|
|
|
|
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/25/2009 11:28:49 PM | Let's look at this from the standpoint of people incapable of moral agency; these might be children under two, the clinically insane, the severely retarded, etc. These people are temporarily or permanently incapable of fulfilling their moral obligation to others. For instance a two year old who comes across a loaded gun might easily kill self or others without malice, simply because he is following his "nature" to explore, manipulate, or play with interesting objects within his grasp. We do not hold the child accountable because we know that the child doesn't understand what he is doing.
Does the fact that the child is incapable of moral agency mean he ought to have no human rights? If so, then why aren't such people treated like animals, which similar to such people seem incapable of moral agency? We grant no such rights to animals, why should they be granted to people with that same limitation?Conversely, If we grant human rights to people incapable of moral agency, why do we not extend these same rights to other living organisms?
Anyone would grant that because we have a right to life, and must eat other life to sustain our own, necessity dictates that it is not immoral to grow, kill and eat food, but here again we run into a slippery slope. Is it any less moral to raise & kill cattle for food than say asparagus? I don't imagine anyone would argue that cows are no more "people-like" than asparagus; they appear to have some capacity for thought, for pain, for love and for other "people-like" traits than asparagus does, so if eating such meat is morally equivalent to eating plants, why do we consider it immoral to raise & kill people for meat? They could be slaughtered before reaching a point of moral agency, say at age one, so it would be no different than raising cattle for veal, so why the moral "prohibition" on it?
Assuming for the moment that it IS immoral to raise babies for meat for whatever reason, why does that reason not extend to cattle that we DO raise for meat? If we grant "human" rights to people incapable of moral agency, why do we not extend those same rights to animals, which also suffer from that little shortcoming?
Many of us criticize vegans and PETA. In fact PETA is practically considered a terrorist organization because it stands in opposition to our society's position on animal rights. Nevertheless, I find their position to be ethically consistent with the premise of respect for all life. They are therefore being authentic and more moral than our society, so why are they considered "nutjobs" and "terrorists" by the bulk of society? My suspicion is that they force us to look at our own morality and point out the hypocrisy of it. Since we don't want to consider ourselves hypocrites, we find a need to discredit them so we won't have to listen.
Personally, I find it much easier to admit to my immorality and lack of authenticity, than to lie to myself. I will never proclaim that decent, ethical people, fighting a just cause for animal rights, are "terrorists" out to destroy our way of life; I know better; do you? | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/25/2009 11:44:40 PM | I wont call them nut jobs as I had no ideas who they where before reading this post but I still want to eat my burgers...
We are animals, no more no less than cows and such but cannibalism isn't even a rule amongst carnivores. Many animals who eat meat will not eat their own.
Humans have resorted to cannibalism in the past and may again.
I do not consider it immoral to eat meat as I do not consider it immoral for a lion to eat a gazelle.
I would say that my point of view may seem different than that of PETA from what I read in your post but to each their own. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 12:12:34 AM | >>>In fact PETA is practically considered a terrorist organization because it stands in opposition to our society's position on animal rights.
Uhhh.....thats not my stance on them. I oppose PeTA because PeTA supports and endorses violent acts to terrorize society. I have little problems with what they represent- but I oppose their actions | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 12:21:18 AM |
I do not consider it immoral to eat meat as I do not consider it immoral for a lion to eat a gazelle.
A lion is a "prisoner" of his nature. He doesn't consider whether or not what he's doing is moral or not, he simply gets hungry, kills and eats some prey and sustains himself. His digestive tract isn't even designed for fruit & grain (So much for ever lying down with the lamb!) What he does is a matter of necessity (he has to do it to survive), so even if the lion had a conscience and regretted killing his prey, he could still do no other and therefore what he does is not in the least immoral even if he had moral agency.
People are different from most animals in that we have a sense of what is fair and unfair, a sense of justice that tries to level the playing field. A part of this is an innate desire to not inflict unnecessary suffering on others. People can live on vegetables only. We don't have to eat higher animals to survive; we do it as a matter of choice, but when we stop to think about it, there is some part of almost everyone that would wish killing Bambi wasn't necessary to enjoy a nice steak. Moreover, it may not be as tasty, but by eating vegetables, we don't have to kill Bambi to survive and therefore don't have to cause an animal to suffer in order to survive. We therefore inflict needless suffering on an animal only because it tastes better. (a matter of preference, rather than necessity).
If we consider ourselves moral beings, how do we rationalize the hypocrisy of inflicting needless suffering on an animal simply because it's delicious? | |
|
| |
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 12:33:35 AM |
PeTA supports and endorses violent acts to terrorize society.
