Food & Animals

[Monkey]

I totally agree with what sinewav and Lucifer are saying about human slave labour.

Also, I would especially like to know Light's opinion on what he believes animals should be given in order that one may say they have a good quality of life. Of course some animals that are raised for consumption don't have a good quality of life before they are slaughtered, however, certainly here in the UK, there are farms (I've been to some myself) that give their animals what I consider to be a good quality of life. The animals have plenty of space, shelter, food, clean water and the company of other animals of the same species to mix with.

[Lucifer]

I totally agree with what sinewav and Lucifer are saying about human slave labour.

Also, I would especially like to know Light's opinion on what he believes animals should be given in order that one may say they have a good quality of life. Of course some animals that are raised for consumption don't have a good quality of life before they are slaughtered, however, certainly here in the UK, there are farms (I've been to some myself) that give their animals what I consider to be a good quality of life. The animals have plenty of space, shelter, food, clean water and the company of other animals of the same species to mix with.

There's also the question of "What is your endgame?" When you reach your goal of having no more animal product consumption, what do you do with the animals themselves? Some have been bred for thousands of years (chickens, pigs) to provide food and are not capable of surviving in the wild. Even cattle won't do so well, with the european varieties also having been bred for food for thousands of years. I believe Texas longhorns were native to the area, but were also bred for food for at least hundreds of years (the US Western cattle-ranching culture actually originated with the Mexica people and their allies, whom you might recognize as Aztecs, and were assimilated into Spanish-American culture. The agricultural foundation of the civilization remained the same until white people brought in actual slaves to Texas).

I've long maintained that the only reason cattle, chickens, pigs, goats, and sheep haven't gone extinct is because they're food. Once they're not food, those species will go straight into extinction, or we will spend several hundred years at least breeding them back to the kind of shape where they might survive in the wild, and then controlling their populations just like we do with deer, mustangs, and other current wild animals. Likewise, bison populations are on the rise because they're being bred for food. Before that effort started, conservation efforts were failing and the poor things were on the edge of extinction. (Yes, I realize white people genocided bison to starve out the natives in the 19th century)

So, what are you going to do with the food animals when they're not food anymore? What humane solution do you have in mind?

[Word]

Heh, at this point we didn't even bring up what it means for us if plants can feel pain and have a memory and whether contributing to the death of a pig every month is better or worse than being responsible for the death of thousands of unsuspecting (?) soy beans. Granted, animals eat those plants too, but it's worth to keep that in mind.

[Light]

Heh, at this point we didn't even bring up what it means for us if plants can feel pain and have a memory and whether contributing to the death of a pig every month is better or worse than being responsible for the death of thousands of unsuspecting (?) soy beans. Granted, animals eat those plants too, but it's worth to keep that in mind.

Though it hasn't been proven, and is very likely they are not sentient, directly eating plants causes less plant deaths as well. So, regardless of how bad that argument may be, it still fails.

Lucifer, if you want to include the murder of sentient beings in your definition of ethical, there's not really much I could say to you then. That is quite a bit different than what most people feel is ethical though.

So, what are you going to do with the food animals when they're not food anymore? What humane solution do you have in mind?

That's a terrible argument for not stopping. Because the current animals will mostly all end up dying (even though they would probably continue to use the rest of their "stock"), means we should continue to breed more and cause the deaths of billions yearly? Nothing would ever get done if we just did nothing because we didn't have a flawless answer to an issue, even when it's tons better than what's currently there. You basically seem to think that because we've made things so bad for them, we should just continue making it worse.

As I've already said. The point is not to completely rid of harm in the world. As nice as that would be, I'm not ignorant enough to expect it. It's to rid of the unnecessary harm. You've already said you consider it to be ethical though, so I guess torture, murder, rape, etc. is meaningless to you.

