What's your excuse for eating meat?

[taxi]

Humans are omnivores. Both meat and plants provide us with nutritional value. The problem is not that we are eating meat. The problem is how capitalism likes to often make money through productivity over providing us with healthy meat.

Animals eating meat is part of the cycle. Are you going to tell every carnivore out there not to eat meat? In fact, if that did happen I don't even want to imagine how imbalanced the world life cycle would be. We'd likely see far more species become extinct as a result.

Eating meat is natural for humans. Just because we've advanced as a society and grown in exponential numbers should not mean we don't eat meat.

Are humans really omnivores? We cannot digest cellulose, which is the main structural component of plants. This is the reason why cows can survive on grass, but humans cannot.

We can digest the simple sugars in fruits. We can digest the carbs found in artificially created cash crops. We can't really digest plants though.

[riffraff]

It's only cannibalism if you eat your own species. I don't eat human meat, and I'm sure 99.99% of people on this forum don't either, if not everyone.

I get that.

But it's been done, mostly by tribes for various reasons. Which creates the question: where does the judgement on ethics end?

If we are all animals and therefore part of the food chain, what happens when the animals and veg are gone?

[jdatb]

To exert dominance. #TeamHumans

[aGENT]

What saturated fats? You should really take a look at buying Blue Menu Chicken Breasts from Superstore. 0.4g of Saturated Fats and 26g of Protein from a single breast. Perfect for my post-workout meals. And sorry, but I like eating meals that are healthy and tasty, I ****ing hate veggies and I force feed them to myself after getting overweight when I was a kid, but mixing those veggies I hate with that 8 dollar box of chicken breasts is the perfect compromise.

What we need to fix is the fact is that people don't have the money to buy foods they want to actually eat. Some families can literally only afford to pick off a couple items off the dollar value menu at McDonalds.

Why buy a single cucumber for 2.50 at Superstore (and it is 2.50, as a college student who tries to save, I keep track of these prices) when you can buy 2 Jr. Bacon Cheeseburgers at the same price? That's the problem.

I love this post. You do realize that the two are connected, right? The more people shop/support fast food restaurants and purchase from mass agro-corp supplied places like Walmart, Superstore etc the less local business support they're giving and hence the less local jobs they are supporting.

It's a race to the bottom and the poorer you are, the faster you'll "win" that race.

Those with less means would be far better off spending the vast bulk of their budget and making their meals on (quality, local, sustainably farmed) vegetables, then (healthy) grains and finally (quality, local, sustainably farmed) meat. Less but higher quality meat supplemented by vegetarian meals with legumes, quinoua etc.

They'd also be best off doing things like buying whole cuts, whole chickens etc as you pay less for the lower amounts of processing and then you can also make things like soup broth from the leftover bones which extends the meat even further.

[D-Money]

have to laugh at how you ask everyone why they still eat it. They give you their VALID ANSWERS, and you reply with "well that's obvious" and proceed to attempt to belittle their intelligence just because their answer doesn't please you.

That said, I do the same thing when I argue with people who drink alcohol or smoke (the belittling their intellect... obviously not the "that's obvious" part)). So, the hypocritical part of me sees the irony in mocking you for doing it.

As for the question at hand. It is as simple as taste for me first. Meat is far more appealing to the taste buds and my stomach than any vegetable or fruit is.

Also, for me, who has only a few teeth left, its actually easier to eat than most vegetables unless you boil them. Far easier to chew ham or chicken than a carrot or a potato for me.

I am aware of how animals are treated. It sucks. But, theres a LOT of "it sucks" things in the world that we blindly ignore daily on top of that. Our reliance on oil is worse for the world than our mistreatment of the animals we are eventually going to kill for food. Nothing I can do about that either.

At the end of the day, they are animals. They would be killed and eaten by other animals in the wild. Their deaths would be far more brutal and surely frightening than the way its done by humans.

You belittle people's intellect for drinking? Seriously?

Dude...you need a drink.

[TimberWolf]

I get that.

But it's been done, mostly by tribes for various reasons. Which creates the question: where does the judgement on ethics end?

If we are all animals and therefore part of the food chain, what happens when the animals and veg are gone?

We eat the grain fed vegans

[Chalky]

It is not all that difficult to source responsibly harvested meat products. I pay more for better meat and eat less of it. I don't need an excuse because I do not need to justify my actions....well, that one in particular.

[Chalky]

We eat the grain fed vegans

[surtur]

We eat the grain fed vegans

free range so it's ethically ok..

[skolozsy2]

I eat meat for the same reasons I ignore the OP's opinion...

...because I want to, because I can, and because I couldn't care less if it bothers others.

When a cow is concerned about my problems then I might actually concern myself about their problems.

[Jimayo]

I like the assumption that we all eat factory meat. I hate that crap.

