CreateDebate


Debate Info

218
173
Vegetarianism Non vegetarianism
Debate Score:391
Arguments:176
Total Votes:512
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Vegetarianism (95)
 
 Non vegetarianism (92)

Debate Creator

gaurav(6) pic



Vegetarianism vs Non vegetarianism

Vegetarianism

Side Score: 218
VS.

Non vegetarianism

Side Score: 173
6 points

Actually, the human anatomy suggests that we are more adapted to be vegetarians, or in other words, 'herbivores'. We are equipped with molars, which are actually meant for grinding and chewing plant matter, and our digestive tract is more similar to that of herbivores. So biologically, homo sapiens are supposed to be vegetarians, but for some unknown reasons along the evolution line, meat started coming into their diets.

Also, meat has been linked with the rising number of cases of those with cholesterol problems, heart problems, deep-vein thrombosis, obesity, so on and so forth, due to the traces of fat that is naturally present in the meat.

Yes, the fact that potatoes can be fried and eaten in the form of potato chip, fries, etc., does contribute slightly to the health problems now, but the 'impact' of such food tend to be more subtle than that brought about by the consumption, especially over-consumption of meat.

Side: Vegetarianism
4 points

We are equipped with molars, which are actually meant for grinding and chewing plant matter, and our digestive tract is more similar to that of herbivores. So biologically, homo sapiens are supposed to be vegetarians,

We are also equipped with canines and incisors, which are adapted to tearing and rending meat.

So biologically, homo sapiens are supposed to be vegetarians, but for some unknown reasons along the evolution line, meat started coming into their diets.

Meat was instrumental in the evolution of the species. It was impossible to sustain a large brain without consuming meat.

Also, meat has been linked with the rising number of cases of those with cholesterol problems, heart problems, deep-vein thrombosis, obesity, so on and so forth, due to the traces of fat that is naturally present in the meat.

That is untrue. Meat is actually very healthy, if eaten in appropriate amounts. Obesity is caused by overconsumption, most heart problems are induced by the oils meats are cooked in, not the meat.

Yes, the fact that potatoes can be fried and eaten in the form of potato chip, fries, etc., does contribute slightly to the health problems now

It actually contributes massively.

but the 'impact' of such food tend to be more subtle than that brought about by the consumption, especially over-consumption of meat.

Over-consumption of anything is by definition bad for you.

Side: Non vegetarianism
janth22(10) Disputed
1 point

cavemen, the first people ate meat and how can we argue againstthat

Side: Non vegetarianism
5 points

Being a vegetarian is healthier for you and is better from a moral standpoint.

But Damn, it's hard to do so thats why I eat meat on occasion.

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
1 point

Being a vegetarian is healthier for you and is better from a moral standpoint.

Why is it healthier? We are omnivores, not herbivores. Also, why is it moral?

Side: Non vegetarianism
zproach(252) Disputed
9 points

Because of the cholesterol and saturated fat in the meat is bad for... there is no denying that.

For the moral argument. The meat industry is known for it's horrid conditions for raising animals for meat... we're subjecting living creatures to pain for pretty close to frivolous causes

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

The meats we consume are the results of animal husbandry, which our bodies are not accustomed to. (speaking from an evolutionary perspective of human genetics)

Plants, those that have not been genetically modified by humans from 1950-current, are better for our nutritional needs and have far greater health benefits.

There is much evidence linking the eating of "greens" to providing 90%+ the nutrients we need to provide a healthy living structure. I would argue that meats that do not come from the result of animal husbandry, also known as wild, have far more benefit. Furthermore, if these meats come from an environment that has the least amount of contaminants it would be the most beneficial- as your body would not require the energy to detoxify as well as any possible genetic change that could result in later in disease.

*Vegetarianism is different than being Vegan.

I'm more inclined to practice a 80-20 or 70-30 type diet whereas the first number is the percent of plant based consumption and the later is animal based in your diet.

Side: Vegetarianism
goundy(18) Disputed
1 point

Its not healthier. You usually lack alot of protein which is majorily contributed by meat. Protein is vital for cell production and if you dont have this, you can become quite week and you lack the formation of tissue cells which will eventually turn into muscle.

As for the morals of eating animals I do have to agree with you on the attrocities commited by a few un-nameable abattoirs, however the whole concept of eating animals has been a foundation of human suplementation for thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years!

Side: Non vegetarianism
zproach(252) Disputed
4 points

There are other forms of protein besides that which comes from animal flesh.

Sure, it's been around forever...but so has war.. does that mean war is better than peace... just because something is a tradition that doesn't mean it is good?

