Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is there any real reason to be a vegetarian? Watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really see the hypocrisy.

    I am vegetarian for ethical reasons but am not vegan. I am aware that the milk industry contributes to the death of animals. The fact is, I don't want the immense, lifelong slog and potential health effects of being vegan. But surely being vegetarian is better than nothing in this case? It makes absolutely no sense to decide that everyone should be 'all or nothing' - that if someone who disagrees with the killing of animals doesn't want to be vegan, they may as well eat meat all the time. That's complete rubbish. I am contributing less to the killing of animals by being vegetarian, so my actions fit my ethics.

    My way of thinking is that if I can be vegetarian with very, very little hassle and no detrimental health effects, then I don't really have the right to not be vegetarian.

    Furthermore, almost everything we do contributes to the death of animals. When we eat rice we're killing some water buffalo that's been worked to death in a rice field. When we fill up our car we're killing animals with oil spills and global warming. It is impossible to be a modern day human and not contribute to animal suffering. So everyone has to draw their own line and I draw mine at being vegetarian.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kimolozen)
    lololol...**** off. i don't debate with ignorant people...
    This is generally the response when there is no argument to be made. If this statement is true, then how can you make any guided decision, after all it requires you to debate with yourself. If you had an argument you would make it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddyman4)
    I don't really see the hypocrisy.

    I am vegetarian for ethical reasons but am not vegan. I am aware that the milk industry contributes to the death of animals. The fact is, I don't want the immense, lifelong slog and potential health effects of being vegan. But surely being vegetarian is better than nothing in this case? It makes absolutely no sense to decide that everyone should be 'all or nothing' - that if someone who disagrees with the killing of animals doesn't want to be vegan, they may as well eat meat all the time. That's complete rubbish. I am contributing less to the killing of animals by being vegetarian, so my actions fit my ethics.

    My way of thinking is that if I can be vegetarian with very, very little hassle and no detrimental health effects, then I don't really have the right to not be vegetarian.

    Furthermore, almost everything we do contributes to the death of animals. When we eat rice we're killing some water buffalo that's been worked to death in a rice field. When we fill up our car we're killing animals with oil spills and global warming. It is impossible to be a modern day human and not contribute to animal suffering. So everyone has to draw their own line and I draw mine at being vegetarian.
    So, if it's impossible to not kill animals then why be a vegetarian to not kill animals?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I can think of a few.

    Firstly there are reasons relating to the ethics of it. Personally, I think if the choice is between eating meat and death, you could justifiably eat meat as long as you caused as little pain as you could. The thing is that none of us on this forum are realistically placed in that position. There's absolutely no need to eat meat because it's no more expensive to eat different foods, especially when you can continue to enjoy meals involving meat by simply replacing it with Quorn. It causes suffering, but worse it causes unnecessary suffering. That's the clincher for me.

    Obviously you could question the degree to which animals really do suffer. But I could point to numerous incidents of cruelty to animals, and many of the systematic processes used are horrific. Just recently The Guardian did an investigation on "the dirty secrets of the UK's poultry industry" which concluded that "Two-thirds of fresh retail chicken in UK contaminated with campylobacter." In the video they show brutal footage and, while they talk about the risks it poses to hygiene standards, I think we should equally accept that were those chickens humans that would be a scene from a serial killer movie with mountains of corpses etc. This article talks about the growing disquiet people have with the fact that male chickens are killed at birth because they can't lay eggs, so millions are being needlessly slaughtered. PETA have a lot of resources for learning about the cruelty that goes on, as does the ASPCA. Rolling Stone just recently did a huge article on "Animal Cruelty: The Price We Pay For Cheap Meat."

    Outside of those reasons, there's also the fact that it's generally healthier for you. It's also much better for the environment as you can grow much more in a given plot of land via agriculture than with animals. Cows in particular emit lots of methane and contribute to the greenhouse effect.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by forfrosne)
    I can think of a few.

    Firstly there are reasons relating to the ethics of it. Personally, I think if the choice is between eating meat and death, you could justifiably eat meat as long as you caused as little pain as you could. The thing is that none of us on this forum are realistically placed in that position. There's absolutely no need to eat meat because it's no more expensive to eat different foods, especially when you can continue to enjoy meals involving meat by simply replacing it with Quorn. It causes suffering, but worse it causes unnecessary suffering. That's the clincher for me.

    Obviously you could question the degree to which animals really do suffer. But I could point to numerous incidents of cruelty to animals, and many of the systematic processes used are horrific. Just recently The Guardian did an investigation on "the dirty secrets of the UK's poultry industry" which concluded that "Two-thirds of fresh retail chicken in UK contaminated with campylobacter." In the video they show brutal footage and, while they talk about the risks it poses to hygiene standards, I think we should equally accept that were those chickens humans that would be a scene from a serial killer movie with mountains of corpses etc. This article talks about the growing disquiet people have with the fact that male chickens are killed at birth because they can't lay eggs, so millions are being needlessly slaughtered. PETA have a lot of resources for learning about the cruelty that goes on, as does the ASPCA. Rolling Stone just recently did a huge article on "Animal Cruelty: The Price We Pay For Cheap Meat."

