Should I become Vegetarian?
I kind of want to become vegitarian because it is good for animals and my best friend is so I figure why cant I, but in my house we eat lots of meat and I actually love tofu but my mom wont get it because I am the only one in the family that likes it. It would be hard to be vegitarian but I would like to. What should I do?
Yea- Good For You
Side Score: 24
|
 |
Nah- I like McDonalds
Side Score: 15
|
|
|
|
|
3
points
There are other faux-meat products besides plain tofu (which, by the way, can be prepared different ways). There are soy hot dogs, various preparation of chicken (soy chicken nuggets, strips, etc), soy taco, veggie burgers, and so on. A lot of it is really good, both the authentic-tasting and the more original flavors (that is, some fake meats don't taste like meat, but they don't taste bad either). You just have to find the right product. Boca and Morning Star both make pretty yummy products, though I guess everyone's taste preferences are different. Some restaurants (like Chili's) even offer veggie burgers - I've even gotten them at steak houses. Fuddrucker's makes great ones. Speaking from experience, it can be really difficult to be the only vegetarian in the house - it's not impossible though. Try talking to your mom about it and explaining why you feel so strongly about it. Even if she doesn't completely agree, she might start respecting your position enough to relent and make things easier for you. You could also try just cutting down on your meat-eating (have Meatless Mondays, or alternating days or something). Best case scenario, your mom realizes that it's not as inconvenient as she expected. Worst case scenario, at least you're minimizing your meat intake, so it's better than nothing. Good luck! :) Side: Yea- Good For You
2
points
If you're really that into tofu, why not? You can pretty much get all you need from legumes and supplements. And buy tofu in small chunks! I had the same (ish) problem as you, my parents are total meat freaks and had a huge spaz at me for converting ;) but I was really just grossed out by it. Side: Yea- Good For You
|
Don't become a vegetarian. If you're doing it for the animals, consider the fact that the animals you eat are already dead. If you really care about animals, avoid hunting. But if you like eating meat, continue eating it. Becoming a vegetarian won't save the animals. If you're doing it for health reasons, well that's a different story, but remember that some meat in your diet is healthy as well. Probably healthier than becoming a vegetarian. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
You're dead wrong. " If you're doing it for the animals, consider the fact that the animals you eat are already dead." They're dead only because people refuse to become vegetarian, and with demand comes supply. " remember that some meat in your diet is healthy as well. Probably healthier than becoming a vegetarian." How many times must we say this being vegetarian is as healthy as meat eating. Perhaps even healthier, as meat is heavier and takes a toll on our system. Veges stimulates peristalsis and provides bulk. If you're talking proteins, we get them from beans, nuts and seeds etc. Side: Yea- Good For You
1
point
Far from the McDonalds tag, think about what will happen to all the animals that are bred for meat if they're not being eaten. The animals that we eat have been bred for centuries to be the way they are, if we stop taking care of them they will all die, they are far too removed from their wild cousins to survive without Humans. Side: Meat is more humane
I fail to see how that is more humane. If we don't eat them, they will die. I'm quite sure if we eat them they die. How about we just slaughter all of the animals that we have bred for meat as we would normally do, and eat that meat until it runs out? No more animal suffering for new animals that we would otherwise eat, and we switch to a more animal friendly diet. Side: Yea- Good For You
1
point
I fail to see how that is more humane. If we don't eat them, they will die. I'm quite sure if we eat them they die. The animals as you know are killed humanely when harvesting meat, because meat makes money, if there was no money then they would be left to survive alone, they would die far more horrible deaths than the electric bolt to the brain that immediately renders them incapacitated, then they're killed, free of suffering, stress and pain. How about we just slaughter all of the animals that we have bred for meat as we would normally do, and eat that meat until it runs out? If one is to become a vegetarian on ethical grounds, I don't think they'd be OK with the mass slaughter of every livestock animal in existence, just to see a day when there is no eating of animals. No more animal suffering for new animals that we would otherwise eat, and we switch to a more animal friendly diet. What then of the millions of wild animals that would be killed in order to make way for farming of land in order to grow the billions of tons of crops the world will now need. Add to that the millions more that will die from farming these plants and the chemicals that will have to be used, will destroy the land, not to mention what the run off into the sea will do. There is no such thing as an animal friendly diet. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