Side: Vegetarianism
sonotbiast(24) Disputed
1 point

Yes meat does have protein but so do many other types of foods. And when i say mean, I mean MANY. Even some sodas have small amounts of protein. Plus, too much protein will turn to fat. Too much fat then equals obesity. And obesity as we all know often results in an early death.

Side: Vegetarianism
4 points

This is a no brainer. I'm just gonna dump a bunch of links from earlier debates...

---

Vegetarians are healthier than non-vegetarians.

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/3/516S#FN2

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12826028

Vegetarians don't "miss out" on any vitamins or minerals.

http://www.eatright.org/Public/content.aspx?id=6374

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/vegetariandiet.html

It's a myth that vegetarians don't get enough protein.

http://altmedicine.about.com/cs/dietarytherapy/a/Vegetarian.htm

http://www.veganbodybuilding.com/

Most meat comes from the grotesquely unethical practice of factory farming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_farming

http://farmsanctuary.org/issues/factoryfarming/beef/

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ Factory_farming_needs_to_be_reformed

And yes, animals are capable of suffering.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cognition

Being natural doesn't magically make something morally acceptable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

There are also environmental reasons for being vegetarian.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

Side: Vegetarianism
lawnman(1106) Disputed
11 points

Please!

“This is a no brainer.”?

All vegetarians who have not eaten for three weeks because their lands have been ravaged by fire, drought, or frost will soon eat the flesh of the herbivore or die. Albeit, the omnivores living among them will be the last to die because they are not fixated upon a false paradigm of eating PREFERENCES.

Eating is about survival and living, it is not about orthodoxy and paradigms. And when men by choice prefer to eat “only certain foods to the exclusion of others” they have precluded their survival in many conditions.

The omnivore though will always eat to survive and will always, in all conditions, out-live vegetarian ideologues.

(Only vegetarians reduce eating to morals. Most people eat to live. Perhaps vegetarians are ignorant of the fact that their diet is possible because of their meat-eating brethren.)

Side: Non vegetarianism
jessald(1915) Disputed
3 points

If the choice is between starvation and the consumption of meat, then by all means, kill away. That is also a no brainer.

But in the civilized world, being vegetarian is easy, healthy, and morally correct. Let's not cling to barbaric traditions for no good reason.

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

Are you suggesting banning non-vegetarianism in favor of vegetarianism because of health reasons? There are a myriad of reasons to ban something due to health reasons, but it doesn't mean that you actually do it.

Side: Non vegetarianism
jessald(1915) Disputed
3 points

Wtf? No, I wasn't suggesting banning the consumption of meat. I was just establishing the fact that vegetarianism is clearly the better choice.

Although now that you mention it, banning meat might not be such a bad idea... :)

Side: Vegetarianism
4 points

Being a vegan is the better choice, as far as health goes. As meat can come packed with disease and is packed with lots of fats. You can get everything your body needs from plants, even though us as humans are omnivores the better path to take is vegetarianism. But I don't have the heart to give up steak.

Side: Vegetarianism
5 points

"Being a vegan is the better choice"

If the vegan choice is viable; for there are circumstances when the vegan choice is not possible and thus not viable.

Starvation trumps a dietary preference.

Side: Vegetarianism

I can't say I disagree with you, but your point seems off topic. What I can see from the statements is purely an argument in semantics. :)

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

Which is why being vegan is the better choice, but much harder choice to follow through with.

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

Why is it better? What types of diseases come from consuming meats? And what types of meats? What types of fats are these meats packed with? How are these meats bad for our health?

What makes Vegan the best choice? What makes Vegetarianism the best choice? Did you know there is a difference?

It's not necessarily that consuming animals is unhealthy. It is the amount you eat and the origin of the meat. How was this meat prepared? Was the animal wild or husbanded by humans? What types of foods did this animal consume during its lifetime? What environmental toxins were in its habitat? What effects do the hormones and medicines introduced have on the animal itself and in turn how does that affect those that consume it?

I could go on and on. My point is you don't have to give up your steak, but you should know where it comes from and balance how much you eat. This will help you take stress off your bodies functions to maintain homeostasis and will result in a long and healthy life.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
2 points

This will help you take stress off your bodies functions to maintain homeostasis and will result in a long and healthy life

How will this take stress off you when you're worried about a million and 1 things that could make your meat consumption a bad experience (chemicals, toxins, habitat, method of butchery, method of cooking, preservatives, hormones...).

Methinks vegetarianism is a lot less stressful...

Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

Health - All necessary nutrients are available in plant matter so meat is not necessary.

