If eating meat is unethical, why is it ok to kill babies?

[antifreeze]

You are only thinking of one idea of the Christian god. You ignore other religions.

you are correct, yet i am attempting to reconcile the apparent disconnect between the two beliefs which many of roman's acquaintances seem to hold and i had assumed they were christians [if they had any religious leanings whatsoever]. however, since it was brought up, are there religions in which animals are indeed possessed of souls? and if such a religion exists, does the society which practices it eat meat regardless? are there strictly vegetarian societies? i will ask that you forgive my ignorance, as i have forgotten the majority of my studies of other religions.

And yet, we are not allowed to kill newborn human children. That is considered murder, even though the children "cannot defend themselves against our weaponry".

This is a clear double-standard, wouldn't you say?

perhaps, yet were humans not so thoroughly enveloped within society, there would be nothing to stop us from killing our offspring - i hear it is not an uncommon occurrence among lions at least - the point being that humans have created for themselves a world of laws. therefore, we all sacrifice some of our rights [killing babies, say] to assure that a similar exertion of another's rights should not befall us. i still hold, however, that these rights are in fact illusory, and that many ethical standards are without practical meaning. as you said, they are but lines drawn arbitrarily.

 

[Oniw17]

Hinduism believes that animals have souls, at least I think, since your soul can be reincarnated into an animal. Also, lions rarely, if ever kill their own offspring, it is the offspring of other males which they kill.

 

[c7ityi_]

Killing unborn babies is more right than killing animals because they are less conscious. But it isn't a good thing to kill unborn babies, it should only be done when no other option is. Killing animals is unethical too, and should only be done when necessary.

Because babies will grow up to be even dumber and evil human beings that kill more animals. It's logical.

All humans aren't dumb and evil.

Hinduism believes that animals have souls, at least I think, since your soul can be reincarnated into an animal.

It hardly ever happens though. Evolution doesn't go backwards.

 

[q0101]

Abortion

I said it before and I will say it again. No one should have the right to tell a person what they can or can’t do with their body as long as they are not causing any involuntary harm to someone in the process. Sure, you could say that abortions are involuntary homicides, but we are talking about a life form that is connected a person. An unborn child is no different than a parasite that has the potential to physically harm its host. Think about all of the physical harm that an unborn child can do to a woman. (Nausea, stretch marks, temporary obesity, vaginal tearing, hormone imbalances that can cause post partum depression, and many other things that I didn’t mention) Why should any woman go through all of that misery if she does not want to have a child? Forcing someone to go through the pain and misery of pregnancy and childbirth is no different than condoning the torture of innocent people.

There is a lot of debating amongst doctors that say babies can or can’t feel during a specific month of the pregnancy. I don’t care if they can feel pain or not. I don’t think an unborn child should have any rights. I remember seeing a story on the news three years ago. It was about a professor that works at Princeton. There was a lot of controversy because he said that newly born children should not have any rights during their first month of life. He was talking about a woman that killed her child after she gave birth to it. He believed that the woman should have the right to end her child’s life because the child is her property. I agreed with some of the things that he said.


Eating Meat

I don’t think it is unethical to eat meat. We are omnivores. There is a reason why we have canines. They may be small, but we do have them. I can understand why some people are vegetarians. Some people just don’t like the taste of meat. But I don’t understand the vegan thing. I couldn’t survive as a vegan. There is such a limited variety of foods that they are willing to eat. I think variety is the spice of life. I love meat and dairy products. I wouldn’t want to live without them. If you are a vegan or vegetarian I want you to think about the fact that animals are not that different from plant life. We are all carbon-based life forms. Humans share about 50% of the same genes with some plant species.

 

[baumgarten]

Killing unborn babies is more right than killing animals because they are less conscious.

Once the animal is dead, it is less conscious than the fetus, and your furder can be retroactively justified.

 

[heliocentric]

Abortion
don’t care if they can feel pain or not.

Why not?

