In the general case, I don't view predation as being within the scope of morality. Is it moral for a fox to eat a hen? The question is meaningless. So humans eating meat isn't moral or immoral; it's amoral. That said, one can take issue with the treatment of farm animals. Idealy, they should not be made to suffer unneccisarrily. That's the real moral issue on eating meat: Are you torturing or predating?
I don't like to dignify concepts like "morality" with my earnest discussion most of the time, but for the sake of making a point, let me play along with your phrasing. Many of these so-called moral judgments that people make only exist because we have sufficiently advanced minds to conceive of the desire for a judgment in the first place. You're right that a fox would be committing an amoral act by eating a hen. Indeed, if we had to pass judgment, I think a good one would be that the fox is doing what is natural for it.
But people aren't foxes. We have brains powerful enough to step above our instincts and behave rationally, if desired. And now that society provides us with more than enough food to satisfy our basic needs, all of a sudden this question of what to eat becomes more complicated. Is it really harmless for us to pick our oceans clean of fish? It may be harmless from the uncaring perspective of the universe, but it is something that we humans find upsetting because of the loss of these diverse creatures, the loss of a good food source, and the risk of unintended consequences in the biodiversity of the oceans. And it is
certainly harmful for the fish.
Likewise with mammal meat: Every day it seems like the scientific community produces another study suggesting that higher animals are more capable of mind than we realized. Due to the spectacular rarity of cognitive sophistication in the course of biological evolution, these creatures are worth a lot more than we may be able to quantify economically. We certainly should think twice before consuming these animals to their extinction, and, moreover, we should even rethink the fate of those individual animals who are alive today: What life experiences are we depriving them of, by raising them as food stock? Even if their deaths are as painless as possible, what about their lives? If slaughtering live humans--after raising them in captivity for their entire lives--sounds even the least bit repugnant to you, then, at the very least, you have to consider the question again for animals.
It's all too much for a fox to wrap its craft little head around...but we humans are stewards of the entire planet. We need to think about this.
As said before, there is nothing wrong with eating meat. There truly is nothing immoral about a fox eating an hen. But, let me tell you something about vegetarians-I think they're filthy hypocrites who think they're in touch with nature, but have done nothing but missed the whole damn point.
So, I'm to blame for eating a cow? Well, why isn't that stag to blame for eating that leaf? Cuz the leaf doesn't have a brain? Cuz it doesn't have nerves? Cuz it can't feel pain? I say, no! To me, all life is equal. The act of feasting upon another's life to prolong your own is a natural, necessary act, which ENSURES THE CONTINUITY OF LIFE. Despite the fact I do not believe anyone deserves death, this case is a special one, as one must always look after himself, at least in the most basic of ways, and take part in this struggle to life. As such, there are plants that defend themselves. There are plants who eat living animals. Saying 'I won't eat that lamb but I will tomato because the tomato won't tell the difference' is a horrible thing to say.
I eat both due to what I believe. My so called 'Law of Equality of Life' states a carrot and a chicken are worth the same, and therefore I should not hesitate to consume them, even if on the same plate. I'm on a race that's on the top of the food chain, I accept it and shut the hell up. So should the vegetarians.
Ouch, Legend. That's atypically angry of you! And I also find myself in disagreement.
Now, first let me disclaim my speech with this (chicken?) nugget of truth: I do eat meat. I notice that I hadn't said that in this thread yet, so I just wanted to make that clear in order that you can understand my argument to come from a more objective point of view. (It's the same reasoning by which I started that fat prejudice topic awhile back despite not being all that fat.)
Vegetarians are not "filthy hypocrites." Maybe some of them are individually, but so are other people. Neither filth nor hypocrisy is a common trait to the condition of vegetarianism. Indeed, those who refrain from meat are a very diverse group, ranging from nominal vegetarians who will still eat eggs, dairy, and fish, all the way to raw-food vegans who consume as prehistoric a diet as possible and would balk at the consumption of any food product (or purchase of any non-food product) that contains any trace of any animal or animal byproduct. Some people refrain from meat for health reasons; others for reasons of personal taste; still others for animal rights; others yet because of social or ideological reasons. So it is difficult to speak of vegetarians in generalized terms with much accuracy. "Filthy hypocrites" is not a good way to start.
You don't necessarily have to feel guilt for consuming meat. Your sense of propriety and the rationale by which you come to your judgments may indeed spare you from such an emotion. I don't want to lay a guilt trip on you, but I do want to feed this controversy back to you in a form that may compel you to reconsider your own point of view.
Your argument is at its worst when you claim that a carrot and a chicken are "worth the same" and that eating tomato rather than lamb because the tomato won't know the difference is "a horrible thing to say." I should think you spoke too zealously here; these claims were dead on arrival and I don't feel the need to address them.
Conversely, your argument is at its best when you speak of the integrity of the food chain ("continuity of life" as you put it), and of the historic precedent for eating meat. It is certainly true that many creatures out there have eaten meat, including humans. But are we hypocrites for reconsidering that practice now? No, we're not. What is happening is that the human species is coming into new forms of knowledge and awareness that are giving many of us a reason to doubt the prudence of eating meat. There is no shame in changing your mind after learning something new. The only shame, perhaps, was that you had made up your mind in the first place.
Humanity is now so far removed from the effects of natural selection on this planet that it would be silly to rationalize our dietary customs solely by the food chain. Our "role" in the food chain is like that of a centralized black hole into which all other living things vanish. If you defend the practice of eating meat simply because we have the skills to acquire meat and the anatomy to digest it, then you are selectively taking one piece of this issue and using it to make statements about the whole. The fact of our
ability to eat meat cannot by itself account for the full ramifications of our
actually doing it. We must also talk, as I said to Radical_Dreamer above, about the life experiences of which we are depriving the animals we consume, and also about the biodiversity of our world and the potential of its future.
Maddox is free to take potshots from his perch as a popular icon and stuff himself with as much meat as he likes. But people of good conscience must begin to wonder about the justifiability of consuming animals that are so similar to us. I wonder too, because I still eat meat. I eat it because it is tasty, plentiful, and inexpensive. It makes me feel good after I eat it. Growing fat by the flesh of animals is a pleasure that pulses in our very genes. But
none of that makes it right, and I do wonder about my practices. Remember this, Legend: As highly sentient creatures, we now have the means to be aware of every life we take. Let us kill with good cause.
And remember this as well: Someday, humans will seldom if ever eat meat. Which side of history do you want to be on?
Poll