Is eating meat right? I mean Is it ok to eat and ENJOY meat? Many in the anti-meat crowd tell us we are causing animals to suffer when we eat meat. They try to shame and guilt people into following their viewpoint. But you don’t have to be bullied; you can enjoy your steak. It is logical and natural to do so. This article seeks to explore the ethics behind eating meat and some alternative viewpoints to why you should not feel shameful when it comes to eating meat.
Many in our modern day society shame people for eating meat. Meat eaters are condemned as being bad people who don’t care about animals. Can you eat meat and feel good about yourself.
What many people miss when delving into this topic is that farm animals do share a symbiotic relationship with mankind. We feed and care for these animals, providing them a good life while they are here, and they in turn produce sustenance for human life. This is a win-win relationship between us and these animals. It is, in actuality, the circle of life – people use animals, animal use plants, and so on.
Animals share a symbiotic relationship with mankind
A happy group of cows on our farm
For some people, not eating meat is seen as a way to minimize animals being raised on farms. Many believe farms are cruel places… but they’re not.
Farm animals are actually very content to live side by side people and animals enjoy a great life there. Being on the farm is the animal’s life purpose, and they seem to understand the purpose of their existence. They are quite content in accepting it. Turning a cow out into the wild is often a death sentence. Cows prefer life with people, and even willingly choose life inside barns. When given the choice, a cow would always choose life on the farm.
Many farm animals cannot survive without moderated temperatures, and proper nutrition. These are the things farmers provide to these animals. Cows freeze in blizzards and need proper shelter to protect them. If they do manage to survive the blizzard, frostbite can affect their teats. The elements are extremely harsh for cows. Farmers care about the animals on the farm. They seek ways to optimize the conditions for their animals. If the animals are having difficulties surviving the environment, farms find ways to alleviate the conditions.
Being a farmer is all about fostering life. We rely on them, and they on us.
Death not an end
Most people see death as an end. They see the death of an animal as being an end of existence. However this belief is far from the traditional beliefs of ancient peoples for centuries before.
This ideology (seeing death as an end) is fundamentally humanistic and materialistic in nature. This outlook could be the result of the materialistic type culture we live in today. We are all constantly bombarded with messages of all the new things we need. Advertisements constantly reinforce the idea that we need more physical things in order to be happy. The destructive philosophy of Darwinism has convinced us that we are physical beings in a physical world and the physical is all there is. This sort of Newtonian belief system constantly reinforces that the physical is all that matters. This has closed our society from seeing thing from other perspectives – a perspective that death is not an end, but simply a moving on
Ancient cultures understood this to be true and reflect this in their traditions. In the past, these ancient cultures did not see death as an end, but more of a moving on. Things do not die per se, but translate to a different reality or form. Cultures such as the Native Americans were deeply appreciative of this cycle, and did not see death as an end, but as a beautiful beginning. They would thank the animal for its nourishment, and respected their contribution to the world.
The ancients believed that those animals were just moving on to greater pastures in the sky.
Eating less meat actually causes animals to suffer more
Many who oppose the eating of animals often propose to us to eat more plants and vegetables to stop animals suffering in this world. They propose that stopping the consumption of eating animals will stop the raising and suffering of farm animals.
What is strange is that this does not stop animal death or suffering; animals will still have an end in their life. If allowed to be around their whole lifespan, they will have a long life but will still eventually die. Further, the overall condition of their life may not always be good. Keeping an animal for many years allows the animal to experience a longer life, but also old age, and the various sufferings that come with deteriorating physical health. Many of these animals will actually experience more suffering from living longer years than living fewer years. In old age, they may succumb to weakening bones, breaks, falls, heart problems, cancer and all other health problems related to old age.
In addition, by not allowing our symbiotic relationship with animals to take place, it would also take away the animal’s life purpose in life. You keep them from fulfilling their contribution to the world. How can they experience a meaningful life without contributing something in return. Their lives do mean something when they are used for human sustenance, and arguably they enjoy a much better quality of life. It allows the animals life to have a much more meaningful purpose in this life.
Flowers are beautiful to look at, but we all know they are less useful than the orange we used to make orange juice this morning. In a sense, the orange has a higher purpose than the flower. The orange contributes more to our life, and we are much more grateful and appreciative of it for nourishing us.
Logically, Plant Life Matters too
Purporting that one adopts a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle in order to help reduce animal suffering also shows a huge flaw in logical reasoning. The premise they hold is that humans and animals don’t have a symbiotic relationship, but instead share an equal relationship.