I agree. Being completely vegetarian isn't easy at all. I fully agree with the avoiding cosmetics and fur boots and coats too! However, I disagree with the you won't be doing any good part, for the same reasons as above. Animal rights to live. (Oh btw I believe that plants may be living things but they do are not sentient, thus we eat them) Health reasons. Environmental reasons (energy inefficiency and climate change). Side: Yea- Good For You
0
points
Millions of little animals die every year during the crop harvest. They die horribly and painfully as they are crushed to death by humongous human harvesting machinery. You know how meat is harvested? The animals are pampered until they reach the prime of their lives, then they are painlessly killed with a spike driven through their neck so that we may feast upon their tender flesh. If you want to be a vegetarian for the health benefits, go ahead. It's a good idea for your health. But if you want to be a vegetarian to 'save the animals', then don't, because you aren't saving the animals. To be vegetarian to 'save the animals' is to be a hypocrite. Don't be a hypocrite. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
I believe that the points you make are slightly misguided. First, your idea that millions of little animals die every year during crop harvests is slightly skewed. First, it is not a definite number and is simply some guy's estimate: "Davis admits he doesn't really know how many animals are lost each year to agriculture, but he suspects it runs in the millions. Not many farmers do a before-and-after survey, so the best data are really just estimates." Second, that number, as mentioned in the above quote refers to agriculture as a whole, not simply harvesting. This includes the one time acquisition of land for farming purposes. Further, since most kills are a result of land acquisition for farming (few animals would be around after their habitat has been shifted), it is only a one time deal instead of a continuous slaughtering of animals for human consumption. Third, your idea that animals are pampered for meat harvesting is clearly missing some inside looks into the meat farms across many industrialized nations. http://www.youtube.com/ The above link shows an example of a pig farm in the United States. I would hardly call something like that pampering animals. The killing portion is often considered painless, but the possess prior to is hardly to be considered a good life. Other point to look at Guess what! Animals that humans harvest for food need to eat crops as well. Further, due to the loss of energy of trophic levels, animals will need ten times more farmed crops than a human will need to produce the same amount of energy (I'm not sure about exact numbers, but the amount of crops consumed will definately be larger if we eat meat instead of not). Side: Yea- Good For You
0
points
Was your only point that I was misguided? Because you didn't really do a good job of that. My point is that it's still hypocritical to be a vegetarian only for the purpose of saving animals. Just because a few people have made mere estimates of the numbers of dead animals doesn't mean that there still haven't been around that many animals that died. Saying that is like saying that the 6 million Jews that died in the Holocaust was just an estimate. That doesn't make it any less true that it happened. Your second point doesn't matter. The acquisition of land still goes towards the agriculture of plants that vegetarians eat. Therefore, the deaths of the animals during acquisition of land are still on the hands of plant eaters. Perhaps not all animals are pampered for slaughter. Most, on the other hand, are not abused. The fact that some are has nothing to do with meat eaters, it has to do with the idiot employees and companies that harm the animals. Plant eaters, on the other hand, are responsible for the deaths of little animals due to the fact that farmers and their giant machinery cannot prevent themselves from the killing the animals. The meat companies can prevent animal suffering in their industry, which makes it their fault. The farmers can't, meaning the demand for the crops is responsible. Your last point is irrelevant as well. Animals eat crops that we grow with our energy, yes, but if the whole country was vegetarian, then we would be using as much energy feeding people crops as we are using it now to feed animals. Duh. Stop drinking the red Coo-laid of PETA and eat some animals you hypocrite. Unless you're only doing it for your own health. In which case, good for you, it's a great choice for your health. But if you're trying to 'save the animals', well, stop. You're not helping anything except your ego. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