[GLASSJAW]

So I read the NYT article in the OP I would say it's right and that eating meat, depending on where and how it is raised is positive for the environment. For most of this I will talk about the prairies because it's what I am most familiar with.

There are some things that people aren't taking into account when they say that eating beef is bad for the environment they are almost always assuming that this is beef that has been raised in a feed lot for all of its life.

If beef are grazed they are actually helping to maintain or increase the biodiversity of the land they are grazing, if it's native prairie it's even more important in Canada because of the demise of the PFRA (this is politics) there are some large areas of virgin native prairie that must be grazed and it only makes sense to eat the animals that graze it. The grasses have developed with being grazed prior to settlement, if they aren’t grazed it leads to a decrease in bidiversity. There are also a lot of areas that have been ploughed/broken and have been put back to grass because it is not suitable for cropping. This may be because of topography but is also because of the soils. These soils would not be as fertile as other soils, they can be coarse or have a lot of rocks in it. The areas that have been put back to pasture normally have a mix of native grasses some can also have a mix of non native grasses added sometimes to increase nutrition. Again this is increasing biodiversity.

As for feed a lot of the feed that is given to animals is not suitable for human consumption, this can be for a number of reasons, but basically coming down to they can digest a lot more than humans. If these crops weren't used as feed it would probably be wasted because while they could be composted, they won't be because it's not feasible. In many other places there are monocultures of either corn, soybeans or canola that can be used as feed or feed additives mostly for feed lots, though they can also be used in the winter to supplement hay to make sure the cattle have proper nutrition.

Now on to "waste", grazing animals have cow pats and urine spots spread over the area that they graze the nutrients are returned to the environment in the same general area they were taken from. This is pretty good for nutrient cycling, unlike feed lot or other types of massive farms where feed is brought in and then the waste is collected and taken away; though normally not to the same area where the feed came from, this is bad for nutrient cycling.

Also what hasn’t been discussed very much in this thread is feed conversion ratio or efficiency, which the ratio of food consumed to meat. While many people know that cattle are among the worst, many people don’t know is that guinea pigs are among the best but because many people view them as pets and not food (outside of Peru) they have trouble catching on.

Tl;dr increase biodiversity, good nutrient cycling, decrease monocultures, proper land capability use.

Apologies if I got ramble-y

But we have to keep in mind that the vast, vast, vast majority of meat consumers in North America are not consuming grazing cows -- they are consuming feedlot cows. So does it really matter if some cows out there are contributing to a diverse ecology when the majority of us are supporting the corporations that couldn't give a sh*t about anything you just said?

FarmForward, which is an advocacy group to educate Americans on the state of farming and the violent/destructive aspect of factory farming, has estimated that 99% of all meat purchased in America does come from Factory Farming. However, that 'stat' is based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture. And I think 2002 pre-dates the whole minor 'food revolution' by a few years. But even assuming the 99% is accurate, how different do you think the stats would be in 2015? 95%? 90%?

As for the bolded paragraph below, if we didn't have 'feed' crops, why couldn't that land just be used for farming something else? I think I'm sorta missing your point here, cuz obviously if we didn't have feedlots, we wouldn't need to be farming that otherwise impossible to digest feed. I think I'm missing your point here maybe?

Anyway, I'm not going to sit here and shame people for eating grazing cows. If someone feels the need to eat meat that much, then okay. That is, obviously the best way to do it. I'm not convinced that it is an ethical argument for it, but it's the lesser of two evils.

[Webster6]

But we have to keep in mind that the vast, vast, vast majority of meat consumers in North America are not consuming grazing cows -- they are consuming feedlot cows. So does it really matter if some cows out there are contributing to a diverse ecology when the majority of us are supporting the corporations that couldn't give a sh*t about anything you just said?

FarmForward, which is an advocacy group to educate Americans on the state of farming and the violent/destructive aspect of factory farming, has estimated that 99% of all meat purchased in America does come from Factory Farming. However, that 'stat' is based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture. And I think 2002 pre-dates the whole minor 'food revolution' by a few years. But even assuming the 99% is accurate, how different do you think the stats would be in 2015? 95%? 90%?

As for the bolded paragraph below, if we didn't have 'feed' crops, why couldn't that land just be used for farming something else? I think I'm sorta missing your point here, cuz obviously if we didn't have feedlots, we wouldn't need to be farming that otherwise impossible to digest feed. I think I'm missing your point here maybe?

Anyway, I'm not going to sit here and shame people for eating grazing cows. If someone feels the need to eat meat that much, then okay. That is, obviously the best way to do it. I'm not convinced that it is an ethical argument for it, but it's the lesser of two evils.

Dude. Do yourself a favour and just stop. You're neither spreading awareness nor converting anyone. Just give it a break, all you've done is gotten under people's skin. Being vegetarian does not make you a hero.

[thejazz97]

I get that.

But it's been done, mostly by tribes for various reasons. Which creates the question: where does the judgement on ethics end?