Traditional Premise: Humans > Animals (humans and animals share a symbiotic relationship where animals provide for humanity).
Anti-Meat Activists Premise: Humans = Animals (humans and animals are on an even level of existence and animals cannot and should not serve humanity)
When looking at the Anti-meat activist from this viewpoint, it seems to make sense. All life is valuable, and one life should not be held higher than another. While seaming reasonable from this viewpoint, it quickly breaks down when you carry on this reasoning through to other areas of life.
For example, activists propose because humans and animals are on the same level, we should follow a vegetarian, or vegan lifestyle eating more plants. But by saying this they are going back to the traditional view of one life form being higher than another:
Eating vegetarian = Animals > Plants (animals are a higher form of life than plants)
They are going back to the traditional viewpoint of one life form is higher than another. They are saying that an animal’s life matters more than a plants life.
Here it’s clearer:
Traditional: Humans > Animals > Plants
Activists: Humans = Animals > Plants
Do you see the flaw in this logic? Veganism still prioritizes one life form over another.
Scientific research into the life of plants has shown that plants are indeed alive. Studies have shown that plants prefer classical music to hard rock music. They will grow more favorably and lush if spoken to with loving kind words each day, than being cursed. Grass has also been shown to experience terror and fear with an oncoming lawnmower, and trees frightful with oncoming chainsaws.
To consume more plants means more terrorizing of plants. Don’t plants matter as a living species also? Why should we kill more plants to satisfy our hunger when we can consume more nutrient dense foods like meat and eat fewer plants? We can reduce our impact and suffering on plants, and the environment by eating more nutrient dense foods.
It is easy to say eat more vegetables, perhaps because pants don’t have eyes or faces for us to see. But this doesn’t remove the fact that plants are alive. Plants are just another life form living on this planet, but what gives us the right to take advantage of them?
If you follow the logic of the anti-meat crowd, you need to also uphold plants as being valuable life forms; otherwise you are again holding one life for over another – humans as being above plants. Logically it doesn’t follow. To not uphold the life of plants is to not follow logic. There is a logical disconnect.
Plant Lives matter too
Lions Eat meat
Even Benjamin Franklin noticed a disconnected form of logic in vegetarianism or veganism. Benjamin Franklin describes his conversion to vegetarianism in chapter one of his autobiography, but then he describes why he ceased vegetarianism in his later life:
…in my first voyage from Boston…our people set about catching cod, and hauled up a great many. Hitherto I had stuck to my resolution of not eating animal food… But I had formerly been a great lover of fish, and, when this came hot out of the frying-pan, it smelt admirably well. I balanc’d sometime between principle and inclination, till I recollected that, when the fish were opened, I saw smaller fish taken out of their stomachs; then thought I, ‘If you eat one another, I don’t see why we mayn’t eat you.’ So I din’d upon cod very heartily, and continued to eat with other people, returning only now and then occasionally to a vegetable diet. So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable creature, since it enables one to find or make a reason for everything one has a mind to do.
It is the nature of animals to eat other animals. They are carnivorous, and their bodies are built to eat meat. Their instincts drive them to consume meat. Lions eat meat. Sharks eat meat. Crocodiles eat meat. There are numerous examples of animals that eat meat and it is perfectly natural for them to do so.
If we don’t eat meat are we ceasing form our true nature. Our bodies are capable of eating and digesting meat. We even have teeth to tear meat up. Biologically, we are built to consume meat. If we adopt a vegetarian lifestyle, one could say that we are deviating from our true nature and adopting unnatural lifestyles.
And God made Carnivorous plants to turn the cycle of life upside down and mess with people’s paradigms. Stop the murder Mr. Plant
Benjamin Franklin determined that veganism was illogical
Meat eating is natural, and ethical
If you’ve been able to stay with me through this whole discussion about whether eating meat is necessary for our society today, you should have been illuminated to the ulterior viewpoint – the viewpoint that eating meat is logical and a natural part of life and humanity.
When modern anti-meat ideals are broken down, they do not stand up to logical reasoning, and actually endorse more animal suffering. The very thing activists say they want (a long healthy animal life with reduced suffering) is the very opposite end result.
Animal agriculture is not shameful or dishonorable, but instead is a traditional part of civilization, highly logical in its nature, and helps animals live a fulfilling life with reduced suffering.