I haven't really looked into PETA's activities to any extent. I just found the existence of the organization and what it stands for useful for my argument. I was unaware of any "terrorist" activities beyond freeing animals (Which I consider might be misguided in some cases - it would be like breaking into a daycare centre and letting the kids out to play in traffic). I considered the reason they were considered terrorists was because like the "abolitionists" before them they are willing to fight the "slave owners". I consider the way our society treats animals to be little different than the days when people could own people and deny them their human rights. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 12:54:41 AM | I guess we have more choices than the lion and you are making me reconsider my previous point of view... I will still eat some hot dogs tomorrow but still... It would become easier to safeguard wildlife, animals could live happier lives...
It is in our instincts to eat meat though or we wouldn't be doing it... | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 1:07:37 AM |
It is in our instincts to eat meat though or we wouldn't be doing it...
If we are creatures of instinct, then any claim we make to moral agency is likely false and we are no "better" than the animals whose rights we regularly deny, no? Man is considered the "reasoning animal" in that our "claim to fame" is our ability to rise above instinct and engage in moral behaviour. If we remain creatures of instinct, that claim to fame is a false one. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 1:22:01 AM | Claims of "moral" superiority of the rational human are false. Most of our behavior is not based on rational thought , we give ourselves far too much credit.We are a mixture what we say and how we actually behave are often in conflict with one another.
Acting out of "instinct" appears to bear a negative conotation.I would argue that to totally ignore instinct or repress instinct,or pretend we are above instinct is not healthy or realistic.We need to accept who we really are.......animals like the rest. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 1:24:14 AM |
Many of us criticize vegans and PETA. In fact PETA is practically considered a terrorist organization because it stands in opposition to our society's position on animal rights. Nevertheless, I find their position to be ethically consistent with the premise of respect for all life. They are therefore being authentic and more moral than our society, so why are they considered "nutjobs" and "terrorists" by the bulk of society? My suspicion is that they force us to look at our own morality and point out the hypocrisy of it. Since we don't want to consider ourselves hypocrites, we find a need to discredit them so we won't have to listen.
PETA is practically considered a Terrorist group, and a bunch of nutjobs, because that is practically what they are. Not for their beliefs of animal rights. PETAA is so rediculous in its acertations that a high ranking officer stated in an interview that guidedogs for the blind was a cruel practice....Are we on planet earth here? PETA maintains a technically PC outershell, while its members and supporting sister/brother organizations carry out violent acts which it supports behind closed doors.
PETA is a nutjob factory because they take extremist views, and condone viloent acts, and likely although unproven as of yet (at least so far as I know of) plan and finance these acts whether directly or indirectly. Example: Johnny gives bobby 10 bucks to beat up billy. While boby may be guilty of beating up billy, billy would have never gotten a black eye if Johnny had not payed bobby to do it. Nearly every ALF attack that has taken place, has been found to have the members also be members of PETA.
Then again, maybe its all just a big misunderstanding, and PETA are angels...NOT. Terrorists and Nutjobs describes them well enough for me. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 2:28:12 AM | No, and neither are people who disguise their own views by coming at a subject obliquely...
whats moral about assault? does defending animals make you less of one? do you like your steak rare?
humans are funny.. running around their planetary cage ,
flinging poo and forgetting to duck
arguing over who has better hallucinations
making it criminal to seek a few
wearing funny wrappers and getting upset if anyone laughs
in public
we climb all over each other trying to prove superiority
by making it to the top of the pile
maybe you can feel better about what you put on your plate
but lets not lose sight of the blindness of every fork and spoon
in someone else's hand .. is this your big chance to leap ahead?
keeping score isnt easy when we are all involved in different games
its aggravating to strike out in soccer , score from a cop
or fuel your being with the wrong protein...
if all you know of morals and ethics can be found in your diet
then controlling yourself should be as simple as
shutting your own mouth
or is the real thrill in controlling others? | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 7:24:15 AM | Ah yes, the hypocrisy.
Cows, chickens, pigs are crammed in to pens for their entire lives where they in many cases can’t turn around. They are tortured then slaughtered by the millions, and end up as tiny little morsels on the shelf of the grocery store---- Dogs and cats are pampered, and treated far better than the homeless. If someone hurts a dog or cat, society is up in arms, and the perpetrator is fined and in many cases jailed.
Eating meat is a lifestyle choice. Animal torture is done for lifestyle choice.
PETA is accused of many things,(many of which are not true) by the giant meat lobby, who don’t want anyone to know that the food on their plate is produced through torture of sentient beings.
No issue brings out the hypocrisy in humans than animal rights. People will go to great lengths to justify supporting the factory farming industry. You are beginning to see some of the comments.