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
4 points

Health - All necessary nutrients are available in plant matter so meat is not necessary.

Our bodies are not evolved for a purely herbaceous diet and consequently a vegan diet is very difficult to balance properly so that you don't suffer from diseases brought on my malnourishment.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
2 points

Ok, why don't you tell that to the vegan Chinese Shaolin monks when their weak & diseased bodies reduce your healthy meat-eating ass to a pulp :) I'd actually like to see that more than anything. Would probably pay to see it too :)

.

More people are suffering from diseases born of eating meat than those born of a vegan diet.

Side: Vegetarianism
wolfbite(432) Disputed
3 points

Not really, meat is clearly the better choice when it comes to getting proteins.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

How much protein do you need each day?

What do you mean by "better"?

.

A male of about 6ft 6in tall:

His ideal body weight is 214 pounds, or 97.3 kilograms.

His daily protein intake requirement is 43.8 grams to 77.8 grams.

At the max level of 77.8g he can achieve it by eating about 300 grams of meat or the same amount of pumpkin seeds, peanut butter or most dairy products like cheese... Eating a variety is not only much better for you, it's less boring as well!

Supporting Evidence: Protein foods (www.indoorclimbing.com)
Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

Environment - Animal farms harm the environment more because they require more resources.

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

Environment - Animal farms harm the environment more because they require more resources.

Depends on the farm.

Side: Non vegetarianism
Kinda(1649) Disputed
1 point

No - it is pure fact. Animal farms require far more resources.

Side: Vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
0 points

Why bother with sorting out the good from the bad farms. Just ban them all, isn't that how you'd deal with problems? ;)

Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

i would strongly say that... u have to be not to much to the +possitive & -negative side! just be inde middle! thats the best! live life till u can.

Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

Hello,

I am Mercy,I visited your page today and i really want to have some personal words with you. We may be friends because it will help us to know ourself better.Send me a mail on([email protected]) and i will send you my photo.

Mercy.

Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

FACTORY FARMING NEEDS TO BE REGULATED!

To help with this project please take this survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XFQ6RSR

It takes less than a minute and is only 4 short multiple choice questions. Also, if you're on facebook, join

"I don't want to eat fake breasts!"

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=114389285249957&ref;=ts

Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

I could go on and on. My point is you don't have to give up your steak, but you should know where it comes from and balance how much you eat. This will help you take stress off your bodies functions to maintain homeostasis and will result in a long and healthy life.

Supporting Evidence: phentermine online (www.online-phentermine.com)
Side: Vegetarianism
2 points

Being a vegetarian doesn't get you anything except that u miss the vital proteins that you otherwise get from meat.Vegetarian food is equally fattier like a non-veg food if not eaten properly.Add regular fried potatoes,cheese ,butter and other milk products to your diet and you are screwed equally like a big meat eater.

On the other hand,Non-Veg diet is bad too if you don't know what you are eating.Sticking to just White Meat (Chicken & Sea food) is the safest bet and you get only the good things from them and not the excess cholesterol which you otherwise get from Red Meat.I eat only white meat and I feel very lite after my meal with out a heavy digestion course that includes items rich in saturated fat like cheese and red meat.

Go white meat and you get the best nutrients on earth.

Go veggie and you miss a lot of nutrients.This is very much true.There is a survey that says 80% of those who have aided eye vision are vegetarians.This is because of deficiency of good quality Vitamin A.Though carrots have Vitamin A ,not many vegetarians care to eat them.Fishes are a very good source of Vitamin A.They are also good for your heart (Omega 3 Fatty Acids).

Fact : Japanese live for almost 95 years -> They are non-veggies by a higher degree.

Reason : They eat lots of white meat ,mostly sea food.Their staple dish Sushi (raw meat and rice) is supposed to increase the life span for some weird reason.

Who cares for the poor animals if you get something good out of them for you and your family ? I would actually be happy to kill a few fishes to save the eyes of me and my family.That is nature.Why God kept those rare nutrients in animals which you don't get from plants ? Think abt it and u ll realize that u r fighting for nothing...Go n have meat.Enjoy the short life...

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

we, by the intestinal structure, are designed to be herbivores. we have a intestinal structure which is large. where as carnivores have a small intestinal structure. when meat, in the human digestive system, undergoes repetitive digestion with the acids of digestion, it releases malignant toxins which are harmful for our body and which causes cancers and liver malfunctioning.

Side: Vegetarianism
1 point

I am not sure what side to enter this comment on really. I am not a vegetarian and, worse still, I am a hunter. Every year I kill a deer, at least, and often a deer and a moose. I feel terrible about the pain and death but I do have a big and happy family and I like the idea that they are being sustained with antibiotic-free meat. And, I confess, that I like to think of myself as a provider in these shaky times.

