Vegetarians who eat fish (pescetarians) - how do you justify this?

You don't have to do either, no, but I don't mind people doing what's practical for them as long as they are doing something. I'm vegetarian but not vegan because it's not practical for me at the moment. I'm okay with that. Some people will be pescatarian but not vegetarian because it's not practical for them to be vegetarian at that time. Some people might eat meat less often. None of it is pointless because it's better than nothing. You can give £10 to charity when you could easily give another £10 and it's still a good thing to do even if you could do more.

I think fish are less capable of emotions like fear, a sense of loss at losing their babies etc., and are less self-aware than mammals. Humans can see certain emotions in mammals that they can't see in fish. It doesn't mean that fish don't suffer, but they probably suffer less.

As someone else said, it's like saying "I'm not racist but I hate Jews" or "I'm atheist but I believe in heaven and hell". You can't be a "vegetarian who eats fish" - you either are a vegetarian or you're not. And you can't claim to be a vegetarian on moral or ethical grounds, because otherwise you wouldn't eat fish. Fish are animals who feel pain the same as cows or chickens. If you just like the taste of fish then admit it don't pretend they are "less sentient" or some other bs.

I'm a vegetarian but I think fish are much less sentient, self-aware and able to suffer than other animals. I'd rather kill a fish than a cow.

I can accept that, I know that I would really like to give up eating fish at some point for ethical reasons but at the moment because of lack of money and time I can't really face it because it's really the only thing that has taste in my meals.

I just don't think these people have a right to call themselves vegetarian. I don't have a problem with people who do it but don't make a fuss it's the people who think they are somehow morally above meat eaters when imo they are doing something just as bad.

And I know it's a personal choice. I'm not asking people to justify it to the world, I was asking how they justify it to themselves. If you have a problem with eating animals I don't really see why you would be okay eating fish.

I can accept that, I know that I would really like to give up eating fish at some point for ethical reasons but at the moment because of lack of money and time I can't really face it because it's really the only thing that has taste in my meals.

I just don't think these people have a right to call themselves vegetarian. I don't have a problem with people who do it but don't make a fuss it's the people who think they are somehow morally above meat eaters when imo they are doing something just as bad.

And I know it's a personal choice. I'm not asking people to justify it to the world, I was asking how they justify it to themselves. If you have a problem with eating animals I don't really see why you would be okay eating fish.

You don't have to do either, no, but I don't mind people doing what's practical for them as long as they are doing something. I'm vegetarian but not vegan because it's not practical for me at the moment. I'm okay with that. Some people will be pescatarian but not vegetarian because it's not practical for them to be vegetarian at that time. Some people might eat meat less often. None of it is pointless because it's better than nothing. You can give £10 to charity when you could easily give another £10 and it's still a good thing to do even if you could do more.

I think fish are less capable of emotions like fear, a sense of loss at losing their babies etc., and are less self-aware than mammals. Humans can see certain emotions in mammals that they can't see in fish. It doesn't mean that fish don't suffer, but they probably suffer less.

a) HOW DO YOU KNOW?
b) Because fish can't really do a "sad face"... If a person is paralysed so they can't move, they still have emotions.

I don't get this don't-eat-animals-but-fish-are-OK thing. Still, I eat both..

This makes no sense whatsoever.

It is all or nothing if you're a vegetarian and tell people it's because animals have feelings and emotions. Because if those are your reasons, how can you eat a fish?

The meat eater argument also makes no sense. A meat eater that doesn't eat beef just doesn't like the taste. It's not some warped moral stance where it's not ok to eat animals but it's ok to eat fish, because they don't quite make the cut

I also eat eggs. It really confuses me when non-vegetarians say that vegetarians shouldn't eat eggs. Surely they know that they are unfertilised and therefore not an 'unborn animal'?