Any Vegetarians/Vegans here?

[bennyboy]

If a carnivorous animal (be it a human, a lion or any other carnivore) wants to eat meat (or is nutritionally required to eat meat as obligate carnivores are, and it seems Rexbeccarox requires to maintain her health) than they shouldn't be forced not to eat meat.

Rexbeccarox's high emotional response to this issue aside, she didn't say she consulted a doctor or nutritionist, carefully studied the issue, and that she had an incredibly rare genetic requirement to eat meat rather than beans, tofu, flax, yeast, etc. etc. She said she quit eating meat, and quickly her health began to fail. Anecdotes are not a good substitution for actual nutritional education.

What if I kill another person and say, "Well, judge, apparently it's in my nature to kill others. That's just the way the world is." Would this work? Of course not!

That's not addressing my argument, it's also not an analogous example. I'm not saying that it's in the nature of animals to kill other animals indiscriminately so we should let all murders and psychopaths off the hook for killing their victims. We're talking about killing animals as a means feeding ourselves so your example should have read more like "If I kill a cow/goat/chicken/another human and say "Well, judge, apparently it's in my nature to kill others for food. That's just the way the world is."" You're conflating the intentions behind the argument - killing another person just because it's your nature to kill is not the same as killing another person so that you can eat them.

I'm saying that having something in one's nature is not necessarily sufficient reason for one to act on one's nature. Yes, people like to eat meat. No, it is not necessary for people to eat meat.

And what if someone said, "I killed that person because I'm poor and hungry, and they were the nearest available source of protein"? Would you then be okay with the suffering that act would cause? No. You have a stronger "Ewww icky" reaction to cannibalism than to eating a steak, I'm guessing. But that's an emotional reaction, not a logical one.

So if, like Raeven (back in post #100), everyone raised their own animals for slaughter, grass-fed them, let them roam free in their pastures and generally live a fantastic life except for the day they get slaughtered, would that meat be okay to eat? After all, they're not living a suffering life in horrible conditions, in fact they would be living a less-suffering life than a free-ranging wildebeest who gets killed and eaten by a lion. And if that meat is okay to eat, is it also okay to eat grass-fed, pasture-raised, humanely treated meat that was raised on a commercial farm? Or do you see this as a slippy slope argument where if you're okay eating meat you raise yourself than you're a mere slip of the foot away from careening down the slope to "fuck it, just eat the factory-farmed animals"?

I've argued that given current farming techniques, natural grassland-fed cattle would probably save lives and suffering, since industrial farming equipment would probably cause the loss of many lives of voles, birds, etc. So unless people REALLY care to save all lives, there's going to be some hypocrisy involved.

However, ultimately, the question for me remains this: should the umbrella of protection that we offer to other people (some of whom are distinctly less worthy of continuing to live, imo, than your average cow) also be extended to animals? Isn't the simple fact that organisms do not wish to die sufficient reason not to kill them? Conversely, if I could kill a person peacefully in his sleep for the purpose of eating him, would the lack of suffering in his death make it okay to kill them?

---

Oh, huh. I guess you're too short-sighted to find a question in my post, and too lazy to actually read it. I guess you missed the part where I have an allergy to nuts and that I was a very unhealthy vegetarian when I was one. Never mind, la ban. You go on with your bad self on this one. You are extremely closed-minded. Also, you can put me on ignore. It's fine. I don't really care if you read this or not.

Do you have an allergy to soy, to beans, to mushrooms, to yeast, and to milk as well?

I support your right to choose your lifestyle. If you want to eat meat, and are willing to accept the consequences of eating meat on other animals, I support that right, too.

However, plenty of vegetarian people have allergies and still have good nutrition. I can almost guarantee you that a good nutritionist (or someone who's good with Googling things) could get you ALL the nutrition you need, while still being wary of your personal allergies and dietary uniqueness.