This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Who else is vegan on here?
- going vegan ?
- GCSE English spoken language endorsement
- Do you think universities should ban meat from their menus?
- Is it okay for a vegan to work for a supermarket?
- Rabbit on my road
- Vegan in halls
- What do I do?
- Kallisto's Sunday Question: Vegetables
- Top 5 Places to Eat in Coventry
- Top 5 Places to Eat in Coventry
- I am a giant Union Jack wearing toy bulldog AMA!
- Group 1 Carcinogens
- chicken use by date
- TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?
- vegetarian at st hilda’s
- Human foods for dogs
- For Maths lovers
- vegan/ gluten free at uni
- University - recipe suggestions for students
Animal lovers that eat meat - hypocrites or not?
You know those people on Facebook that often post photos of cute animals and share links to do with saving elephants/dolphins from harm etc. Can someone fairly call themselves an 'animal lover' but still buy into the barbaric, intensively reared, mass-produced factory farmed pigs, cows and chickens?
Scroll to see replies
I love animals don't get me wrong, but eating meat is a natural part of (most) human's diets.
The people that get me are the animal "obsessives" who DON'T eat meat, not because they don't like it, but because its "hurting all the animals" if they eat it. It's a natural thing, if the first humans turned around and said "NO MATE, I DONT EAT MEAT" then they probably would have all died at some point. Animals are cute, but they eat each other, why shouldn't we?
Hunting and killing/harming with the intent of not eating, or for no good reason (such as people who buy pets and beat them etc) are wrong in my eyes, but eating animals, no. At least they then go to good use, i.e. energy. I think eating endangered animals is sad, but theres not gonna be any way to stop that ultimately, so I don't bother with the whole campaigning thing. I care, but humans are causing the next mass extinction, so there's no going back now we've already ****ed up this planet.
The people that get me are the animal "obsessives" who DON'T eat meat, not because they don't like it, but because its "hurting all the animals" if they eat it. It's a natural thing, if the first humans turned around and said "NO MATE, I DONT EAT MEAT" then they probably would have all died at some point. Animals are cute, but they eat each other, why shouldn't we?
Hunting and killing/harming with the intent of not eating, or for no good reason (such as people who buy pets and beat them etc) are wrong in my eyes, but eating animals, no. At least they then go to good use, i.e. energy. I think eating endangered animals is sad, but theres not gonna be any way to stop that ultimately, so I don't bother with the whole campaigning thing. I care, but humans are causing the next mass extinction, so there's no going back now we've already ****ed up this planet.
(edited 10 years ago)
I love animals but I also eat meat, arent most farm animals bread for this purpose anyway? what would happen to this huge number of methane producing animals if they were not used for food and other things?
Also what would happen to all the farmers who own/provide them.
I dont agree with harming an animal for fun/sport though similarly to what a previous poster said.
Funny thing is I've met alot of "hardcore vegans" who wear leather products, drink non vegan approved alcohol and use non vegan approved beauty products, makes me laugh, met one drinkin guiness once had to inform him of his fishy pint lol.
Also what would happen to all the farmers who own/provide them.
I dont agree with harming an animal for fun/sport though similarly to what a previous poster said.
Funny thing is I've met alot of "hardcore vegans" who wear leather products, drink non vegan approved alcohol and use non vegan approved beauty products, makes me laugh, met one drinkin guiness once had to inform him of his fishy pint lol.
More hypocritical than vegetarians/vegans who consume or use animal products.
Nobody is perfect, but they certainly are hypocrites.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Nobody is perfect, but they certainly are hypocrites.
Posted from TSR Mobile
In some cases I'd say it was hypocritical; in others I wouldn't. It depends on what makes the person an 'animal lover'. One example would be a person who only likes fluffy animals; cows, pigs, chickens, etc., are aesthetically unappealing, and so they are a lover of some animals and not all.
In another case, a person might indeed love all animals, but also believe for instance that the natural order justifies cruelty to them; this person I would call hypocritical, because his or her professed values are in direct contradiction. It is not possible, in my opinion, to genuinely love a creature and yet simultaneously wish to harm it for your own benefit (especially one so trivial such as the taste of your sandwich).
In another case, a person might indeed love all animals, but also believe for instance that the natural order justifies cruelty to them; this person I would call hypocritical, because his or her professed values are in direct contradiction. It is not possible, in my opinion, to genuinely love a creature and yet simultaneously wish to harm it for your own benefit (especially one so trivial such as the taste of your sandwich).
Original post by miser
In some cases I'd say it was hypocritical; in others I wouldn't. It depends on what makes the person an 'animal lover'. One example would be a person who only likes fluffy animals; cows, pigs, chickens, etc., are aesthetically unappealing, and so they are a lover of some animals and not all.
