Slaughtering and eating cats (NSFW?)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So, who "won" this one?

[Ronja]

Very funny, Zilla

[Robert_S]

So, who "won" this one?

I did.

[charlou]

So, who "won" this one?

I did.

nom.

[Robert_S]

So, who "won" this one?

I did.

nom.

Meow!!!

[lordpasternack]

What I will say, briefly, and have been meaning vaguely in the back of my mind to say for the past few days - is that I can't for the life of me think of a way to regard meat-eating as ethically equal to or superior to vegetarianism and veganism. Even putting aside the issue of cruelty, and the ethical issues around taking a sentient being's life - there are other ethical issues bearing on diet choice - and to my mind, they all weigh in favour of being more herbivorous.

Livestock, for instance, are the biggest producers of greenhouse gases on the planet (or so I have been informed) - outweighing everything from aviation, SUVs/4x4s, power stations and all the rest. Obviously this works out less per capita than other pollutants - since consumption of meat is more widespread and frequent than driving SUVs/4x4s or going on flights - but it is still an issue that leans ethically in favour of going more veggie.

Diet is a choice we're all free to make (perhaps at risk of adverse legal and/or biological consequences) - but let's not try to kid ourselves, for the sake of our consciences or for the sake of not wanting to cause a fuss - that all choices must be ethically equal.

[leo-rcc]

So what is so special about sentience that it needs special consideration? Why is the right to eat a cow any different than the right to eat a carrot?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Very funny, Zilla

[lordpasternack]

So what is so special about sentience that it needs special consideration? Why is the right to eat a cow any different than the right to eat a carrot?

Indeed. Why is my right to kill and eat an adult human any different from my right to pull up a cabbage and boil it?

Why do we pick flowers without compunction, while feeling a bit iffy about killing humans and other sentient animals willy-nilly?

These are profound considerations that we are starting to have…

[leo-rcc]

Indeed, and I still have not seen an answer yet.

[lordpasternack]

Indeed, and I still have not seen an answer yet.

Well what is your answer? Do you feel that killing healthy people is, from some objective perspective, ethically equivalent to pulling up carrots? Do you think that you should feel the same way about mowing down a crowd with a machine gun as you do about driving a combine harvester through a field?

What are the differences that consciousness and sentience, bring to the issue? The capacity to suffer, physically and psychologically? The capacity to be aware of one's existence and to enjoy going on existing? The capacity to suffer the loss of other sentient beings? Do these things make no difference?

Has anyone shown clearly that plants are any more capable of suffering or being aware of what they are, than the soil they're growing in - that killing and eating plants is ethically distinguishable from eating mashed rocks? Are plants capable of feeling sensory pain, of suffering - of feeling fear, loss, mourning, or anything, in relation to their own death or death of others around them? Are they aware of their existence or of anything's existence, and how they'd vaguely like to keep being?

Because that is what it boils down to with me. To me, if these things don't matter ethically, then nothing does. Ethics means nothing if it isn't about consideration for those capable of suffering and valuing their lives, and those of other beings around them also possessing those qualities.

And I don't honestly believe that you do feel similarly about killing all bacteria, archaea, plants, fungi and animals - or that you rationally think you should. I think it's more a little sideline of philosophy, and a test of how others can articulate a viewpoint, than an argument that you do want to hold to.

[leo-rcc]

My answer? Oh I'm sorry, her I thought you were the one trying to make a case for stopping something we as a species have been doing for centuries, so I assumed you are the one that has to bring a valid argument to the table.

I do think human beings deserve more consideration than others because I am one. That is speciesism I know, but there you go. You are in the luxury position to be able to choose what to eat and still be healthy, as do I. Applying ethics to a food choice are a sign that people have it good. I don't hold to this position that what you eat has to be morally justified. To me if a food tastes good, if it is legal, and I can afford it, its good enough for me.

Just because you draw a line in the sand somewhere doesn't mean I need to respect that line. And that makes me not better than you or worse than you, we just have different boundaries. So far I've not heard a single argument that convinced me. Specially the valuing their lives bit. That is just guesswork on your part, you don't know if a cow values its life. The cruelty issue has been addressed before so I won't delve into that.

[lordpasternack]

I do think human beings deserve more consideration than others because I am one. That is speciesism I know, but there you go.

So after probing ME for a more sturdy base to my own argument, yours simply boils down to, you think humans deserve more consideration because you are one? I don't suppose you think whites and males also deserve more consideration because you are one?

I don't hold to this position that what you eat has to be morally justified.

Do you hold to the position that what you fuck has to be morally justified?

To me if a food tastes good, if it is legal, and I can afford it, its good enough for me.

Would you feel the same way about someone making a similar dismissal about prostitution/marriage of minors, in places where this is legally above board?

Just because you draw a line in the sand somewhere doesn't mean I need to respect that line. And that makes me not better than you or worse than you, we just have different boundaries.

I do love the smell of moral relativism in the morning.

So far I've not heard a single argument that convinced me. Specially the valuing their lives bit. That is just guesswork on your part, you don't know if a cow values its life. The cruelty issue has been addressed before so I won't delve into that.

You're right, I've yet to get thorough neurological data and read all the pertinent psychological experiments delving into the cerebral existence of bovines and other livestock - but I do know enough to know that they appear to experience common mammalian sensations of affection, friendship, fear, stress and sensory pain - enough to glean some kind of vague self-awareness and knowledge and defensiveness about one's existence. And I also know enough to deduce that pigs are likely more sentient than cats and dogs.

As to cruelty, I want to get back to that at some point. There is some data particularly that captive bolt and electrical stunning aren't always adequate - particularly electrical stunning. Indeed, there was even a case a while back where someone killed their dogs by first stunning with captive bolt, and this was deemed an 'inhumane' way to kill dogs. And either that was just some bizarre speciesist consideration with no real ethical substance, or there may be genuine concerns that captive bolt stunning just often does involve some degree of suffering (which we couldn't be subjecting doggies to).

[Rob]

It is objectively true the the raising and slaughtering of animals for our eating habits causing excessive pain to them. I would say it would be equivalent to torture. These things are factually true:

1) Animals can feel pain and suffer
2) The massive amounts of livestock we raise to eat does harm our environment
3) It is morally unethical to cause needless pain and suffering.

These 3 facts are not arguable. For these three reasons I would support a reduction in livestock and an overall reduction in the average amount of meat intake. I unfortunately am not able to do so. I simply do not have the income to support such a diet. When you have to worry about money and you start comparing the food costs it is quite apparent how expensive it is.

Leo, I can't say I get your point. You question why we should value the manner in which we eat as ethical? It's quite easy to understand, just like it's easy to know why people boycott certain products that are produced through the misfortune and suffering of others. I think you are fully capable of understanding each proposition.

[lordpasternack]

It really is bizarre how certain meat produce works out cheaper than plain veggie food. When you consider the amount of time and resources that go into producing a hamburger versus those that go into producing a meal-sized amount of pasta, or beans, or whatever, it is deeply counter-intuitive and a bit suspect that the latter should wind up costing more than the former.