I have lived in the north long enough to realize that nothing in the woods - no deer, no moose, no wolf, no muskrat - lives to a happy old age or dies a pleasant death. When creatures age, they are tormented and die terrible deaths - natural predators do not share our sensibilities. My bullets are true - I have, after years of hunting, never killed anything gratuitiously or irresponsibly. Still, I do feel that, somehow, we should be evolving away from administering death this way. But, there is no easy answer for this - we are six and a half billion strong now - there is no room for everything to survive anymore.

Side: Vegetarianism
1 point

All animals have feelings, emotions and etc., so I am sure that humanity should NOT use animals for food, clothes and other needs. Animals are not meant to be our food, they must be equal in rights. I said humanity because some people are too hard-nosed to say that meat do not give us happiness or good health. I am vegetarian and I am happy. I am happy to save lives of innocent animals which are more humane that people are.

Side: Vegetarianism
0 points

Moral - It's sadistic to kill and eat an animal when you don't need to. Being an omnivore is the same as being able to do both good and bad. Just because you can also do bad, doesn't mean you should do bad.

Side: Vegetarianism
wolfbite(432) Disputed
5 points

So killing plants is any better? You still end up killing life regardless. You also end up taking space whether it be by cattle farming or crop farming that would otherwise be an ecosystem for those animals that you claim to cherish, so either way they die despite your "moral" choice.

And did it ever occur to you that some cultures cannot afford to grow healthy food or do not live in a place that is too hot or cold to produce crops and therefor must turn to meat?

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

You still end up killing life regardless.

It's not animal life, so it makes me feel better!

You also end up taking space whether it be by cattle farming or crop farming

True, but it'll be less destructive no? A plantation is almost natural to the space it occupies, whereas a pig farm would be lotsa pigs in a space with lotsa infrastructure to support it...

some cultures cannot afford to grow healthy food or do not live in a place that is too hot or cold to produce crops and therefor must turn to meat?

We should give those poor souls our vegetables in exchange for their nice smiles :)

If it's not a choice, then fine. But if vegetarianism is a choice, shouldn't it be taken if it's better?

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
4 points

Moral - It's sadistic to kill and eat an animal when you don't need to. Being an omnivore is the same as being able to do both good and bad. Just because you can also do bad, doesn't mean you should do bad.

False analogy. Being an omnivore means that our bodies depend on certain proteins to be healthy, and these proteins come from meat and plant life.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

So our protein requirements presents us with the choice of killing animals or consuming plants... Why kill animals when you don't have to? Why do bad when you don't have to?

What's wrong with my analogy?

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
3 points

Fun argument: Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian. I guess sadists can be vegetarians too.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

I wonder what Hitler tastes like... put him on a spit, or may be in a stew... hmmmm... vegetarians are suppose to taste sweeter than meat eaters...

Side: Vegetarianism
Greengitters(1) Disputed
1 point

Actually, he wasn't a vegetarian, he just reduced his meat consumption.

But your point is well taken. By the way, he also had a moustache and wore a hat quite often. So people who have those traits are also evil, just like Hitler!

Iron-clad argument, my friend.

Side: Vegetarianism
0 points

Diseases - Animal farms and eating animals is kinda how we get pig flu, bird flu and all the viral diseases that were once confined to animals only...

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
1 point

Disease is a part of nature. These diseases would always pose a risk to us, we simply exacerbate it by keeping animals in high densities.

Side: Non vegetarianism
0 points

We all know it's the right choice to make.

It may have been a harder choice if we lived in a society where food isn't abundant or garaunteed.

But we're not.

The only reason people now decide not to eat meat is for their self-indulgence.

Side: Vegetarianism
-1 points

Preservation - It's the farming of animals for meat that harms other species in the wild. The farms take over their natural habitats, they are culled to protect the farm animals. The bottom line: we're losing more species then we can preserve through farming.

Side: Vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

Preservation - It's the farming of animals for meat that harms other species in the wild. The farms take over their natural habitats, they are culled to protect the farm animals. The bottom line: we're losing more species then we can preserve through farming.

This is an argument for improving efficiency, not vegetarianism.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

Don't presume to tell me what my argument is for.

Make an argument instead of trying to change my argument.

It's for less animal farms. Less habitat destruction. More species preserved.

Side: Vegetarianism
Kinda(1649) Disputed
0 points

Wrong again.

You cannot improve efficiency with animal farming over crop farming. Unless you can get animals to photosynthesize.