As a vegetarian, you'd still eat plants, which are living things. You'd still spray cockroaches, you'd still wipe your table clean. Who's to say that a plant's life, an insect's life, or a bacterium's life is worth less than an animal's life? Living things are living things. It sucks that humans have to kill living things by the truckload in order to survive and thrive, but that's how the world is. Until it becomes possible for humans to fruitfully co-exist with other living creatures without killing them, I'll continue killing and eating them for food so I don't starve. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
2
points
Not every living thing is the same - you'd probably be okay with squashing a bug, for example, but you could be uncomfortable watching a kitten get abused. This is because each species' capacity to suffer is different. This isn't speculative, it's based on science, and in particular knowledge of the animal's nervous system. Cows, pigs, and chickens raised for meat generally suffer immensely (given that most are raised on factory farms), whether it be from the slaughter itself, the conditions they're raised in (which are often disgusting and/or painful), or the fear and discomfort they're able to experience. You can't honestly say that you think a cow is of the same intelligence and capacity to suffer as a plant, can you? Are you aware that plants don't even really have nervous systems? Plant and animal cells are remarkably different, as I'm sure you're aware of from any basic biology class. There can't be any serious position, supported by evidence, that it's just as immoral to kill a plant as it is to kill an animal. Otherwise, even the analogy presented before between the squashed bug and abused kitten isn't strong enough - it'd be more like saying that you think it's just as bad to pluck a piece of grass from the ground as it is to stick a knife in a dog. You must realize that's patently absurd. Side: Yea- Good For You
If the morality of killing a living thing is based on the suffering it undergoes when you kill it, does that mean it's morally acceptable to kill any living thing we like, for whatever reason, as long as you put it under anaesthesia first? Surely not. I believe that the morality of killing depends largely on what goal the killing is supposed to achieve, the availability of alternatives to killing in achieving that goal, and the way we go about with the killing. Putting down a dog with cancer in a humane way is acceptable, while kicking it to death for fun is not. Spraying ants to keep your kitchen clean is acceptable because that's about the only reasonable means we have of keeping ants away, but killing your cat so it doesn't shit in your kitchen is not, because there are many other ways to prevent it from shitting in your kitchen. Killing a crazed murderer in self-defence is acceptable, but executing a criminal who is already imprisoned and poses little risk to you is not. I see this to be a more compassionate way of measuring morality than simply looking at the species a creature belongs to and assigning its life a value based on that alone. Hence I see no great moral difference between killing animals for food and killing plants for food. It's true that we feel more concern towards some living creatures than others. Even many meatarians who happily eat beef or pork would have a problem with eating a puppy. But that's sentimentality, not rationality, and I don't think sentiments should be raised to the status of moral rules. If someone is an animal lover and can't stand the thought of eating an animal, it's fine for them to choose to turn vegetarian personally. But such a sentiment shouldn't be used to persuade people that eating meat is immoral. At the most, it might be possible to say that it'd be nice for people to stop eating animals so that they don't hurt animal lovers' feelings, but such a concern doesn't exactly sound urgent :/ The only species that I think deserves special status is humanity, because it is our own species. Among other things, we need to protect ourselves from the self-destruction that would occur if humans regularly killed each other. I get your point about the terrible conditions most farm animals live in, but I don't think that means we should refrain from eating meat altogether. What is means is that we need to enforce more hygienic and spacious farms that give animals better living conditions, and ensuring reasonable measures are put in place to minimise stress and suffering when the animals are killled. Side: Nah- I like McDonalds
Yes, we eat plants, but plants are not sentient beings as compared to animals. We don't spray cockroaches (but we do wipe our tables clean). Who's to say that an animal's life is not worth as much as yours then? That's how the world is, and unless we don't do something (like become vegetarian), it will never change. I'm sure it's possible to not starve as a vegetarian, I'm one (and I'm healthier than most :P). I don't kill ants or anything on purpose either. And I plead all of you, to follow us vegetarians on a healthier lifestyle. Warning: It's not as easy as that though. As vegetarians, we still need to watch our diet carefully. Side: Yea- Good For You
|