I don’t think it is unethical to eat meat. We are omnivores. There is a reason why we have canines. They may be small, but we do have them. I can understand why some people are vegetarians. Some people just don’t like the taste of meat. But I don’t understand the vegan thing. I couldn’t survive as a vegan. There is such a limited variety of foods that they are willing to eat. I think variety is the spice of life. I love meat and dairy products. I wouldn’t want to live without them. If you are a vegan or vegetarian I want you to think about the fact that animals are not that different from plant life. We are all carbon-based life forms. Humans share about 50% of the same genes with some plant species.

I like variety too, i just dont think another being should have to suffer to make my life more varied and interesting.

 

[android]

Why are so many vegans/vegetarians aghast at the idea of raising dumb animals for food meat, yet believe it's an unalienable right to kill unborn babies?

They probably feel the same way about killing animals without a place for them. Remember, many of these folks also support hunting to make sure animal populations do not grow too large and strangle themselves.

But the real answer is to eat stupid people.

 

[baumgarten]

Where is Dr. Hannibal Lecter when you need him? He would certainly agree with you.

 

[spidergoat]

We are omnivores. There is a reason why we have canines.

That's not why we have canines. Such teeth in Gorillas are mostly for show. By the time people became proficient hunters, we had already known how to use fire for cooking, so ordinary teeth would suffice.

 

[q0101]

Why not?


I like variety too, i just dont think another being should have to suffer to make my life more varied and interesting.

I would be extremely depressed if I decided to care about the well being of every life form on this planet. Apathy is a necessity in a world that is full of misery and pain. Complete apathy is bad, but we can’t care about everything. We a have to pick and choose the things that we care about.

I don’t care about the suffering of unborn children for the same reasons that I don’t care about the suffering of bugs or cattle. The misery that they’re experiencing cannot affect me in a negative way. (Assuming that the unborn child does not get a chance to grow up after it has experienced suffering in the womb) The billions of actions and decisions that people make everyday affect our lives. Everything is connected. I care about the suffering of other human beings because their suffering can affect me in a negative way.

I have a rule that I like to live by. Do on to other life forms as you would life them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you. For example, I have no problem with stepping on an ant or a worm because that action will not affect me in a negative way. I also don’t care about unborn children because their deaths will not affect me in a negative way. Actually, their deaths are more likely to affect me in a positive way because unwanted children are more likely to be abused and neglected. These children are more likely to become criminals than the children that are raised in a loving environment.

As I said before, do onto to other life forms as you would like them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you. It is a rule that prevents me from killing people when I am angry. I am aware of the fact that their deaths could anger and sadden the people that care about them. Their family and friends could want revenge, which could affect me in a negative way. It is the same reason why I would never mistreat a dog that has the potential to be dangerous. (I would eat dog meat if I was in Korea or China) I am aware of the fact that the human body is very fragile, therefore I have to respect the life forms in my environment that could damage my body.

 

[q0101]

That's not why we have canines. Such teeth in Gorillas are mostly for show. By the time people became proficient hunters, we had already known how to use fire for cooking, so ordinary teeth would suffice.

What do you think our earliest ancestors were eating before they learned how to make fire? They were eating meat and vegetation. Their diet was very similar to the diet of chimpanzees. Gorillas are vegetarians because they adapted to the food that is easily available in their environment. The same thing can be said about pandas. Both of these animals will eat meat on rare occasions.

 

[heliocentric]

I would be extremely depressed if I decided to care about the well being of every life form on this planet. Apathy is a necessity in a world that is full of misery and pain.
Complete apathy is bad, but we can’t care about everything. We a have to pick and choose the things that we care about.

