CreateDebate


Debate Info

14
14
Vegetarian prochoicers. Meat eating prolifers.
Debate Score:28
Arguments:37
Total Votes:30
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Vegetarian prochoicers. (11)
 
 Meat eating prolifers. (11)

Debate Creator

SitaraForJesus(3819) pic



Which one is worse?

Im just bored so Im bringing this up for debate. Im open to suggestions.

Vegetarian prochoicers.

Side Score: 14
VS.

Meat eating prolifers.

Side Score: 14

Hippys are funny, save the animals because it's mean to eat them.. But dam you I have a right to abort my baby! Ok so funny or not, I see the humor. Same goes for the big time cattle ranchers who are pro-life.. But I do see how humans have this idea that we are at the top of our food chain. Saving a baby to them is way more important than an animal. Either way both are messed up

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

Not all liberals are prochoice. .

Side: Meat eating prolifers.
Coldfire(1014) Clarified
1 point

Vegetarians and pro-choice advocates both consider the moral status of an embryo (chicken egg and human fetus respectively) is such that eating eggs and aborting fetuses is morally justifiable.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

As long as the chicken egg was not fertilized then I see no harm in eating it. We raise farm eggs and we have no males. So how it this compared to a human egg that has been fertilized?

ie; you can't!

Side: Meat eating prolifers.
2 points

I would have to go on this side because I see nothing wrong with being a meat eating pro-lifer.

Oh, and I am pro life and I eat meat.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
Coldfire(1014) Clarified
1 point

How convenient for you that your opinion already coincides with your preconceived notions.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
Atrag(5556) Banned
1 point

This one, but only if they eat the fetus does prochoice have anything to do with vegetarianism

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
1 point

True enough, but what if we substitute 'vegan' for vegetarian? Vegan is a bit more extreme, eschewing using any product derived from animals where possible, and generally not even swatting flies.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

People who are vegetarian or vegan tend to think killing is wrong though.

Side: Meat eating prolifers.
Atrag(5556) Disputed Banned
0 points

Disagree .

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

this one worse because abortion is basically murder its not the womans body its the baby's body. Also, being a vegetarian is terrible because if you don't eat the meat the animals died for nothing. They died for you to eat and you might as well eat it to make their death worth something.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

Not all liberals support abortion. .

Side: Meat eating prolifers.
DrawFour(2662) Clarified
1 point

The idea is that as a vegetarian animals won't have to be killed anymore... the obvious flaw is that the whole world isn't going to go vegetarian, so the meat's still going to be killed regardless of their decision not to eat it. In other words, they are not making a change, they are just being different, for their own reasons.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

I agree with Stickers, the only reason i pick this side is because I don't prefer vegetarians. I understand giving up meat for health reasons (sort of anyway) and I can definitely understand not having a taste for it, me personally will never ever again try deer or rabbit.

However, it would be perfectly fine with me, if the majority (not all, but damn near) of vegetarians I met weren't taking a stand for animal rights. Animal rights? That's a laugh. They probably own pets, drink milk, and wear shit tested on animals. Not to mention the fact that we, as humans, are animals. Where's my right to eat other animals? They get to!

Animal rights aside, I have to mention the fact that if we stop eating animals, nothing will change... not for the better anyway. If we are eating anything to extinction, they are the exception, but every thing else has coped with our presence and would then thrive too much if we were to stop eating them.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
3 points

I don't see how either of these groups of people are necessarily bad....

Whatever happened to the "judge not lest you be judged" thing?

Side: Meat eating prolifers.
Coldfire(1014) Clarified
3 points

Ye shall know them by their fruits. How? because you need to measure them to a standard, i.e. judge.

The judge not thing though, that only applies to non-Christians.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
Stickers(1037) Clarified
2 points

Ye shall know them by their fruits. How? because you need to measure them to a standard, i.e. judge.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that deeming someone of not following a standard imposed is being "judgmental".

The judge not thing though, that only applies to non-Christians.

The person who wrote this debate is (apparently) a jew. Although one might argue that Christians are a variety of jew, it's unlikely that a Christian would call themselves one.

My point is that the second that you start referring to them in the context of being "worse" people than each other, you're clearly judging them.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
1 point

Im not judging anyone. Im just saying that they are both inconsistent.

Side: Vegetarian prochoicers.
Stickers(1037) Disputed
2 points

That is not my reasoning for claiming that you are judging. Saying that their actions are inconsistent with their moral code is not judging them. Inquiring "which is worse?" is judging them as you are referring to them as people.

Asking "whose actions are more blatantly more inconsistent with their respective moral codes" would not be judging, and is quite different than asking "which is worse?".

Side: Meat eating prolifers.