    Outside of those reasons, there's also the fact that it's generally healthier for you. It's also much better for the environment as you can grow much more in a given plot of land via agriculture than with animals. Cows in particular emit lots of methane and contribute to the greenhouse effect.
    You make many valid point here. But PETA is a bloody awful organisation. They take the very worst farms possible and make it seem that every farm in America is exactly like that.

    If you do want to actually look at Agriculture you need to look at both sides of the argument not just the animal welfare groups. Also you want to know that the standards of American animal welfare are appallingly low compared to that of the UK.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Attention Seeking
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Please go look up the definition of "most" and try again


    And what would you say if I claimed to dislike the taste of all vegetables?


    Direct me to a religion which that expressly bans the consumption of all meats, there are often absolute commandments, but mostly moral as far as the ones that are listened to go. Please find me a Jew/Christian that strictly follows all the laws given in Leviticus (I'll let you ignore the other laws and commandments) and then you can say it isn't pick and choose.


    Definitively justify on a moral/ethical ground then?
    You seem incapable of rational debate. Is there a reason for this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chagsha)
    Cows and chickens are killed for meat in a far more barbaric fashion. So I would rather be a bird in this case. And lets not forget that meat eaters also consumer vegan products.
    How? Cattle simply are stunned and get a bolt to the head. The cruelty is largely in how they're reared and fed.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kimolozen)
    How? Cattle simply are stunned and get a bolt to the head. The cruelty is largely in how they're reared and fed.
    I must know, what is cruel about how they are fed?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    This is generally the response when there is no argument to be made. If this statement is true, then how can you make any guided decision, after all it requires you to debate with yourself. If you had an argument you would make it.
    eh?

    OK...

    Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, some Christians, and other religions don't largely eat meat for religious purposes. I'm not Hindu or Buddhist, so can't say if the Vedas or Buddha himself were "contradictory"..... (maybe some here on this forum can enlighten me and others here...)

    People with specific medical conditions are advised not to eat meat. Hypertension is one example.......
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Can't we all just get along?

    You eat meat, I don't eat meat... Tomayto, tomato... severed leg of baby cow, lentil soup with a hint of chilli.... Let's call the whole thing off!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steezy)
    Can't we all just get along?

    You eat meat, I don't eat meat... Tomayto, tomato... severed leg of baby cow, lentil soup with a hint of chilli.... Let's call the whole thing off!
    No, I would rather have a petty argument where neither side will convince the other of their point of view. It passes the time basically.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kater Murr)
    Meat is murder.
    The flesh you so fancifully fry...
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kimolozen)
    eh?

    OK...

    Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, some Christians, and other religions don't largely eat meat for religious purposes. I'm not Hindu or Buddhist, so can't say if the Vedas or Buddha himself were "contradictory"..... (maybe some here on this forum can enlighten me and others here...)
    Well, looking stuff up only Jainism explicitly requires it, however the doctrine is highly flawed, but that's another matter, so I suppose I can let you off on Jainism.

    People with specific medical conditions are advised not to eat meat. Hypertension is one example.......
    Since you show yourself incapable of defining "most" I clearly have to do it for you: "greatest in amount or degree.". Now,correct me if I'm wrong, but this means that "most" and "all" (used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing.) are not synonymous.

    And where is this person who doesn't like the taste of any meat? Or a solid justification on moral grounds?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So, if it's impossible to not kill animals then why be a vegetarian to not kill animals?
    I explained that pretty clearly in the post you quoted...most of the first paragraph is devoted to this, so if you didn't see the answer to your question, I guess you just didn't want to.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steezy)
    Can't we all just get along?

    You eat meat, I don't eat meat... Tomayto, tomato... severed leg of baby cow, lentil soup with a hint of chilli.... Let's call the whole thing off!
    Can't we all just get along?

    You do human slavery, I don't do human slavery... slightly unhealthy conditions, restricted freedom... obedience to their master... Let's call the whole thing off!

    You miss the point of this thread.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    If you value animal life.

    (that's probably the only reason)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's worth bearing in mind that it is possible to be a vegetarian and also campaign for better conditions for animals reared for produce rather than meat.

    For example, I would support cows being kept in open conditions, using self-timed milkers, and being kept or passed on to others at a certain age rather than killed.

    Going vegan is difficult because dairy and eggs are in so many things and are also some of the best ways of replacing the protein deficit from not eating meat - egg whites and cottage cheese much? I imagine a lot of people use vegetarianism as a stepping stone to becoming vegan.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.