- Animals don’t feel pain
- We are meant to eat meat
- Survival of the fittest, and we are the fittest.
- God gave us animals to use as we see fit.
- Who really gives a sh*t, we only live once, and if animals are tortured and the world is destroyed, who cares, I will be dead.
- Lions kill, so why can’t we.
- Factory farms are the most efficient way to feed ourselves.
- Meat tastes good. So what if the animals are tortured.
Dukky raises some good points.
If we are concerned with efficiency and feeding the planet, why don’t we grind up (render) dead humans and feed them to the cows and pigs so they can then feed us?
After all, meat is meat. We feed cows to cows, pigs to pigs, and pigs to cows, What is wrong with throwing human meat in the batch. Think of all the graveyards that would become obsolete and maybe turned into parkland, ,,or more factory farms.
Third world countries could become a great source of protein for humans, or feedstock for factory farms. What a waste. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 7:53:29 AM |
If we are concerned with efficiency and feeding the planet, why don’t we grind up (render) dead humans and feed them to the cows and pigs so they can then feed us?
After all, meat is meat. We feed cows to cows, pigs to pigs, and pigs to cows, What is wrong with throwing human meat in the batch. Think of all the graveyards that would become obsolete and maybe turned into parkland, ,,or more factory farms.
Third world countries could become a great source of protein for humans, or feedstock for factory farms. What a waste.
NO meat is not just meat...
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), commonly known as mad-cow disease
A British inquiry into BSE (Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, March 2007. ) concluded that the epidemic was caused by cattle, who are normally herbivores, being fed the remains of other cattle in the form of meat and bone meal (MBM), which caused the infectious agent to spread.
If you were to grind up humans into the food chain you would contain every human disease and transmit it to everyone on the planet within a few generations, like the 6 degrees of separation, 1 person ground up would go on to feed 200, those 200 would go on to feed 40,000 and so on | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 8:09:45 AM | BSE is transmitted mainly through the brain and spinal column, which is no longer used to feed other cows. No other diseases can be spread through eating human meat as long as it is prepared properly just like pork.
Cows may have at one time been herbivores, but now thanks to factory farming, are omnivores. More like Frankencows.
Speaking of frankencows, have you ever visited a dairy farm? | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 8:33:55 AM | 'transcend'..//humans are funny....running around their planetary cage, flinging poo and forgetting to duck//
As your message highlights in a bleak way, the world is (for lack of better words) f**ked up..... With a less bleak prognosis of it, I would suggest that it is not beyond repair.
'transcend'..//does defending animals make you less of one?//
....no...it makes me a more caring one.
'transcend'..//do you like your steak rare?//
....yes, I am a hypocrite... The first step to the road of correcting ones own wrong behaviour is 'admitting' that your own behaviour is wrong..... I like a rare steak with some fava beans and a nice cianti... Tchtchtchtchtchtchtch.
I eat meat... I think it is wrong for me to eat animals. I am primitive and instictive in that sense. I am a 'bad' monkey.
What you and your bleakness should understand 'transcend', is that the world, the technology in it, the people and their primitive attitudes to life may be very different in tomorrows world.
You should look to that possible future and not be content with wallowing in the present. I wouldn't hold my breath for such a future... But I can visualize it and hope for it......
Like Dukky does. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 8:34:43 AM |
BSE is transmitted mainly through the brain and spinal column, which is no longer used to feed other cows. No other diseases can be spread through eating human meat as long as it is prepared properly just like pork.
BSE attacks the brain and spinal column, it is transmitted by contamination, ie. by eating tissue infected by BSE. Cooking it will NOT destroy BSE, so no amount of 'preparation' will suffice.
A cow is a herbivore and they still are, we don't get many herds of cows roaming the countryside here looking for a big mac. Much of the practice of feeding cows to cows has been banned. Other forms of protein are fed to them now like soya.
A fankencow, that would be a combination of different parts of a cow's stiched together. Hardly an analogy and you were critical of peoples comments and terminology.
What you have to conside is that we need cheap food and lots of it. There are well over 6 billion people on this planet, soon to be 9. For the masses, factory farming will be the only viable option...we already have millions of children left to starve, would you prefer billions.
My Auntie owns a dairy farm in Wales | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 9:13:50 AM | I disagree with almost every contention in your post OP. This is starting to seem a bit like preaching.  Do you feel shame when you swat a fly or step on an ant? Does PETA? How about the microscopic bugs you're constantly killing...don't they also deserve the right to life and liberty? BTW, I don't pretend to disagree with these kind of ideas to make myself feel better about eating animals as you seem to believe everyone does. I feel perfectly fine about eating animals. It's natural.  | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 9:22:39 AM |
BSE attacks the brain and spinal column, it is transmitted by contamination, ie. by eating tissue infected by BSE. Cooking it will NOT destroy BSE, so no amount of 'preparation' will suffice.