In another case, a person might indeed love all animals, but also believe for instance that the natural order justifies cruelty to them; this person I would call hypocritical, because his or her professed values are in direct contradiction. It is not possible, in my opinion, to genuinely love a creature and yet simultaneously wish to harm it for your own benefit (especially one so trivial such as the taste of your sandwich).
In another case, a person might indeed love all animals, but also believe for instance that the natural order justifies cruelty to them; this person I would call hypocritical, because his or her professed values are in direct contradiction. It is not possible, in my opinion, to genuinely love a creature and yet simultaneously wish to harm it for your own benefit (especially one so trivial such as the taste of your sandwich).
I pretty much agree with this.
My general rule of them is to not eat anything I'd keep as a pet. Anything else is fair game
I like animals which is why i could never be cruel to an animal, would i kill an animal for food? yes if all other food resources had been exhausted.
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
Original post by PerryPerry95
I like animals which is why i could never be cruel to an animal, would i kill an animal for food? yes if all other food resources had been exhausted.
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
I wouldn't say vegetarianism was more expensive; meats are generally expensive.
I expect that you must also be someone who doesn't vote, as the same logic applies to not being able to influence the electoral outcome. Nevertheless, vegetarianism as a movement is on the whole reducing demand for meat, which has no doubt prevented a number of animals from being raised for slaughter.
Original post by PerryPerry95
I like animals which is why i could never be cruel to an animal, would i kill an animal for food? yes if all other food resources had been exhausted.
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
Would i agree that all animals breed for the food industry should be treated humanly? yes of course and i could never be involved in cruel acts to an animal.
However refusing to buy a pack of chicken breasts from Tesco because the chickens were battery hens etc would have little to no impact on the industry so i save myself from spending twice as much money for no reason
You are infact directly involved in cruel acts to animals when you buy cheap meat. By paying for it you are essentially saying "I support this and i wish for it to continue."
I despise the attitude of "There's no point giving this thing up because it won't make much difference." It's a **** excuse and the exact way i used to think before i gave up meat.
(edited 10 years ago)
There is a big difference between animal welfare and animal rights. Some animal lovers are animal rights supporters who don't eat meat and some may even be vegan, that's fine. Some care about animal welfare but do not go as far as animal rights does - those people are the ones who do eat meat but, for example, look for free range produce.
Animal rights effectively means you give up meat. Animal welfare means eating meat, but only meat which has been reared in decent conditions like on free range farms - it's basically the middle ground. This is my position on things like meat, I support animal welfare but animal rights goes too far for me.
So no, animal lovers who eat meat are not necessarily hypocrites if they stick to things like free range. But when an "animal lover" makes absolutely no attempt to go for humane produce, and claims to love animals but eats factory farmed meat without hesitation, that's when I would say it starts to get hypocritical.
Eating meat is a natural thing for humans to do, you can be an animal lover but still eat meat.
Animal rights effectively means you give up meat. Animal welfare means eating meat, but only meat which has been reared in decent conditions like on free range farms - it's basically the middle ground. This is my position on things like meat, I support animal welfare but animal rights goes too far for me.
So no, animal lovers who eat meat are not necessarily hypocrites if they stick to things like free range. But when an "animal lover" makes absolutely no attempt to go for humane produce, and claims to love animals but eats factory farmed meat without hesitation, that's when I would say it starts to get hypocritical.
Eating meat is a natural thing for humans to do, you can be an animal lover but still eat meat.
Original post by Ggmu!
More hypocritical than vegetarians/vegans who consume or use animal products.
Nobody is perfect, but they certainly are hypocrites.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Nobody is perfect, but they certainly are hypocrites.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I never really understand this argument. You may as well say everyone who cares about the environment is a hypocrite for not committing mass murder then suicide in order to rid the world of overpopulation.
doing something is better than nothing and I believe the world would be a better place if people cut down or cut out as they felt comfortable, rather than feeling pressured and getting called a hypocrite for trying.
Original post by miser
I wouldn't say vegetarianism was more expensive; meats are generally expensive.
I expect that you must also be someone who doesn't vote, as the same logic applies to not being able to influence the electoral outcome. Nevertheless, vegetarianism as a movement is on the whole reducing demand for meat, which has no doubt prevented a number of animals from being raised for slaughter.
I expect that you must also be someone who doesn't vote, as the same logic applies to not being able to influence the electoral outcome. Nevertheless, vegetarianism as a movement is on the whole reducing demand for meat, which has no doubt prevented a number of animals from being raised for slaughter.