Side: Vegetarianism
6 points

From a biological standpoint we are not herbivores, meat is an evolved part of our diet.

From a moral standpoint, many of the organisms we eat are probably not intelligent enough to realise that they are in a farm.

From a conservation standpoint, most meat animals are domesticated for this purpose, meaning that if we stopped eating meat, or using animal products, those animal species would become endangered or even extinct, and some of them like the cow have outlived their ancestors so it would mean losing an important piece of genetic stock. In this respect farms are actually keeping the species alive at the organism's cost.

From an ecological standpoint, hands down meat is less efficient to produce than grain (and thus harder on the environment).

Side: Non vegetarianism
jessald(1915) Disputed
4 points

Just because we can consume meat doesn't mean we must. Vegetarians are healthier than non-vegetarians. That fact is indisputable.

Most of the animals we kill are intelligent enough to experience pain and suffering, and that's the important thing.

As for conservation, ever heard of a zoo? Or a wildlife sanctuary? There are better ways to preserve species.

Side: Vegetarianism
larryt700(1) Disputed
4 points

No they are not healthier! They get fatigued easily, are not very strong at all and their endurance tends to lack. If you look at any athlete; see what their diet consists of... Seriously

Side: Non vegetarianism
aveskde(1935) Disputed
4 points

Just because we can consume meat doesn't mean we must.

The fact that we CAN consume meat is an evolved trait. It means we are more adaptable. But that's not the argument I'm making. There isn't a moral argument against eating meat which holds under rational scrutiny. You eat grains, fine, but you kill animals to produce those grains (pesticides kill all sorts of insects, some of them poison fish, rodents live in grain fields, and so on. These are all animals.). So at best a moral argument can serve to change the industry (because in this case the industry is only exacerbating this practice) but it is still not an argument to abstain from meat. It's just an argument to not use industrial ranching.

Vegetarians are healthier than non-vegetarians. That fact is indisputable.

You don't really understand the basis of your argument, is what you're telling me. Eating only vegetables doesn't make you healthier. The reason that vegetarians may as a demographic be considered healthier is due to diet planning. It isn't the vegetables, but when you practice a lifestyle that requires more effort and is consequently scrutinised more, your diet should be healthier because you're not eating useless calories and fats and sugars that accompany a typical modern diet.

Most of the animals we kill are intelligent enough to experience pain and suffering, and that's the important thing.

Do you realise that we are the only organisms even arguing this point? It's kind of funny when you think about it because life is a struggle. The bacteria in your colon would consume you right now if they could get past your defences. The insects around you would have no restraint from eating your flesh. That we have come to this apex where we can relax from hunting and reflect at last upon the cruelty of life that is in our survival, it is almost like eating our tails.

A cow that is butchered humanely doesn't suffer. They are given open pastures, same as sheep, and horses. They aren't suffering. Chickens tend to suffer because there is less incentive in many farms to raise them in open land. Pigs may suffer most of all because they don't seem to be thought of as needing all the land that the others get. However, yours is an argument against crowded farming, and painful death. It isn't an argument against eating meat.

As for conservation, ever heard of a zoo? Or a wildlife sanctuary? There are better ways to preserve species.

I've heard it estimated that there are twenty billion chickens on Earth. We have over a billion cows. Tell me about a wildlife sanctuary, or zoo which has been able to proliferate a species so well. Farming gives us a use for these animals, and so we keep their numbers far from ever dwindling.

Side: Non vegetarianism
5 points

Vegetarianism is nothing more then a fad movement for self-righteous pricks who think that they are somehow in better standing because they choose to kill plants rather then animals.

They claim to be all for the animals and yet their food they get comes from a farm that most likely used to be a habitat for animals.

Side: Non vegetarianism
Kinda(1649) Disputed
5 points

It's a fad movement for self righteous pricks?

Including Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs and other religions/groups which have been around for several centuries?

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

I can understand what you are saying consider the fact that there are vegetarians that simply call us omnivours "Evil". Some are self-righteous prick but there are those that just simply do not want to eat meat.

In order for life to continue, the life of another must be sacrificed. Perhaps the way the animals are kill and treated can be dabated but other than that, lets just leave it at that.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
2 points

It's a fad movement that grows and grows and doesn't seem to stop... what's a fad again?

Vegetable farm vs Animal farm

You must always choose the lesser of two weavils ;)

Side: Vegetarianism

What is the difference between killing plants and animals? Nothing. They are both living things. Different ways.

Side: Non vegetarianism
gcomeau(536) Disputed
4 points

The difference is one has a brain and one doesn't. And that's a large difference. It's the dividing line between dealing with something that can think and feel and perceive and something that can't.

