RE: Childhood indoctrination
June 10, 2013 at 3:38 am
(This post was last modified: June 10, 2013 at 3:54 am by littleendian.)
(June 9, 2013 at 6:21 pm)Rhythm Wrote:I assume you're referring to the notion that animals get harmed when growing crops such as soy for human consumption. Still I hold there is a difference between (a) maximizing killing (and all too often also suffering) by producing meat and (b) defending ones crop production while trying to minimize the amount of suffering necessary to do so.(June 8, 2013 at 4:56 am)littleendian Wrote: Most tastes are acquired, there are excellent protein sources for vegans, and it's fun to do something different!
Not a single one of which eliminates any cruelty, inhumane treatment, or wholesale slaughter of animals both human and non.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you argue for a reduction of meat consumption, but you don't see a reason to cease it completely. Now it's been suggested by a UN report ("Livestocks long shadow", available here) that livestock production is a significant contributor to global warming and also contributes to other major environmental problems. The developing world today asks for more and more meat in their diet, and if they ever reach the levels we Westerners are eating today, this will have significant consequences for the environment, affecting us all and future generations.
How can we ask the third world not to do this to the planet if we're eating steak ourselves? I don't think it would be very convincing to say "Look, Ma, we're eating less" where "less" is not very well defined. Wouldn't it be much more convincing if we could say "Look, Ma, we don't eat it at all!"?
"Men see clearly enough the barbarity of all ages — except their own!" — Ernest Crosby.