Scientists believe that BSE is transmitted through cattle eating animal feed that has been contaminated with the BSE disease agent. The source of contamination is infected neural tissue such as brain, spinal cord and part of the intestine from BSE-affected cattle. Not meat.
Cattle are still fed meat. Just not brains and spinal columns.
What you have to conside is that we need cheap food and lots of it. There are well over 6 billion people on this planet, soon to be 9. For the masses, factory farming will be the only viable option...we already have millions of children left to starve, would you prefer billions.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the run-off from factory farms pollutes our waterways more than all other industrial sources combined
From the worldwatch institute: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1770
· The US meat industry produced some 1.4 billion tons of waste in 1997— five tons of animal waste for every US citizen. (USDA)
· Current farming practices cause about 70% of the pollution in the nation's rivers and streams. (EPA)
· Approximately 70% of all antibiotics in the U.S. are fed to healthy pigs and poultry to promote growth and compensate for crowded, unsanitary conditions found on factory farms. (Union of Concerned Scientists)
· It takes over 600 gallons of water to produce meat for an average quarter pound hamburger.
· The livestock population of the U.S. is fed enough grain and soybeans each year to feed the entire human population five times over.
· It takes two to four times more land to feed an average meat-eating American than a vegetarian.
I would say that the only way for humanity to survive is if we quit eating meat.
My Auntie owns a dairy farm in Wales
Not sure about your Anties farm, but Dairy cattle raised in factories are not like cows at all. They have such large udders they can hardly walk, They look nothing like their predessors. They are force fed hormones to keep them producing milk which is so hard on their bodies they are useless as meat, and have to be rendered and fed to other animals or other cows. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 9:34:34 AM |
I disagree with almost every contention in your post OP. This is starting to seem a bit like preaching. Do you feel shame when you swat a fly or step on an ant? Does PETA? How about the microscopic bugs you're constantly killing...don't they also deserve the right to life and liberty? BTW, I don't pretend to disagree with these kind of ideas to make myself feel better about eating animals as you seem to believe everyone does. I feel perfectly fine about eating animals. It's natural.
See my previous post
no issue brings out the hypocrisy in humans than animal rights. People will go to great lengths to justify supporting the factory farming industry. You are beginning to see some of the comments.
- Animals don’t feel pain
- We are meant to eat meat
- Survival of the fittest, and we are the fittest.
- God gave us animals to use as we see fit.
- Who really gives a sh*t, we only live once, and if animals are tortured and the world is destroyed, who cares, I will be dead.
- Lions kill, so why can’t we.
- Factory farms are the most efficient way to feed ourselves.
- Meat tastes good. So what if the animals are tortured.
- I kill flies, and bacteria, and plants, so why not animals
- Its natural
I added a couple to the list for you cyke. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 9:39:34 AM | Our greed (never ending quest for greater profits) is pushing us to create environments that are unsanitary and unethical for our food. I am equally appalled at what we are doing to plants (mono-cultures, blind genetic manipulation, pesticides and herbicides) as I am regarding meat (over crowding, anti-biotic, hormones...).
There are serious problems to business as usual. Really humanity is experiencing a spiritual crisis. Is profit really our highest calling? | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 10:00:38 AM |
I would say that the only way for humanity to survive is if we quit eating meat.
What a silly extremist statement. 
I added a couple to the list for you cyke.
You don't (and couldn't possibly) speak for me so don't pretend to. Thank you. I see lots of hypocrisy but not on my part.
- Animals don’t feel pain - Never said that, don't believe it
- We are meant to eat meat - true
- Survival of the fittest, and we are the fittest. - also true
- God gave us animals to use as we see fit. - god doesn't exist
- Who really gives a sh*t, we only live once, and if animals are tortured and the world is destroyed, who cares, I will be dead. - this is just silly
- Lions kill, so why can’t we. - ok
- Factory farms are the most efficient way to feed ourselves. - never said that
- Meat tastes good. So what if the animals are tortured. - never said that
- I kill flies, and bacteria, and plants, so why not animals - sure
- Its natural - I believe I did say that and it is true
Are vegans and PETA more moral than society at large? Hell no! Are they extremist hypocrites? Hell yes! You want to live on salad like a rabbit, be my guest. You want to run around with your heart bleeding about "some' animals rights, help yourself. You want to try to stop me from eating meat...maybe you'll be supper.  | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 10:02:15 AM |
Cattle are still fed meat. Just not brains and spinal columns.