I am still however an omnivore and not planning on changing. The really critical ethical dividing line is the posession of sapience, not the possession of perception, and I'm evolved for meat in my diet. Vegetarianism does however have it's compelling arguments. Beyond the purely personal health issues, which are ambiguous despite what many people think, there's the question of large scale resource allocation. You can feed a lot of people on the land you use to graze a few cattle that will only feed a much smaller number of people. If I thought there was any reasonable chance of those resources actually being used to distibute food to where it was needed in the world I'd consider the switch to vegetarianism worth the sacrifice of, well, being vegetarian.

Since that is not the current reality however and we're already producing a large amount of waste food that nobody will redistributre because the people who need it can't pay for it... I'm eating my burger for lunch.

Side: Vegetarianism
3 points

Well, the conception that plants don't feel pain is simply false. Common sense says if something is living, then it probably feels pain.

"Each root apex harbors a unit of nervous system of plants. The number of root apices in the plant body is high and all brain-units are interconnected via vascular strands (plant nerves) with their polarly-transported auxin (plant neurotransmitter), to form a serial (parallel) nervous system of plants. The computational and informational capacity of this nervous system based on interconnected parallel units is predicted to be higher than that of the diffuse nervous system of lower animals, or the central nervous system of higher animals/humans." [1] A German Study

It is expensive to feed livestock, and at times, there is a large misuse of resource allocation in the nation and the world, yet farmers who raise livestock and own property has the right to raise livestock, and in do so, they have the right to to sell it as a product as well as farmers who plant vegetables and fruits.

Supporting Evidence: Planets [1] (ds9.botanik.uni-bonn.de)
Side: Non vegetarianism
2 points

I've yet to meet a vegetarian able to convince me not to eat meat. Their arguments are just stupid and horribly flawed, every time.

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
2 points

The fact that you're inconvincible is testament to your own stubbornness. There's nothing wrong with most of the logics and reasonings provided here.

Side: Vegetarianism
ryuukyuzo(607) Disputed
1 point

For example?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Side: Non vegetarianism

Meat is way better....................................................................

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
1 point

I have a pet water bottle, it's the best ever.................................

Side: Vegetarianism
TERMINATOR(6778) Disputed
1 point

I'd sooner eat my cat that a carcinogenic water bottle.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

People have eaten meat since the dawn of man at first just for food then because it tasted good and now we eat it for the health benifits and also why should we stray away from our original source of food and but we should also eat some vegetables and fruits to control our nutrition levels but no meat at all thats just not right

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

I don't quite understand why people argue healthier or not. Humans and our ancestors have been eating meat for thousands of years. The argument of healthier or not does not play an important role of life or death. We found our own way to survive and adapt to our surrounds through the eating of plants and meats. If we can survive for our entire life through the consumption of plants and meats, we can suvive the rest of our lives in a happy and enjoyable way eating plants AND animals

Side: Non vegetarianism
2 points

This is basically the argument I was making in some of my other replies. We have the capacity to eat meat and enjoy it, and we know how to live healthily, so we should take advantage of that knowledge and our body's ability to process meat and vegetables, and enjoy both.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

wooooooooooot........................................... your so right

Side: Non vegetarianism
NVYN(289) Disputed
0 points

I don't quite understand why people argue healthier or not

Where have you been the last 10 years?

The argument of healthier or not does not play an important role of life or death

You're right, it doesn't. But we're no longer the hunter gatherer tribesmen and tribeswomen thousands of years ago. Most of us are not in any danger of starvation any more. So the argument of healthier is about living longer and being able to function better.

.

Bottom line, if we have evolved to be able to eat both, it means we can choose. Vegetarianism is better in so many ways as have already been mentioned.

Side: Vegetarianism

Vegetarians fart more than non-vegetarians.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

I wonder what vegetarian humans taste like...

Valuing animal life above plant life does not make one morally superior, as morals are entirely subjective.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

It is expensive to feed livestock, and at times, there is a large misuse of resource allocation in the nation and the world, yet farmers who raise livestock and own property has the right to raise livestock, and in do so, they have the right to to sell it as a product as well as farmers who plant vegetables and fruits.

Supporting Evidence: Compare Insurance Quotes (www.direct-quotes.com)
Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

what else would pigs be for ?

Side: Non vegetarianism
zombee(1026) Disputed
1 point

Why does an animal need to be 'for' anything? Does every species on earth need to be able to provide some kind of benefit to humans in order to live here?

Side: Non vegetarianism
Axmeister(4319) Disputed
0 points

" Does every species on earth need to be able to provide some kind of benefit to humans in order to live here?"