And if you really want to argue from the point of environmental effects, you should do some research into what animal agriculture does to our planet. Your comments about cars falls short when all combined transportation puts out less greenhouse gasses than animal agriculture. Almost one and a half times as much. We're also seeing improvements in this area, while not much of anything is being done about the bigger issue.

[Word]

Heh, at this point we didn't even bring up what it means for us if plants can feel pain and have a memory and whether contributing to the death of a pig every month is better or worse than being responsible for the death of thousands of unsuspecting (?) soy beans. Granted, animals eat those plants too, but it's worth to keep that in mind.

Though it hasn't been proven, and is very likely they are not sentient, directly eating plants causes less plant deaths as well. So, regardless of how bad that argument may be, it still fails.

You again didn't think that through to the end, did you? If we all become vegetarians and don't eat plant-eating animals, would you want to be a plant? But it would be funny to see whether some crazy movement of meat eaters would rise and claim that its followers are morally superior.

[Light]

You again didn't think that through to the end, did you? If we all become vegetarians and don't eat plant-eating animals, would you want to be a plant? But it would be funny to see whether some crazy movement of meat eaters would rise and claim that its followers are morally superior.

I guess we'll cross that bridge when there's evidence to worry about it. The point though, was that eating plant-eating animals causes us to go through a much larger supply of plants than eating them directly would. It would also save on water.

[Word]

If we stay in the scenario of your endgame, don't you think the animals that have just been saved from death row still need food and water?

[Light]

If we stay in the scenario of your endgame, don't you think the animals that have just been saved from death row still need food and water?

As previously stated, it would be unlikely the current farms wouldn't use up the rest of their animals. It may be the case that a very small percentage would be saved by sanctuaries and pets, but I'm aware the vast majority would die. The point though is that we would stop breeding more and more for the purpose of slaughter. In a short time, the resources put towards them would be widely available for a number of other things.

[Lucifer]

Though it hasn't been proven, and is very likely they are not sentient, directly eating plants causes less plant deaths as well. So, regardless of how bad that argument may be, it still fails.

Lucifer, if you want to include the murder of sentient beings in your definition of ethical, there's not really much I could say to you then. That is quite a bit different than what most people feel is ethical though.

I don't, that's why I don't eat any of the great apes.

And I'm finding it hilarious that you're making an appeal to the masses to support an argument to not eat meat when you know damn well the masses eat meat and vegans are a small minority, so not only are you invoking a logical fallacy, but it's a complete failure.

So, what are you going to do with the food animals when they're not food anymore? What humane solution do you have in mind?

That's a terrible argument for not stopping. Because the current animals will mostly all end up dying (even though they would probably continue to use the rest of their "stock"), means we should continue to breed more and cause the deaths of billions yearly? Nothing would ever get done if we just did nothing because we didn't have a flawless answer to an issue, even when it's tons better than what's currently there. You basically seem to think that because we've made things so bad for them, we should just continue making it worse.

It's not an argument for not stopping. As I've previously stated, I have no ethical problems with raising animals for food. None whatsoever. I have problems with animals being treated cruelly, but you know what? These animals actually have a purpose in life. Many 20-something humans have no idea what to do with their lives, but these animals had a purpose since they were born. Their lives are relatively simple and end with meaning. That's a much better life than most people have.

In any case, you're argument can be simplified to "Let's genocide one more time, then our hands will be clean". I realize that may count as the reductio ad absurdum fallacy (or whatever it's called), and I'm not trying to do that.

As I've already said. The point is not to completely rid of harm in the world. As nice as that would be, I'm not ignorant enough to expect it. It's to rid of the unnecessary harm. You've already said you consider it to be ethical though, so I guess torture, murder, rape, etc. is meaningless to you.

False equivalency. Eating animals isn't the same thing as torturing or raping. I guess you missed the part where I said something about not abusing animals.

I guess it could be considered murder, except I didn't eat the last person I killed.

