as well kill them and eat them before they slowly and painfully starve to death. It's the only right thing to do!


Heike

PS A little off-topic here but one of my personal peeves: Why do so many people in the Western "civilized" nations object to the eating of dogs and cats in other countries but happily eat bacon? Pigs are much smarter than dogs or cats and make better pets if you train them, but we don't have a problem eating them, so it's not a question of intelligence or "pet-ability," so what is it?



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: hhott
Blah blah blah


All that talking to just say animals dont have sentience, wrong. I suggest you educate yourself on neuroscience as well as genetics, no difference in animals and humans other than we have developed our frontal lobes a little bit, other than that we are all pretty much the same at the genetic level. Same brains, same blood, same everything. . . .

You used a few walls of text to say you dont care about animals because you believe they dont have sentience when they do.

Then say its totally moral to kill them for food when we dont need to just because you think they dont have thoughts emotions feelings and a sense of self. Any pet owner will tell you animals have personality and ego just like we do, they are intelligent, however they dont seem to have the frontal lobe developed as humans do.

Denial of sentience and not caring about killing something when its not necessary to kill it doesnt make it a morally good thing in fact it may be just the opposite.

PS:
If you killed and ate dogs and cats in United States Of America I doubt anyone would think of it as not an immoral action.


edit on 3-2-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: hhott

Well put.
I strongly doubt the op will touch your comment in any meaningful fashion though.
He appears to only like talking to those who agree with him.
He only insults, pidgeon holes, and disregards those who disagree.

To answer your last question.
It's cultural, we're raised to see cats and dogs as companions.
Not food.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: hhott



Well put.

I strongly doubt the op will touch your comment in any meaningful fashion though.

He appears to only like talking to those who agree with him.

He only insults, pidgeon holes, and disregards those who disagree.



To answer your last question.

It's cultural, we're raised to see cats and dogs as companions.

Not food.


Show one shred of evidence to back up the animals dont have sentience ignorance that has just cropped up.

Let me help you with that there is zero evidence to back what the two of you are preaching, its BS full steam ahead.

Not just any BS animals have no sentience ludicrous speed going into plad BS.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Show one shred of evidence to back up the animals dont have sentience ignorance that has just cropped up.


How about you show one scrap of evidence that plants don't have sentience....

Let me help you with that there is zero evidence to back up that plants do not have sentience....



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

Show one shred of evidence to back up the animals dont have sentience ignorance that has just cropped up.




How about you show one scrap of evidence that plants don't have sentience....



Let me help you with that there is zero evidence to back up that plants do not have sentience....


I take it you have no evidence to back up what your saying then lolz just as I thought total BS.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

No sir, that's not at all what I said.

Ok, so I watch too much sci-fi. By "sentient" I meant the mental capacity for self-awareness, thinking, the ability to use logic and complex thinking, the ability to have a concept of the "future" and plan one's own future actions based on reasoning or consideration of abstract concepts, the ability to understand concepts such as "right" and "wrong," the ability to create, and so forth, which has nothing to do with blood or genetics. If you are religious, then the Bible itself tells us that humans are the only beings on Earth who have the knowledge of "right and wrong," if you don't then science has plenty of guidelines for how the consciousness and mental capabilities of animals differ from humans.

I did not say I don't care about animals - I do. How many have YOU personally rescued or saved? I've lost count, but it's over 100 at least for me and not all of them were dogs or cats. I SAID that livestock animals are specifically and deliberately bred for consumption as food, and that the balance of life on planet Earth is dependent on the predator-prey system, and that the "golden rule" can't properly be applied to animals who can't understand right and wrong (or "good" and "evil").

If you think the "golden rule" is appropriate to the issue of eating meat, and that there is "no difference in animals and humans," then go and debate your moral and ethical issues with animals who eat meat, such as a wolf, cougar, tiger, or grizzly bear. (And please take along someone to video the results for me).

If you want to debate with me, I'd love to. But please address what I actually said, and please tell me if the morality you wish to discuss is based on religion or not, so that I don't have to keep addressing both.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Vincent: Bacon tastes gooood. Pork chops taste gooood.
Jules: Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy mother#er. Pigs sleep and root in #. That's a filthy animal. I ain't eat nothin' that ain't got sense enough to disregard its own feces.
Vincent: How about a dog? Dogs eats its own feces.
Jules: I don't eat dog either.
Vincent: Yeah, but do you consider a dog to be a filthy animal?
Jules: I wouldn't go so far as to call a dog filthy but they're definitely dirty. But, a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: hhott
To answer your last question.
It's cultural, we're raised to see cats and dogs as companions.
Not food.


I have to agree - it's cultural. That's the only answer that makes any sense to me. Therefore, in this modern era of [over-] education on cultural diversity and accepting cultural differences, shouldn't we have got over it by now? As far as I know, there aren't videos all over the internet by Hindu people damning us for eating cows, so isn't it about time we got off the "it's so horrible they're eating cats/dogs" bandwagon?

Just saying.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: hhott
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



No sir, that's not at all what I said.



Ok, so I watch too much sci-fi. By "sentient" I meant the mental capacity for self-awareness, thinking, the ability to use logic and complex thinking, the ability to have a concept of the "future" and plan one's own future actions based on reasoning or consideration of abstract concepts, the ability to understand concepts such as "right" and "wrong," the ability to create, and so forth, which has nothing to do with blood or genetics. If you are religious, then the Bible itself tells us that humans are the only beings on Earth who have the knowledge of "right and wrong," if you don't then science has plenty of guidelines for how the consciousness and mental capabilities of animals differ from humans.



I did not say I don't care about animals - I do. How many have YOU personally rescued or saved? I've lost count, but it's over 100 at least for me and not all of them were dogs or cats. I SAID that livestock animals are specifically and deliberately bred for consumption as food, and that the balance of life on planet Earth is dependent on the predator-prey system, and that the "golden rule" can't properly be applied to animals who can't understand right and wrong (or "good" and "evil").



If you think the "golden rule" is appropriate to the issue of eating meat, and that there is "no difference in animals and humans," then go and debate your moral and ethical issues with animals who eat meat, such as a wolf, cougar, tiger, or grizzly bear. (And please take along someone to video the results for me).



If you want to debate with me, I'd love to. But please address what I actually said, and please tell me if the morality you wish to discuss is based on religion or not, so that I don't have to keep addressing both.




This thread isnt about me its about morality, the lack of it, and if we care about animals, knowing we have alternative choices.

Its not a religious based thread period.

Your correct about animals not having the ability to have complex thoughts about the future, but they can learn, and remember things, faces, places, have emotions, as well as thoughts. However it has been stated that animals dont have the ability to projects into the future or plan for tomorrow, things like hibernation are natural for them.

Yes animals and humans thinking capabilities are at different levels, but they do think and have sentience.

The difference between humans and animals is we have a choice they dont have a choice, as far as food is concerned.
We dont have to be predators if we dont want to be, nor do we need to prey on innocent animals to survive, its done out of want not need.

This thread is dealing with the morality of not accepting alternatives reguardless of how advanced they may become some may always want to eat real animal flesh.

As to your go debate with animals thats just being silly, animals have no choice in what they eat, they dont have vegi foods now do they, nor do they have agriculture to grow vast amounts of food, not even worth a serious response.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join