Probably some of the primary reasons we are questioning this is only the result of our degrading society. The creeping ideals of materialism, Darwinism, and Newtonianism have been blocking our viewpoints from seeing this alternative, traditional viewpoint of animal agriculture. If our society continues to embrace these ideals (materialism, Darwinism, and Newtonianism), more and more people will be prevented from seeing outside these paradigms.
Eating meat is natural, and it has been done for thousands of years by countless civilizations. Don’t be bullied by meat haters.
Don’t be shamed by guilt, but instead feel freedom the next time you enjoy your steak.
Humans are not carnivores, thus we have nothing in common with a lion. Your teeth do not look like a lions, nor do your finger nails. Las time a checked lions don’t use forks, knives or fire to consume their meat. And as far as caring for them so you can eat them, is it okay to wine and dine a lady and force her to have sex with you because you treated her so well? Any animal you can kill and eat by using the same method as a lion, go for it, otherwise use some logic.
Thanks for commenting. You’re right in that we are a different type of mammal than a lion, and we eat different things. Each creature has a different purpose. If you look at the logic of your 2 examples, it doesn’t quite match up.
I am undecided on whether I believe it is wrong or right to eat meat and am exploring the issue in my own mind. Thank you for sharing your views on the subject
I’m also learning about logic and forming arguments. I have an issue with your reasoning that because lions, crocodiles and sharks eat meat therefore human can too, and with Franklin’s reasoning of “If you eat one another, I don’t see why we mayn’t eat you.” This is reasoning by analogy, reasoning by looking at what others are doing. You can see the inherent danger of this way of reasoning by looking at three examples: Nazism (my commanding officer kills Jews so its alright for me to); Slavery (my father owned negros slaves so its ok for me to); Sexism (my father believes women aren’t allowed to vote so its ok for me to believe it too). The importance here is obviously to not reason by analogy, to not reason by what others do, but to instead reason from introspection.
Yes its true that non-human animals kill other non-human animals but is that a valid reason for humans to do so? As far as I know humans are the only animal to have self-consciousness, morality, and the ability to create meaning such as right vs wrong. A wolf may not kill another member of its pack because that would be detrimental to the survival of the pack. On the other hand a human will not kill another human because he/she believes it to be morally wrong. Does this morality then continue further to not killing animals or does it stop at not killing humans? If so why? These are questions I am asking myself and questions I am asking you too.
I would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts and the time you put into a reply.
Joey- great comment, thanks for contributing. Interestingly, I’ve found this same line of reasoning used prolifically in vegan circles. Example, is when they tell you it’s unnatural to drink milk. You know the line – no other species drinks the milk of another (Its a false statement) but using the same sort of reasoning. But if you do want to go at the argument logically you would find that meat eaters are quite logical. Meat eaters are logically consistent (Humans>animals>plants) while vegetarians are not (Humans=animals>plants). Why prioritize one type of lifeform but still discriminate against another. Plants, while not in similar physical bodies as humans and animals, still have emotions and are intelligent beings. All life should be treated with respect – not just ones with eyes and ears.
Um you are an idiot. Vegans kill less plants than you do, because most of the plants grown are fed to the livestock. So you should go vegetarian because you care so much more for the plants than the cows who you separate from their calves. Also beef and dairy cows are usually not even close to being old when you send them to slaughter. Read a few articles about what happens in slaughterhouses to your beloved cows.
That’s not necessarily true, when you stop eating nutrient dense foods like meat and butter, it takes more vegetables and plants to meet your daily nutrient requirements. Pretty hard to fill up on carrots..
What if you think about Cows as pets? Which seems fair if there is a bond between them. Hell, some farmers probably have a better bond with their cows than their cat. Now compare this to a large dog owner who feeds theiir dog a pound of meat a day (not that unusual with big dogs). Double what an average British person eats. What does the dog achieve? Not much, probably. It uses up toys, fuel, food, shits, pisses and farts. A cow does the last 2, arguably more on the farting/burping greenhouse crimes, apparently, but it grazes. This can be and should be a function which most pets don’t serve. Cats kill wildlife. Like ALOT of birds and small mammals. Cows? Soft as shite.
So yeah, reframe farming as owning and maintaing responsible vegetarian pets (whose shit does NOT smell and can be used in emergencies as firelighters and in tough times, currency [not joking]). Gotta pay vet bills and everything! Farmers are the kings of animal lovers. It’s all about perspective.