Yes, otherwise they would be extinct

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

The average American lives an average of 80 years. If you're going to die anyways, you may as well eat your fill of corndogs and steak. I hear heaven is severely lacking in good meat.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

be nonvegetarians are so lucky that we can eat both veg and non veg actually in the world populion we non vegetrians are leading if we wont eat non veg or kill animals on earth animals will be more and there would be no place to humans to live they tell us cruel but they will also kill plants if we tell like that they will tell that it will grow agian but they will carrots ground nuts and many more vegetables witch grow underground one thing i want to tell that WE NON VEGETRIANS RRRRRRRRRRROCK!u guys tell any but in fornt of nonveg teast u r veg is nathing .thank you bye good luck nonvegetrains u gana lose vegetrians nanananana

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

I will never be a vegetarian. As I hate the taste of most vegatables and fruit. My diet is nearly completely composed of animal products. I am well aware of factory farms, and I do disagree with their inhumane treatment though.

Side: Non vegetarianism
1 point

.Its all about balance and the eco system and survival.Humankind couldn't have survived or evolved had they not been meat eaters.Pre-historic man was pre-dominantly a hunter . Cultivation was necessary as an alternate food supply for survival. Now Lets take the cow for eg. it was in it mutual benefit for the species to survive to be allowed to be eaten,its has helped the survival of the species. Also if everyone were just Vegetarians,there's always a high demand for milk , the cow gives milk but for her to continually provide milk she has to have more calves.If ones doesn't eat them there would be a population explosion. Do most Vegetarians not use Leather products?? or any product that is made from animal extract. If they do thats hypocritical. Coz the animal is only slaughtered for their skin so one could own a piece of fancy leather!!. By consuming the meat of the animal the death of the animal is not in vain and every part of it is being utilized in one form or the other. Man has definitely abused hes power and have resorted in unethical practices and i am not debating that.

Side: Non vegetarianism
0 points

Ask yourself this question

If you were in a Jungle in Africa or something, and a lion saw you (this lion is very hungry) Do you think that the lion would think " Omg poor little human, I'm hungry but i feel bad for it so i'm going to go eat grass instead" OR do you think it would think "Yum. Theres a human, I'm hungry let me go eat it"

If you think it would spare you then your seriously stupid.

If you know that it would eat you then why should you have to spare its life, when it would be more than willing to savage you in one bite?

Its the food chain, some animals eat us and we eat some animals. Thats how the world works, its not immoral to eat meat.

I agree that animals should be killed differently but the world will never be perfect

and someone else also said, if its wrong to kill an animal why is it right to kill a plant? Not eating meat doesnt do anything, no animal gets saved if you decide to eat tofu instead of chicken. That chicken is still dead either way, animals will still be killed whether you decide to eat meat or not, so i dont see the point? You might as well eat it cause its already dead anyways. I understand people who just dont like meat or dont feel comfortable eating it because its their choice.

but those who think that eating meat is wrong and immoral are truly mentally challenged.

Side: Non vegetarianism
0 points

Why being non-vegetarian is better

________________________________________

Vegetarians are those people who do not eat meat while non vegetarians are those who include meat in their diets.

The following essay will explain the benefits of being a non vegetarian over a vegetarian.

The first aspect to consider is the issue of nutrition. Eating meat comes with numerous health benefits that cannot be derived from any vegetarian meal. To start with, meat contains high quality proteins with all the essential amino acids. Proteins are very useful in body building and thus persons relying only on plant foods for proteins are more vulnerable to retarded growth and a weak body than a non vegetarian. A well cooked chicken provides amino acids that protects from common influenza and enhances a person's immune system against common ailments and allergies.

Meat contains creatinine which is necessary for building the body muscle mass for locomotion and other physical practices. Most vegetarian infants exhibit stunted growth (Brown, 2008).

Iron which is a crucial mineral in hemoglobin formation and the consequent blood level sustenance especially for menstruating women is present in huge quantities in red meat than from any plant source. Animal liver for instance, contains 6000 mcgm per every 100 grams as opposed to 325 mcgm per every 100 grams of carrots. Bone marrow and soup is also a very rich source of iron as compared to green vegetables. Vegetarians are more likely to suffer from iron-deficiency anemia due to a low iron level.

The phosphorus content found in cereals and legumes is normally in the form of phytic acid. This means this kind of phosphorus has to be hydrolyzed first before it can be absorbed into the body. On the contrary, the phosphorus found in meats is easily absorbed in body tissues indicating that non vegetarians are more likely to have the desirable levels of phosphorus in the body than vegetarians.