And if you really want to argue from the point of environmental effects, you should do some research into what animal agriculture does to our planet. Your comments about cars falls short when all combined transportation puts out less greenhouse gasses than animal agriculture. Almost one and a half times as much. We're also seeing improvements in this area, while not much of anything is being done about the bigger issue.

Wait, what? Animal agriculture is something that can, and often does, happen in areas where we can't use the land for anything else. Sure, there's greenhouse gasses involved, and raising animals currently takes more oil than plants, but that's something that can change. Even so, there are vital nutrients we can't get from plants that we can only get from animals at this time, so it's an environmental cost, just like lead in chinese rivers is an environmental cost to sustain our western lifestyles.

I'm quite in favor of lab meat, to be honest. And they're almost to a point where they can grow meat without dealing with the whole ethical dilemma that vegans raise at a cost that'll rival what you can buy in the stores now. But you don't really see people going for that, do you? Hell, people are still so afraid of GMOs that you know they won't touch lab meat.

So here's a question for you. Will you eat lab meat?

[Light]

And I'm finding it hilarious that you're making an appeal to the masses to support an argument to not eat meat when you know damn well the masses eat meat and vegans are a small minority, so not only are you invoking a logical fallacy, but it's a complete failure.

Only when you ignore what I said and make up your own idea of what I said. Most people don't go as far as you to think it's a good thing animals go through what they do for food. I never said most people don't consume it.

It's not an argument for not stopping. As I've previously stated, I have no ethical problems with raising animals for food. None whatsoever. I have problems with animals being treated cruelly, but you know what? These animals actually have a purpose in life. Many 20-something humans have no idea what to do with their lives, but these animals had a purpose since they were born. Their lives are relatively simple and end with meaning. That's a much better life than most people have.

I guess slavery was good too then. Black people were born for a purpose. Yeah, they got treated like shit, but it benefited their owners.

In any case, you're argument can be simplified to "Let's genocide one more time, then our hands will be clean". I realize that may count as the reductio ad absurdum fallacy (or whatever it's called), and I'm not trying to do that.

No, but I'm not going to put any hope in the world all stopping at once. It's just not going to happen. It would happen gradually if it did, so it's really a pointless thing to talk about in the first place. I just entertained the thought of "what if".

False equivalency. Eating animals isn't the same thing as torturing or raping. I guess you missed the part where I said something about not abusing animals.

I guess it could be considered murder, except I didn't eat the last person I killed.

Of course not. It's paying someone to do it for you.

Wait, what? Animal agriculture is something that can, and often does, happen in areas where we can't use the land for anything else. Sure, there's greenhouse gasses involved, and raising animals currently takes more oil than plants, but that's something that can change. Even so, there are vital nutrients we can't get from plants that we can only get from animals at this time, so it's an environmental cost, just like lead in chinese rivers is an environmental cost to sustain our western lifestyles.

Actually, we're constantly taking out our forests for land to raise animals and grow crops to feed them. They're one of the leading causes of it, and take up about 30% of the world's land. It takes over 15 lbs of grain to end up with 1 lbs of beef. I'm pretty sure you can see how much of a difference we could make there.

I'm quite in favor of lab meat, to be honest. And they're almost to a point where they can grow meat without dealing with the whole ethical dilemma that vegans raise at a cost that'll rival what you can buy in the stores now. But you don't really see people going for that, do you? Hell, people are still so afraid of GMOs that you know they won't touch lab meat.

I don't know enough about the process to say I'm either in favor or against it. The idea in the way they put it out seems a bit over simplified. It will also change greatly when (or if) it goes into mass production. I assume they're still using animals, but regardless, it's definitely a step in the right direction. It would make a huge difference if it became the norm.

On the other hand, China has taken things to a new level by wanting to use cloned animals. I don't know if it takes out any of the damage done by "normal" animal agriculture, but I don't believe it's a big thing over there at the moment, so it's just adding to the current issues. Of course, they get heat over the ethics of using cloned animals, or cloning animals for that purpose, but I don't see how that's the real issue. If anything, the only real difference is unknown health effects, but this is gonna be off topic so, I'll avoid dropping into this. Especially since I haven't researched too much into it yet.