Agreed! but *not* eating meat doesnt mean i have to lie in a pool of my own tears every night. Its hardly impacted my life atall in fact.
You can care without taking it to the extremes i think youre talking about, being a vegetarian doesnt mean you have to spend every waking moment thinking about animals being slaughtered (or at least not for me or any of the veggies i know).
You can care for everything in a very very small way (by not killing it and eating it) and it doesnt require a huge level of emotional/physical energy, in some cases it requires even less.

p

I don’t care about the suffering of unborn children for the same reasons that I don’t care about the suffering of bugs or cattle. The misery that they’re experiencing cannot affect me in a negative way.

So for you to care about something it has to effect *you* in a positive way some how. That seems pretty infantile and pathologically self-centred to me, no offense but im not quite sure how else i can put it.

(Assuming that the unborn child does not get a chance to grow up after it has experienced suffering in the womb) The billions of actions and decisions that people make everyday affect our lives. Everything is connected. I care about the suffering of other human beings because their suffering can affect me in a negative way.

lol. Everything isnt about *you* haha....your whole life philosophy seems to be 'if im happy, everythings fine!'

I have a rule that I like to live by. Do on to other life forms as you would life them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you. For example, I have no problem with stepping on an ant or a worm because that action will not affect me in a negative way. I also don’t care about unborn children because their deaths will not affect me in a negative way. Actually, their deaths are more likely to affect me in a positive way because unwanted children are more likely to be abused and neglected. These children are more likely to become criminals than the children that are raised in a loving environment.

Youve taken the golden rule and flipped into an entirely self-regarding ideology . Thats actually pretty astonishing.

As I said before, do onto to other life forms as you would like them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you. It is a rule that prevents me from killing people when I am angry. I am aware of the fact that their deaths could anger and sadden the people that care about them. Their family and friends could want revenge, which could affect me in a negative way. It is the same reason why I would never mistreat a dog that has the potential to be dangerous. (I would eat dog meat if I was in Korea or China) I am aware of the fact that the human body is very fragile, therefore I have to respect the life forms in my environment that could damage my body.

So you essentially dont understand compassion is what youre saying.
Compassion for you can only ever be applied when theres some benefit for you involved somewhere. Pretty terrifying out look on life youve got there.

 

[q0101]

So you essentially dont understand compassion is what youre saying.
Compassion for you can only ever be applied when theres some benefit for you involved somewhere. Pretty terrifying out look on life youve got there.

Yes, I am selfish. Subjectively everything is about me. Objectively I am just spec of dust in a vast universe. Everything is about you in your subjective experience also. You just aren’t aware of it. Do you know what compassion is? The main chemicals involved in compassion are oxytocin and serotonin. People are compassionate because it makes them feel good. Why should anyone be kind and helpful if they are not getting something in return? The reward does not always have to be in the form of material possessions. But it does have to be a chemical reward (Oxytocin, serotonin) that makes them feel good. Most acts are selfish acts.

The next time that you are helping someone or doing a good deed I want you to think about the fact that you are being compassionate because it makes you feel good. Everyone is selfish in their own way. The only difference between you and me is the fact that we have a different subjective opinion about compassion.

By the way, are you a Buddhist?

 

[antifreeze]

helio, would you eat meat if the animal was killed painlessly?

and for the record, the golden rule is "do unto other before they do unto you."

 

[Absane]

I was wondering... what if we waited until the moment a cow or chicken died and then grabbed the meat? Or is this a bad idea? I would think taste is compromised.

 

[baumgarten]

Isn't that what we usually do? We just make sure the animal dies at a time when it will be able to feed the most mouths, so that its life wasn't a waste.

 

[James R]

antifreeze:

however, since it was brought up, are there religions in which animals are indeed possessed of souls? and if such a religion exists, does the society which practices it eat meat regardless? are there strictly vegetarian societies? i will ask that you forgive my ignorance, as i have forgotten the majority of my studies of other religions.