Meat also contains high levels of vitamin B12 which is absent in plant foods. Deficiency of vitamin B12 may lead to Macrocytic Anemia in infants of vegetarian mothers.

Strict vegetarians face the risk of nutritional deficiencies such as riboflavin, zinc, iron, calcium and essential amino acids like lysine and methionine. Vegetarian children face the risk of energy deficiency in calories (Brown, 2008).

Fish, milk and milk products are very rich in calcium which is important for ensuring strong bones and teeth. Children lacking meat in their diets normally have problems in teeth formation and their bones are weak often resulting to frequent fractures and limb deformations and rickets due to lack of vitamin D. The calcium quantities in plant foods are minute and unreliable when it comes to proper bone and teeth formation. Osteoporosis may result due to calcium deficiency and cause bone demineralization .

Some fish types such as tuna and salmon contains omega 3 acids which are very useful in mental health and general physical health. Omega 3 acids also have good anti-cancer properties.

Fish also contains vitamin A well known for its ability to boost human memory and thus intelligence. Children fed with fish supplements are found to perform better academically than those who depend entirely on plants for their food. The nutrients concentration in meat is high as compared to that in plant foods and hence little quantity of food is required in non vegetarian diets than in the vegetarian ones. This has the advantage of reducing the cases of food shortages if all people would adopt the concept of having meat as part of their diets and the resultant savings on food would be channeled to other financial needs.

The good thing with non vegetarians is that they consume both plant foods as well as meat thus it is easier for them to attain a balanced diet than those who cannot eat meat. Patients who eat meat are found to recover more quickly than those who don't since meat helps to speed up the repair of damaged body cells and formation of new cells.

In the west Vegetarians face a higher rate of lack of food choices since restaurants still do not provide a wide range of vegetarian foods and preparing the food separately may be time consuming and expensive. Also a person is more likely to miss vegetarian food options when they drop at a friend's house for dinner. On the contrary, a non vegetarian cannot suffer such food option limitations since they can feast on both plant foods as well as meat. Outside India ,Vegetarians will have more hard times eating out with friends since it is much easier to arrange meals for everyone in the group rather than making separate meals for people who don't eat meat. A non vegetarian will find it uncomfortable to eat from the same table with people eating meat which is not the case with a non vegetarian who can eat any kind of food on the table (Brown, 2008).

Ecological issue is another aspect to consider when thinking of the benefits of being a non vegetarian. Man makes part of the ecological food web that is responsible for balancing the natural occurrence of living things; animals and plants. If all people were to stop eating meat from animals, the population of herbivores would drastically increase resulting to lack of pasture and fodder for the domestic animals due to over competition. This would in turn result to starvation of the livestock and their eventual death. This explains the essence of man having to include animal meat in their diet to maintain a balance on the number of herbivores feeding on plants at any given time. Animal products such as skins, hides, fur and bones are useful in production of leather items, clothing and adhesives. This implies that having meat as part of the human diet comes with other benefits of the by products. It is ironic that people are against non vegetarian practices yet they are quick to use leather products obtained after these animals are slaughtered.

Most of the religious beliefs that make people not to eat meat are based on the belief of reincarnation. Most Asian religious groups that do not eat meat believe that when a person dies, they reincarnate in form of an animal. This makes them believe that eating meat would mean eating their ancestors or those who have just died. The truth about this belief is very questionable since their mythical theory cannot explain why the animal population is still low in comparison to the number of people who have died. Animals are born and develop just like humans do and never do they emerge from reincarnation as alleged.

In a biblical point of view, God created man and gave them dominion over all animals. He did bless the animals for human consumption and hence eating meat should not be considered as sin. The Quran also allows its followers to have meat as part of their food. Animals cannot be fully personified to possess "human rights" of not being killed for human consumptions. Owing to the above benefits associated with eating meat, it is therefore more logical and beneficial for all people to become non vegetarians, and assume the full benefits that come with the consumption of meat.

Advantages of Non-Vegetarian foods are:

• Non-vegetarian foods are rich in protein of high biological value and in Vit B complex, especially B12 which is not available in plant foods.

• Fish, especially the small varieties are a rich source of calcium.

• Egg-white is good source of protein and easily digested.

Side: Non vegetarianism
Cynical(1948) Disputed
2 points

I sense plagiarism...

Side: Vegetarianism
dwmiller(7) Disputed
1 point

There are many way to get B12. The average human only requires 4 mcg of B12 per day. I can get this from a bowl of cherrios. Last I checked, cherrios are not made of meat.

Side: Vegetarianism