So here's a question for you. Will you eat lab meat?

Probably not. Even if it were to pass my idea of ethical, I no longer crave or feel any want to consume meat. I don't even really eat processed vegan food. I guess we'd have to wait and see though when the time comes that everything is a little more ready. I just don't imagine wanting it, but I may not object to it. Like I said though, it seems a much (stressed "much") better method than what we currently have, and a huge step in the reduction of animal use.

[ConVicT]

Was just reminded of this

[Monkey]

@Light

You didn't respond earlier so I'll rephrase what I said as a question:

What do you believe animals should be given in order that one may say they have (or have had) a good quality of life?

Also, the environmental issues you bring up are not simply due to raising/farming animals for human consumption. Humans have been doing this for an exceptionally long time. They exist because:

1) Some of our current farming methods could be improved.
2) Most importantly, the planet's population is rediculously large now; we need to reduce it drastically.

[ConVicT]

A good quality bitch.
I had a dog, he wouldn't even eat if he could smell it in the air.

As long's an animal gets the chance to breed before gettin' ate, it's prolly had a good life compared to gettin' ate before you cam walk properly -_-

[Lucifer]

Damn, Light, I had a whole response written that I saved on my clipboard, but it seems to have been lost. My so-called smart clipboard lost it. I'll come back to this in a bit, hopefully. I'm actually losing interest in this topic and getting more interested in the election topic, because, you know, it's election year, and I'm a junkie.

[FRAGILE]

I JUST ate TAcoS! oooey gooey butter drenched lightly over golden brown ground beef frying nicely in a pan sprinkled with taco seasoning the spicy kind but you cant taste the spicy it just says it on the package its like a 95 cent one you kNOW! what im tyalking about and then i really wanted to use crunchy taco shells but all i had was soft tortias SO i Put it in the soft totias with a spoon and drenched the left over meat jusices infuzed with taco seasoning lightly over the meat but not on the totia so as not to get it wet and soggy and then !!!!!! I CHOPPED! UP A TOMATO ! A cold tomato and then i CHOPPED UP an onion and then i CHOPPED UP a peice of cilantro .. im kidding :p they were all ready chopped up when i got them i spoon fet the hungry tortia the pico degaio from a plastic tub and then i ripped a block of cheese with my hands because i didnt have a grinder and no body else was going to be eating what i was making and then i rolled it all up twice! but before i did I PUT SOUR CREAM in there with a spoon a different spoon then the one i used to scoop out the tomatos onions and cilantro AND then i Rolled it up twice and then i sat down and took a bite it tatsed just like i thought it would and even better then it would have if i would have used the crunchy taco shells that i did not have and then i had some JUMEX (a great part of a heathy diety you should drink som every day any day to sart your day or end you day ){btw the Guanabana nectar JUMEX smells like fruity perfume and taste like shampoo I REPEAT SMELLS LIKE FRUITY PERFUME AND TASTE LIKE SHAMPOOO omg you guys have to try it 75 cent a can look it up nO! ill post a pic !!! BUT no i had STRAW BErry BANNA JUMEX and it was good THEn i put a spicy italian SAUSAGE INT HE OVEN FOR 15 minutes ad then i let it cool down in till it shrivled up and then i ATE IT ! and then i OPENED my MANGO JUMEX and STARTED TO DRINK IT wait i had pomograted juice withthe tacos nvm but it was the expencive kind the same company that make the crannberry juice that makes you poop water and you have to add sugar to it because its straight cranberrys but i dont BECAUSE I LIKE THE TART TASTE AND I LIKE TO EAT HEALTHY ! tommorrow i AM gonna make a cup of CAYENE pepper WATER to start my DAY off with .