Hinduism has its "sacred cows". Hindus aren't allowed to eat cattle, or hold them captive. I'm not sure why.

perhaps, yet were humans not so thoroughly enveloped within society, there would be nothing to stop us from killing our offspring - i hear it is not an uncommon occurrence among lions at least - the point being that humans have created for themselves a world of laws. therefore, we all sacrifice some of our rights [killing babies, say] to assure that a similar exertion of another's rights should not befall us. i still hold, however, that these rights are in fact illusory, and that many ethical standards are without practical meaning. as you said, they are but lines drawn arbitrarily.

I didn't say ethical lines are drawn arbitrarily. I said sometimes legal lines are drawn arbitrarily. Don't confuse law with ethics.

 

[James R]

q0101:

I don’t think it is unethical to eat meat. We are omnivores. There is a reason why we have canines. They may be small, but we do have them.

This argument is called "appeal to nature". You are essentially arguing that because we can eat meat, we should eat it. It is "natural" for humans to eat meat, therefore it is morally right.

Unfortunately for your argument, it does not follow that what is natural is also morally good.

I can understand why some people are vegetarians. Some people just don’t like the taste of meat.

Is that why you think people are vegetarian? Can't think of any other possible reasons? (I know many vegetarians who love the taste of meat. And yet, they don't eat it any more. Strange, don't you think?)

But I don’t understand the vegan thing. I couldn’t survive as a vegan. There is such a limited variety of foods that they are willing to eat. I think variety is the spice of life. I love meat and dairy products. I wouldn’t want to live without them.

So, you argue on the basis of selfishness. Interesting.

If you are a vegan or vegetarian I want you to think about the fact that animals are not that different from plant life. We are all carbon-based life forms. Humans share about 50% of the same genes with some plant species.

So, are there no important differences at all between plants and animals, do you think? Or are some differences important? What about differences between humans and other animals? Anything important there?

I don’t care about the suffering of unborn children for the same reasons that I don’t care about the suffering of bugs or cattle. The misery that they’re experiencing cannot affect me in a negative way.

So, what you're saying is the only thing you really care about is yourself.

Interesting.

I care about the suffering of other human beings because their suffering can affect me in a negative way.

I bet you don't care about the suffering of humans in Africa. That doesn't affect you - right?

I have a rule that I like to live by. Do on to other life forms as you would life them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you.

So, the strong should dominate the weak, then.

I guess torture is ok, too, if you can get away with it.

Interesting.

As I said before, do onto to other life forms as you would like them to do onto you unless they have little or no chance of harming you.

In which case, it's open slather.

Interesting. Immoral, but interesting that somebody can hold such a view.

 

[antifreeze]

Hinduism has its "sacred cows". Hindus aren't allowed to eat cattle, or hold them captive. I'm not sure why.

and jews aren't allowed to eat shellfish, and muslims aren't allowed to eat pigs...i think. regardless, there is no society [to the best of my knowledge] which practices vegetarianism. [unless you regard vegetarians as their own society.]
note: sorry for being obtuse, but what i am trying to say here is there is not any culture to the best of my knowledge where the protection of animals is applied universally, therefore the differences in religions are esssentially irrelevant and my point still stands. [feel free to disagree] i suck at coherence.

I didn't say ethical lines are drawn arbitrarily. I said sometimes legal lines are drawn arbitrarily. Don't confuse law with ethics.

a cultures' laws are not drawn from the cultures' beliefs regarding morality and whatnot? and am i to understand from your response that your contention is ethical lines are not drawn arbitrarily?

 

[S.A.M.]

and jews aren't allowed to eat shellfish, and muslims aren't allowed to eat pigs...i think. regardless, there is no society [to the best of my knowledge] which practices vegetarianism. [unless you regard vegetarians as their own society.]
note: sorry for being obtuse, but what i am trying to say here is there is not any culture to the best of my knowledge where the protection of animals is applied universally, therefore the differences in religions are esssentially irrelevant and my point still stands. [feel free to disagree] i suck at coherence.

Strictly practicisng Hindus in India are vegetarian; they consume dairy products but no meat or fish. A subset of Indians, known as Jains are lacto-vegetarians, i.e. they do not even consume eggs.