I agree with most of what you say but the argument that eating less meat causing more suffering because allowing them to grow old allows suffering seems a bit of a stretch, given the very tender ages animals are slaughtered (awkward pun). That’d be like euthanising somone in their late teens becaise adulthood is too brutal. Maybe right, but probably not!
Humans are not carnivores, thus we have nothing in common with a lion. Your teeth do not look like a lions, nor do your finger nails. Las time a checked lions don’t use forks, knives or fire to consume their meat. And as far as caring for them so you can eat them, is it okay to wine and dine a lady and force her to have sex with you because you treated her so well? Any animal you can kill and eat by using the same method as a lion, go for it, otherwise use some logic.
Thanks for commenting. You’re right in that we are a different type of mammal than a lion, and we eat different things. Each creature has a different purpose. If you look at the logic of your 2 examples, it doesn’t quite match up.
Dear The Dairy Guy,
I am undecided on whether I believe it is wrong or right to eat meat and am exploring the issue in my own mind. Thank you for sharing your views on the subject
I’m also learning about logic and forming arguments. I have an issue with your reasoning that because lions, crocodiles and sharks eat meat therefore human can too, and with Franklin’s reasoning of “If you eat one another, I don’t see why we mayn’t eat you.” This is reasoning by analogy, reasoning by looking at what others are doing. You can see the inherent danger of this way of reasoning by looking at three examples: Nazism (my commanding officer kills Jews so its alright for me to); Slavery (my father owned negros slaves so its ok for me to); Sexism (my father believes women aren’t allowed to vote so its ok for me to believe it too). The importance here is obviously to not reason by analogy, to not reason by what others do, but to instead reason from introspection.
Yes its true that non-human animals kill other non-human animals but is that a valid reason for humans to do so? As far as I know humans are the only animal to have self-consciousness, morality, and the ability to create meaning such as right vs wrong. A wolf may not kill another member of its pack because that would be detrimental to the survival of the pack. On the other hand a human will not kill another human because he/she believes it to be morally wrong. Does this morality then continue further to not killing animals or does it stop at not killing humans? If so why? These are questions I am asking myself and questions I am asking you too.
I would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts and the time you put into a reply.
Kind Regards,
Joey
Joey- great comment, thanks for contributing. Interestingly, I’ve found this same line of reasoning used prolifically in vegan circles. Example, is when they tell you it’s unnatural to drink milk. You know the line – no other species drinks the milk of another (Its a false statement) but using the same sort of reasoning. But if you do want to go at the argument logically you would find that meat eaters are quite logical. Meat eaters are logically consistent (Humans>animals>plants) while vegetarians are not (Humans=animals>plants). Why prioritize one type of lifeform but still discriminate against another. Plants, while not in similar physical bodies as humans and animals, still have emotions and are intelligent beings. All life should be treated with respect – not just ones with eyes and ears.
Um you are an idiot. Vegans kill less plants than you do, because most of the plants grown are fed to the livestock. So you should go vegetarian because you care so much more for the plants than the cows who you separate from their calves. Also beef and dairy cows are usually not even close to being old when you send them to slaughter. Read a few articles about what happens in slaughterhouses to your beloved cows.
That’s not necessarily true, when you stop eating nutrient dense foods like meat and butter, it takes more vegetables and plants to meet your daily nutrient requirements. Pretty hard to fill up on carrots..
So we eat more plants than cows do? Wow that’s impressive even for the vegans.
What if you think about Cows as pets? Which seems fair if there is a bond between them. Hell, some farmers probably have a better bond with their cows than their cat. Now compare this to a large dog owner who feeds theiir dog a pound of meat a day (not that unusual with big dogs). Double what an average British person eats. What does the dog achieve? Not much, probably. It uses up toys, fuel, food, shits, pisses and farts. A cow does the last 2, arguably more on the farting/burping greenhouse crimes, apparently, but it grazes. This can be and should be a function which most pets don’t serve. Cats kill wildlife. Like ALOT of birds and small mammals. Cows? Soft as shite.
So yeah, reframe farming as owning and maintaing responsible vegetarian pets (whose shit does NOT smell and can be used in emergencies as firelighters and in tough times, currency [not joking]). Gotta pay vet bills and everything! Farmers are the kings of animal lovers. It’s all about perspective.
I agree with most of what you say but the argument that eating less meat causing more suffering because allowing them to grow old allows suffering seems a bit of a stretch, given the very tender ages animals are slaughtered (awkward pun). That’d be like euthanising somone in their late teens becaise adulthood is too brutal. Maybe right, but probably not!