To be clear the increase in cost is for meat that isnt battery farmed etc I could never be a vegetarian as i just like meat too much :/ I think it is great that the demand for meat is being driven down but think that as more and more people are trying to save money that less and less people are buying the kinder meat. The option is to go veggie or go cruel :/ Meat is just too big a part in my life to give it up
Original post by tomclarky
You are infact directly involved in cruel acts to animals when you buy cheap meat. By paying for it you are essentially saying "I support this and i wish for it to continue."
I despise the attitude of "There's no point giving this thing up because it won't make much difference." It's a **** excuse and the exact way i used to think before i gave up meat.
I despise the attitude of "There's no point giving this thing up because it won't make much difference." It's a **** excuse and the exact way i used to think before i gave up meat.
I actually wrote out a response to this which i have deleted because i cant imagine you will acknowledge it as your comment seems quite aggressive. People are entitled to their opinions and people are entitled to disagree, however could you please have a bit more decency when voicing you opinion? I think "terrible excuse" gives the same effect as "**** excuse". I swear irl but think it lacks conviction when using it in a opinionated discussion/argument
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by tomclarky
You are infact directly involved in cruel acts to animals when you buy cheap meat. By paying for it you are essentially saying "I support this and i wish for it to continue."
I despise the attitude of "There's no point giving this thing up because it won't make much difference." It's a **** excuse and the exact way i used to think before i gave up meat.
I despise the attitude of "There's no point giving this thing up because it won't make much difference." It's a **** excuse and the exact way i used to think before i gave up meat.
I was the same. You have to try.
Look at fish, I always thought sustainable fishing would never take off but there have been changes to EU law just this year!
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by redferry
I was the same. You have to try.
Look at fish, I always thought sustainable fishing would never take off but there have been changes to EU law just this year!
Look at fish, I always thought sustainable fishing would never take off but there have been changes to EU law just this year!
Genuine question, were these changes to the law driven by people buying less fish from unsustainable sources? OR because of animal rights activists etc appealing for fairer laws and also because there was a decline in the fish population?
(or something else entirely)
I'd say that in one sense I am being hypocritical by supporting animal rights - ie I'm against Whaling, killing of elephants for ivory, killing of dolphins and I support animal conservation, yet at the same time I eat meat.
Humans have been omnivores for centuries and there isn't anything intrinsically wrong with it, but what is wrong is the bad conditions that animals are kept in on battery farms and the sheer scale of it. We're influencing the direction of several species' evolution because we are breeding them for more meat, milk and eggs.
Humans have been omnivores for centuries and there isn't anything intrinsically wrong with it, but what is wrong is the bad conditions that animals are kept in on battery farms and the sheer scale of it. We're influencing the direction of several species' evolution because we are breeding them for more meat, milk and eggs.
Original post by PerryPerry95
I actually wrote out a response to this which i have deleted because i cant imagine you will acknowledge it as your comment seems quite aggressive. People are entitled to their opinions and people are entitled to disagree, however could you please have a bit more decency when voicing you opinion? I think "terrible excuse" gives the same effect as "**** excuse". I swear irl but think it lacks conviction when using it in a opinionated discussion/argument
I actually wrote out a response to this which i have deleted because i cant imagine you will acknowledge it as your comment seems quite aggressive. People are entitled to their opinions and people are entitled to disagree, however could you please have a bit more decency when voicing you opinion? I think "terrible excuse" gives the same effect as "**** excuse". I swear irl but think it lacks conviction when using it in a opinionated discussion/argument
I'm not responsible for how you interpret my post. The points i was making were quite clear.
You were directly contradicting yourself by saying 'I would never be involved in cruel acts to animals' yet then admitted you do indeed buy meat because if you didn't 'it wouldn't make much difference anyway'. That's awful logic.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by PerryPerry95
Genuine question, were these changes to the law driven by people buying less fish from unsustainable sources? OR because of animal rights activists etc appealing for fairer laws and also because there was a decline in the fish population?
(or something else entirely)
(or something else entirely)
a combination of the two
Animal rights activists brought it to peoples attention and consumer patterns changes accordingly.Related discussions
- Who else is vegan on here?
- going vegan ?
- GCSE English spoken language endorsement
- Do you think universities should ban meat from their menus?
- Is it okay for a vegan to work for a supermarket?
- Rabbit on my road
- Vegan in halls
- What do I do?
- Kallisto's Sunday Question: Vegetables
- Top 5 Places to Eat in Coventry
- Top 5 Places to Eat in Coventry
- I am a giant Union Jack wearing toy bulldog AMA!
- Group 1 Carcinogens
- chicken use by date
- TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?
- vegetarian at st hilda’s
- Human foods for dogs
- For Maths lovers
- vegan/ gluten free at uni
- University - recipe suggestions for students
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UKTrending
Last reply 4 days ago
If you could instantly become fluent in any foreign language which one would it be?Last reply 3 months ago
About the NCUK IFY Program for university Studies in the UK
