Is it wrong for a lion to eat a gazelle? Biologically we are designed to eat animals too, to reject that, is to reject the natural law. For me it is absurd, however, I respect the vegans, but an anarchic movement that forbids me to eat anything, ceases to be an anarchic movement.
Fail. You're not a lion. Stop trying to justify your actions by what others do. You're biologically designed to be able to survive by eating both plants and animals, not that eating animals is optimal. Go eat only animals and let me know how healthy you are after decades.
I think I'm aware that I'm not a lion, in fact, it seems to me that the vegan posture is the one that is not aware that we are humans, and that humans are omnivorous.
I have not said that only as meat, now, vegans if they plan to eat only vegetables, do you see the irony?
However, I propose the same, go eat only vegetables and let me know how healthy you are after decades.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5168823/Dangers-vegan-diet.html
As I said in my first comment, I respect the vegans, They simply can not respect the rest of the people who decide to eat meat?
Are you sure about this? Sure humans have adapted to consume meat because we've been in places where our ideal food source is not available, though biologically carnivores have shorter and thicker intestines to digest meat compared to humans and other primates with long ones which are made for plants—mostly fruit.
To only apply non-aggression principle/equal freedom rule only toward humans is essentially narrow-minded as what separates humans from other animals? Anarchy means without rulers, so why can humans rule over non-animals; that's a spook.
Everything I have read on this subject seems to indicate that yes, I obviously don't have the absolute truth about anything.
Oh, my understanding of anarchy does not include animals, because it is a government of humans, designed by humans, I never thought of extending the principle of non-aggression to them because we are not the same species. Lions have their rules among lions, do not impose their rules on other species, wolves do not either, that is, they have a collective behavior that governs their species, a natural law that governs their species, but they do not extend their "rules" to other species.
I have not really heard much about this, I like to eat meat, and I think I'll eat meat the rest of my life, on the other hand, I do not force anyone to eat meat, as I said, I respect vegans, I just do not share their vision.
It's quite clear that humans are not designed to eat meat and it's not our species specific diet. Try to going out in the wild and eat meat, versus pick some fruit from a tree; which one you think is more convenient for humans in an ideal circumstance? It seems pretty evident that we didn't evolve in an environment where being a carnivore was viable until we left the tropical forest into the more hostile and less human-food rich savannah. Also, the primary anatomical limitation which distinguishes diets between animals, our digestive tract(short intestines), prove that humans can't digest meat like a carnivore(long intestines, even though we still try to and why humanity is filled with diseases and sickness.
Humans are animals, to believe otherwise is a spook. There is no defining characteristic that separates humans apart from animals that is not based on some dogma. This doesn't mean humans have differences between other animals namely like the huge one between cognition.
It's not natural for these carnivorous animals you mention to have rules of conduct when it's in there nature to rule(eat) others. If you believe humans are the same, than it seems to me that your suggesting that using force, conquest, or exploitation is natural and ok, while freedom is not. Basically, humans are "low level" animals which it's to be expected that they prey and dominate others. Bonobos are closest relative, have almost no propensity to aggression or domination and they eat mostly fruit.
Many philosophers seem to negate the discussion of food and diet, besides a few select enlightened ones. But yeah, eating meat can be pleasurable in the moment though this is the same with many other things. I don't believe in forcing anyone to do anything, I just believe that humanity will stay stuck in this vicious cycle of insanity and destruction until they finally acknowledge the root of their problems and choose to live up to their potential.
Would you justify eating meat under specific situations?
Absolutely, I'm not really a moralist, eating meat was how we survived in harsh climates and environments as we header out of where our primary food source was not available. There are times and places which this choice would be necessary unfortunately, like those people on Flight 571 that crashed in the Andes, they needed to eat their fellow humans in order to survive and I would of done the same.
Also, this is probably why there has been a backlash against general vegetarianism by some people who've lived in say places like Norway where they've eaten meat for thousands of years and it seems "natural", which it perhaps is in that sort of environment. A huge chunk of the developed world lives in places which are not suitable for human habitat outside of relying on industrialization and advanced technology. Most people aren't willing to accept that our ideal human environment is the tropics and food grown there.
Under that line of logic, we can do other things that lions do 'naturally', such as killing our offspring, stealing from others, force-ably having sex with others when they don't want it, and being violent and killing others when we are upset because we have been designed to. Natural law is not about doing what comes naturally to your design. It’s the idea that your rights as an individual are not determined by the state or through the democratic process but are derived from self-ownership or inherent within the universe.
Unlike lions, we do not require the consumption of meat in order to thrive, moreover as I'd imagine most humans tend to have more consciousness when it comes to the understanding of right and wrong, it would seem incumbent upon us to hold ourselves to a higher standard. By your analysis, if alien vampires decided to feed on human beings the way we feed on animals, it would be permissible for them to do so as it is within their nature. Your position is logically inconsistent unless you concede to this.
I'd also correct you by saying that we are behaviorally omnivores however physiologically herbivores.
There are many arguments to support this point but the most salient is that true carnivores do not suffer from atherosclerosis when consuming meat, unlike humans and other herbivores. (See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1312295/)
The fact that there are over 700+ million examples of healthy and thriving vegetarians and vegans in the world, among them world-class athletes eg Carl Lewis, Timothy Shief, Alexy voevoda, Venus Williams and the greatest minds that have ever lived e.g. Albert Einestein, Tesla, Leonardo Da Vinci, Pythagoras, Benjamin Franklin etc would make this fact self-evident.