You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Is It Ethical To Eat Meat?
We removed millions of herd animals off the land, killed their predators, monocropped their land destroying the biome, and ground the grain into flour to replace our natural food sources. And you only see the last 10 days of the disruption? One hamburger more or less makes that all just fine?
We are the apex predator. We displace wolves and sharks. We need to do their job. Those herd animals should be back on their fields. The only non-totalitarian way to get them there is to buy and eat pastured meats.
"We are the apex predator. We displace wolves and sharks. We need to do their job" - Wow. There's doing their job and there's going too far. I think we've done the latter.
Well, we have certainly done their job wrong. Allan Savory's methods are more like this, where wolves changed the habits of prey and caused an ecological recovery.
We are not the apex predator. We are disruptor.
That's the whole point - being with the nature or against the nature. Killing millions of stock animals for food is against the nature.
We are pretending to be better than the nature. We are not!
We are pretending to know and play our role. We are presumptuous. We are vane.
The original sin of the (western) civilization is constant fight against the nature.
Nature doesn't care about us. Give or take several hundred thousand years we will be history. The nature will still be here.
Even if we destroy this planet from human point of view sooner or later the nature will fix itself.
We humans are not the solution. We are the problem!
That's only been true in the last 10000 years or so (grain agriculture). Just because we are doing it wrong doesn't mean there is no right way to do it. Learn and grow, it's the human way.
And in the meantime we are allowed to kill massively and as we see fit. No, I don't buy it.
Killing animals for food is plain wrong. Killing humans is plain wrong too. Yes, this is comparable! Does killing humans also fit under learn and grow excuse?
So what I am hearing you (and others) say, is that you don't want to decrease the level of cruelty in the meat industry, because the level of cruelty is something you can use to demonize meat eaters as murderers.
And you don't want to increase the sustainability of the meat production process because the unsustainability is something you can use to force your opinion on others in the name of "saving the Earth".
You don't want to hear or engage with the ideas and logic of anyone who has a different solution, just call them a murderer, and trot off pleased with yourself.
Fine. I was there 20 years ago. I learned better. Check you in 20 years.
I am not talking about sustainability, cruelty or whatever. I am telling you that breeding animals for food is plain wrong for a multitude of reasons.
I am not trying to convince you. Not at all. It is you decision what you do or what you eat.
I just don't agree with you.
By the way - eating animals is not a solution.
And I am not pleased with myself because I call anybody a murderer. Me being pleased doesn't change anything. I am deeply saddened that these killings are going on and on and on. That sadness doesn't help either.
Why are we arguing in the first place?
I believe that killing animals for any reason is wrong. You believe that - what? Humanely terminating animals for food is necessary? I still don't get it.