If we are all animals and therefore part of the food chain, what happens when the animals and veg are gone?

It has. But society has grown to believe that eating itself is wrong. How we came to that assumption is disputed, but it just means that those tribes have... interesting values.

As a Christian, I believe that we aren't animals, and we were created above them. (Some will laugh at this, they already have.) I also believe that vegetables and animals will never truly be gone until the end of time.

Another thing, if they do end up disappearing off the face of the planet, humans will likely have created synthetic foods. I mean, we're already halfway there with fast foods.

[riffraff]

We eat the grain fed vegans

Probably a bit bony. But I'm sure the heart and liver would be very nutritious:)

[thejazz97]

Probably a bit bony. But I'm sure the heart and liver would be very nutritious:)

[riffraff]

It has. But society has grown to believe that eating itself is wrong. How we came to that assumption is disputed, but it just means that those tribes have... interesting values.

As a Christian, I believe that we aren't animals, and we were created above them. (Some will laugh at this, they already have.) I also believe that vegetables and animals will never truly be gone until the end of time.

Another thing, if they do end up disappearing off the face of the planet, humans will likely have created synthetic foods. I mean, we're already halfway there with fast foods.

I have respect for you and your faith. May you enjoy what has been provided.

[CALGARY!]

I love the taste, a tender raw stiploin.. MMMMMMMMMMM. I don't hunt, never have, not interested, love animals, but love to taste of meat. Im sorry about the way they are slaughtered, but I don't have any excuse, I eat meat for the same reason I watch hockey, its enjoyable. Why do I need an excuse.

[GLASSJAW]

The way I see it is that we too often have emotions towards these animals when it isn't our place. We like to think of ourselves as superior beings because we're at the top of the food chain, but we are still IN the food chain. George Orwell once said that men are inherently evil, and I'm a strong believer in that. We are all animals and we must do what we must to survive. Does the lion question its morality (if lions have morality) when it hunts the gazelle?

none of this actually means anything. you don't need to eat meat to survive. you certainly don't need to eat meat three times a day to survive. you have options. a lion doesn't have options. you are a person with a grocery store beside you, a lion has to eat a gazelle or else it will starve. how silly is that comparison? you are not a lion.

we don't get our eating practices from lions. period. you are not an alpha predator, you are a mindless consumer. please realize that. should we start justifying our sexual practices by looking at ape populations, or something?

why are you pretending that morality and emotion are dirty words?

We are effectively the lion in this situation, however, we are far more intelligent and efficient. We settled down from the nomadic, tribal people we once were and created great civilizations. OP, the only reason you can even ask these types of ethical/ideological questions is because we ate meat and learned to feed villages, cities, countries, etc... You don't have to worry about food because of the PROGRESS humans have made.

where did you get the impression that i am unfamiliar with the fact that people throughout history have eaten meat? why are you even typing this?

Now if someone could come up with a solution on how to continue to eat meat without leaving much of an environmental footprint I'm all for it, just for the sake of preserving our place in the future of this earth.

where did this conscience come from? last paragraph you were a proponent of the half-baked idea of "humanity is evil!" -- but either way, i hope you realize that you do not have to eat meat. you can eliminate your 'environmental footprint' by embracing the fact that you don't need meat. you choose to eat it. why? not sure, you didn't say. you only imply that it's your moral or historical imperative to do it, or something? you only really supplied some totally grandiose history lessons as if history justifies the present, or something

Oh and btw there is no right or wrong. Acting like everyone who doesn't share your opinion is less intelligent than you, really paints you into ignorant fellow. I don't know you and you might be a fine lad but from what I've read you come off as a total mong so please do try and listen to what people say. Try to see what they're saying through their eyes and try to understand where they're coming from, which is what I believe was your original intention. Either way, I'm done with this thread.

i already said 'there is no right or wrong' -- so please don't tack that on as if you're teaching me something. read the thread, or don't read the thread. contribute to the discussion, or don't.

thank you for speculating that i might be a 'fine lad,' but your estimation of me is literally valueless, for the record

it is ironic to me that someone who typed a lot of nothing, obviously didn't read my posts, or obviously didn't get them, is referring to me as a 'total mong' and asking me to listen to what people say.

[GLASSJAW]

It has. But society has grown to believe that eating itself is wrong. How we came to that assumption is disputed, but it just means that those tribes have... interesting values.

As a Christian, I believe that we aren't animals, and we were created above them. (Some will laugh at this, they already have.) I also believe that vegetables and animals will never truly be gone until the end of time.

Another thing, if they do end up disappearing off the face of the planet, humans will likely have created synthetic foods. I mean, we're already halfway there with fast foods.

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

so, how do you decide which passages to take literally and which to take more figuratively? let me guess, your compassion levels fluctuate depending on how hungry you are, or how oily and spiced up your meat is?