They can be fed meat or protein but not from cows, sheep or goats. This has been banned from 1997. There is a loop hole that they can be fed chicken and chickens can be fed to cows.
Most of what you are quoting there is just bad practice. Yes you could feed the population 5 times over with just grain and soya, but they would soon be dead as that isn't enough to create a balanced diet. Anyone who 'claims' to be a vegan and lives in the city is full of sh!t. There is no way that your food has been produced without the use of animals or their products. Just because it didn't pass your lips doesn't mean to say it wasnt killed so that something else could pass your lips. That waste you refer to, thats fertiliser where I come from. Either use that to produce your crops (5 times over) or dig up loads of coal to produce fertiliser, your choice. Currently 40% of fertilisers are made from natural gas which will soon run out! The trouble with crops is they are seasonal, meat isn't. One failed crop and millions will stare, 5 million were reported to have starved or went missing in Ireland because of the potato blight. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 10:27:04 AM | 'Cyke'..//Do you feel shame when you swat a fly or step on an ant//
It's got everything to do with empathy. People have it in unbelievable varying degrees.
Me?.. I like empathy. I think empathy is a decent feeling.
If I step on an ant for no reason other than to kill it because it is infront of me then I am callous. I personally never do this. If I call in an exterminator to kill hunderds of ants it is:-
(1)Because they are taking over my kitchen and I can't reason with them nor afford the time to coax the army away from my home.
(2)I have never been capable of a sustained attack of stamping the ground and killing them as they dart about (shudder)... I knew someone once who saw no proplems with jamming a screwdiver through the heads of frogs and holding them up to his face to watch them wriggle and die.... The way he treated tiny animals wasn't very nice. Empathy evaded him completely.
My empathetic boundary can be overstepped. I'm not proud of it. If I were the size of an ant I would hope for better treatment by a caring top dog.
Only one scenario turns me into a thoughtless killer.... Spiders in my bedroom. I have an irrational phobia. I don't think properly when confronted with the jerky movement of the unpredictable swines :)
Edit: Having said all of that... If I lived in the wild, I would have no qualms about catching and slaughtering a deer in order to feed myself and my family. If we were hungry, I would kill it as quickly as my tools or hands would allow. I would wear it's skin and be grateful for it's contribution to my survival. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 10:48:52 AM |
Do you feel shame when you swat a fly or step on an ant?
Yes I do, if I do it deliberately and with malice aforethought. These are living things with as much of a right to life as we have.. I no longer kill & torture animals except out of habit, ignorance and/or necessity. I instinctively swat mosquitos & flies and admit I don't feel too bad about it if I've been "attacked" first, and I don't pay too much attention to the ground I walk on, so I'm sure I step on the occassional ant without realizing it. However, my basic philosophy now is mainly live & let live. I don't kill deliberately except in self defence.
How about the microscopic bugs you're constantly killing...don't they also deserve the right to life and liberty?
Actually, yes, but the practical reality of it is such that harming or killing of necessity, or out of complete ignorance (too small to see) is not immoral.
I feel perfectly fine about eating animals. It's natural.
Then you should be OK with soylent green too, or would you prefer the more natural product? There are societies that eat people as a matter of their nature. Are you OK with that? (to be ethically consistent you should be)
In my own case, I eat meat too, but recognize that I am not being ethically consistent in doing so, unless I agree that people incapable of moral agency (like babies, the severely retarded & insane) ought to have no rights either and can be eaten, enslaved, or destroyed as we see fit. | |
|
| Are vegans and PETA more moral and ethical than society?
Posted: 8/26/2009 11:09:12 AM | I'm a member of PETA...the other PETA. People Eating Tasty Animals. Our motto: "There's a place for all of God's creatures. Right between the peas and mashed potatoes."
Seriously, though, we're arguing different things. If you're opposed to eating meat, then don't eat meat. Are there more "humane" means of raising animals for meat/protein/material? Absolutely.
Does that make PETA more ethical because of their opposition? Absolutely not, although I'm certain they would think they are. From what I've seen, their capacity for self-righteousness is unsurpassed.
Tell ya' what. How about rather than have PETA wasting its time protesting and throwing paint on people wearing furs and generally looking like a bunch of nutters, why don't they try something a little more practical? How about concentrate on projects that increase and reclaim land for agriculture? How about working on ways of improving crop yields? Reducing crop loss to disease and pests? Then they can reduce the need for meat.
Of course, I'm still and always will appreciate a nice tasty piece of cow. | |
|
|
| Page 1 of 14
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 |
|
Home
login 
