Turn on thread page Beta

Post arguments against vegetarianism/veganism, please! watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've thought for years that killing and eating animals while we, as westerners and members of the 'developed' world, have dietary options that don't require meat and provide us with similar nutrition is wrong.

    Saying that, I've also been fairly undisciplined and immoral because I hold these beliefs while being a frequent meat-eater. I'm considering becoming a vegetarian because animals are capable of suffering and they are conscious, living things that want to survive in the same way we do. You can't make the same statements about plants, and even if you could, it would be impractical to adopt an alternative beyond vegetarianism or veganism. At least for now it would.

    Are there any good arguments against this? Please post them!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's harder to get good quality protein if you're a vegan or vegetarian.

    Eating protein helps make you alpha. Let's face it, who wants to be a skinny beta who eats carbs all day?

    So you can see the dilemma.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We are Humans and we are granted dominion over the animals.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Effy.)
    We are Humans and we are granted dominion over the animals.
    By whom, or what, are we granted dominion over the animals?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    An animal raised for meat, if it's treated right, can live a happy pampered life and have a relatively painless death. If it were left to live in the wild, on the other hand, it would constantly be in danger and have to work hard to survive, and when it did die it would probably be from either starvation, disease or predation. None of which are very nice ways to go.

    So, as long as we try our best to get rid of battery farms and similar, I don't think there's anything at all wrong with eating animal products.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alpha brah)
    It's harder to get good quality protein if you're a vegan or vegetarian.

    So you can see the dilemma.
    That's true, but aren't there a lot of practices that are harder when you're doing the 'right' thing?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Effy.)
    We are Humans and we are granted dominion over the animals.
    Wat
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    An animal raised for meat, if it's treated right, can live a happy pampered life and have a relatively painless death. If it were left to live in the wild, on the other hand, it would constantly be in danger and have to work hard to survive, and when it did die it would probably be from either starvation, disease or predation. None of which are very nice ways to go.

    So, as long as we try our best to get rid of battery farms and similar, I don't think there's anything at all wrong with eating animal products.
    Does raising a creature in good conditions give you the right, or make it moral, to then kill it for food? Should its death not be, to the greatest degree possible, a natural one? We apply this to humans, and the only thing that distinguishes us from animals is intelligence.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    By whom, or what, are we granted dominion over the animals?
    If you're religious; by the grace of God. If you're not; by the indisputable evidence that we are the 'top' of the food chain through our superior intelligence.

    Reasons against vegetarianism? It's a perversion of nature. Everything, from our teeth to our primal behaviour to our digestive system, is geared towards omnivorousness.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Bacon. :coma::mmm:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StretfordEnd)
    If you're religious; by the grace of God. If you're not; by the indisputable evidence that we are the 'top' of the food chain through our superior intelligence.

    Reasons against vegetarianism? It's a perversion of nature. Everything, from our teeth to our primal behaviour to our digestive system, is geared towards omnivorousness.
    The first argument refers to God. Is there proof that a god exists?

    Why is something wrong if it perverts nature? Why does being designed to eat meat, when we can live healthily by adopting alternatives, make it morally acceptable to kill creatures that obviously want to continue living?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    Does raising a creature in good conditions give you the right, or make it moral, to then kill it for food? Should its death not be, to the greatest degree possible, a natural one? We apply this to humans, and the only thing that distinguishes us from animals is intelligence.
    It's not morally right, but as long as it doesn't cause suffering I wouldn't say it's morally wrong either.

    I take the opinion that, for humans, the thing that makes a painless killing wrong is the effect it has on their family and friends. The victim himself wouldn't notice a thing and therefore can't be upset about it. Since most animals don't feel grief or have a sense of bereavement, the same rules don't necessarily apply to them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    It's not morally right, but as long as it doesn't cause suffering I wouldn't say it's morally wrong either.

    I take the opinion that, for humans, the thing that makes a painless killing wrong is the effect it has on their family and friends. The victim himself wouldn't notice a thing and therefore can't be upset about it. Since most animals don't feel grief or have a sense of bereavement, the same rules don't necessarily apply to them.
    What about people who don't have a family and friends?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    The first argument refers to God. Is there proof that a god exists?

    Why is something wrong if it perverts nature? Why does being designed to eat meat, when we can live healthily by adopting alternatives, make it morally acceptable to kill creatures that obviously want to continue living?
    I'm an antitheist, I firmly believe no God exists. What I'm saying is regardless of whether you want to talk about religious, scientific or logical explanations - everything points to the fact that humanity is the dominant sentient species.

    Ultimately I'm not a person to push my own agenda on other people; personally speaking the fact that I'm demonstrably designed/have evolved to digest meat is a good enough reason to eat it. It's the healthiest option.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    By whom, or what, are we granted dominion over the animals?
    I believe she's joking.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StretfordEnd)
    I'm an antitheist, I firmly believe no God exists. What I'm saying is regardless of whether you want to talk about religious, scientific or logical explanations - everything points to the fact that humanity is the dominant sentient species.

    Ultimately I'm not a person to push my own agenda on other people; personally speaking the fact that I'm demonstrably designed/have evolved to digest meat is a good enough reason to eat it. It's the healthiest option.
    Should a marginally better diet, for you, give you the right to kill a creature that wants to continue living? How does being designed to do something make doing it right? Are there not people who are 'designed' to be immoral?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member841230)
    I believe she's joking.
    She might have been. Are there not many people who, because of their religious affiliations, would agree with what she said?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    Does raising a creature in good conditions give you the right, or make it moral, to then kill it for food? Should its death not be, to the greatest degree possible, a natural one? We apply this to humans, and the only thing that distinguishes us from animals is intelligence.
    What is a natural death, then?

    In nature there is no such thing as dying of old age. Animals die from disease, injury or of course being eaten by other animals, few of which are so conscientious in their method of slaughter as humans.

    A domesticated sheep/cow/pig gets protected from the predators, disease and food-shortages that would plague its wild relatives. Yeah, they get eaten at the end, but that really is how life works, there is nothing unnatural about it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    What is a natural death, then?

    In nature there is no such thing as dying of old age. Animals die from disease, injury or of course being eaten by other animals, few of which are so conscientious in their method of slaughter as humans.

    A domesticated sheep/cow/pig gets protected from the predators, disease and food-shortages that would plague its wild relatives. Yeah, they get eaten at the end, but that really is how life works, there is nothing unnatural about it.
    Could 'natural death' and 'murder' (or something like it) not be placed on opposite ends of a spectrum?

    Are animals in the wild not forced to kill, in a way that we aren't seeing as we have viable alternatives in many parts of the West?

    If a human were to be killed, 'conscientiously' after having been treated well, or having been given a better life than they otherwise would have gotten, would that be moral?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ralph Lauren)
    What about people who don't have a family and friends?
    I believe that no-one has the right to be the first to condemn an act, other than someone directly affected by it. Even if that someone doesn't actually exist but is only a hypothetical possibility, what they would think and feel about the matter should be the basis for what everyone else thinks.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

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

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