Are you a vegetarian?

[Sibboleth]

However, it would be nice if animals were slaughtered more humanely, and lived more humanely. Also, there is the issue of its contribution to global warming... I think chicken is probably the best meat to eat. I prefer it in terms of taste, but also because chickens have been bred for consumption, and aren't the most sentient of animals

My Taid spent most of his working life in the poultry industry (in a very wide range of different jobs over the years as well). He never ate chicken.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

No.
Yet, I find the motives of most vegetarians honorable and I hold those vegetarians in high esteem who don't try to convert carnivores with missionary zeal and don't give you the feeling that they're morally superior.

You have a +4.00 social score and you're complaining about others personally advocating for their moral beliefs?

No. While I accept that humans can live a vegitarian lifestyle (obviously), humans are omnivores, so I see nothing wrong with eating meat.

What's the argument here?  It's instinctual, therefore it's moral?

[perdedor]

I did it for about a year...and then I dumped my girlfriend and went to Whataburger (an awesome fast food for those of you in deprived states). Never looked back.

[CultureKing]

Not a true vegetarian but I do abstain from meat for about 90% of my meals (I usually eat meat about twice a week). Personally I choose my diet based on environmental concerns, so meat is not necessarily 'evil', more that since industrial raised meat is so horrible in so many ways I find myself choosing not to eat it.

If I get a good enough job after graduating I will likely become a pescatarian; seafood is my personal weakness.

[Hatman]

No.
Yet, I find the motives of most vegetarians honorable and I hold those vegetarians in high esteem who don't try to convert carnivores with missionary zeal and don't give you the feeling that they're morally superior.

You have a +4.00 social score and you're complaining about others personally advocating for their moral beliefs?

No. While I accept that humans can live a vegitarian lifestyle (obviously), humans are omnivores, so I see nothing wrong with eating meat.

What's the argument here?  It's instinctual, therefore it's moral?

Never said it was moral. More amoral. I know where you're going with this though. I understand there are some "instincts" that are wrong, but that opens another can of worms, doesn't it?

However, it would be nice if animals were slaughtered more humanely, and lived more humanely. Also, there is the issue of its contribution to global warming... I think chicken is probably the best meat to eat. I prefer it in terms of taste, but also because chickens have been bred for consumption, and aren't the most sentient of animals

My Taid spent most of his working life in the poultry industry (in a very wide range of different jobs over the years as well). He never ate chicken.

I'd imagine not. Just like people who work in a chocolate factory are sick of chocolate. (Well, not "just like", but the idea of being around the product all the time, plus in this case the added bonus of knowing/witnessing some pretty gross things.)

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Never said it was moral. More amoral. I know where you're going with this though. I understand there are some "instincts" that are wrong, but that opens another can of worms, doesn't it?

Right.  But we're a higher-order animal that forms higher-order societies and has more latitude to think ethically than its forebearers.  Why shouldn't we open that can of worms?  We have with plenty of social and legal principles that apply to humans.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Whoa, Alcon is more of a hipster than I thought.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Whoa, Alcon is more of a hipster than I thought.

yeahhh man, corporate aggro...Monsanto and sh**t, y'know?  F'ed up.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I'm kind of kidding. But it's funny that you and bgwah would be vegetarian and I never would be despite all the bands that promoted it that I listened to in high school (which is essentially how I based my entire worldview in high school.)

[Hatman]

Never said it was moral. More amoral. I know where you're going with this though. I understand there are some "instincts" that are wrong, but that opens another can of worms, doesn't it?

Right.  But we're a higher-order animal that forms higher-order societies and has more latitude to think ethically than its forebearers.  Why shouldn't we open that can of worms?  We have with plenty of social and legal principles that apply to humans.

I never said we shouldn't open that can of worms. I just worry we could get off topic. But anyways, I can recall coming to the conclusion whilst in Kindergarten that "if other animals eat other animals, it is therefore okay for me to as well". Since then I never really thought about it, until a friend of mine suggested just what you did. Made me think. It just seems so ingrained in nature though, that some animals eat other animals.

I think it's kind of in the category of religion/spirituality and capitalism. They all don't really make sense, but they are so ingrained in human nature that they must be at the very least tolerated, and regulated to ensure that they are not excessively harmful. I.e. certain characteristics of human nature are undesirable, but can be tolerated.

[Grad Students are the Worst]

Never said it was moral. More amoral. I know where you're going with this though. I understand there are some "instincts" that are wrong, but that opens another can of worms, doesn't it?

Right.  But we're a higher-order animal that forms higher-order societies and has more latitude to think ethically than its forebearers.  Why shouldn't we open that can of worms?  We have with plenty of social and legal principles that apply to humans.

I never said we shouldn't open that can of worms. I just worry we could get off topic. But anyways, I can recall coming to the conclusion whilst in Kindergarten that "if other animals eat other animals, it is therefore okay for me to as well". Since then I never really thought about it, until a friend of mine suggested just what you did. Made me think. It just seems so ingrained in nature though, that some animals eat other animals.

I think it's kind of in the category of religion/spirituality and capitalism. They all don't really make sense, but they are so ingrained in human nature that they must be at the very least tolerated, and regulated to ensure that they are not excessively harmful. I.e. certain characteristics of human nature are undesirable, but can be tolerated.

But isn't that a problem when there's a third party involved that may be impacted?  I think the same limit of tolerance applies to religion.  And based on your economic score, you seem to think there are not only ethical limits on capitalism, but it's a tendency so potentially harmful it should be restricted by government.  So, why tolerate this in oneself?

[Hatman]

There are third parties affected by capitalism and religion as well. One could argue they are more harmful to humans than meat intake, although some would argue eating meat is harmful to one's self as well.

As for myself, I am guilty of dabbling in all three. I eat meat, I go to church, and I participate in the capitalist system.

[I left.]

and I participate in the capitalist system.

What choice do you have? At least assuming you want to stay alive?

[opebo]

Not quite, but almost. Easier that way.

What is the 'not quite', mostly?

[Grumps]

Not quite, but almost. Easier that way.

What is the 'not quite', mostly?

And what's easier?

[Grad Students are the Worst]

There are third parties affected by capitalism and religion as well. One could argue they are more harmful to humans than meat intake, although some would argue eating meat is harmful to one's self as well.

As for myself, I am guilty of dabbling in all three. I eat meat, I go to church, and I participate in the capitalist system.

Right...and you're evidently willing to governmentally enforce regulation of the negative effects of capitalism.  You're not even willing to personally limit the negative effects of meat consumption.

I'm also not sure what kind of ethical excuse "we do it, even if it's wrong" is in the first place.  If it's wrong, shouldn't we try to seek a means to limit this harm or stop this behavior?  I assume that's why you support government regulation on capitalism.  I'm not sure I follow your argument.

[Sibboleth]

What is the 'not quite', mostly?

Meat about once every two weeks or so on average, or something like that.

And what's easier?

Don't find meat very easy to eat usually.

[opebo]

What is the 'not quite', mostly?

Meat about once every two weeks or so on average, or something like that.

But the point was - what meat?  Kippers? Lamb's kidneys?

And what's easier?

Don't find meat very easy to eat usually.

False teeth?  If meats are too tough for you, try organs.  And also a steak knife helps.

[a Person]

And also a steak knife helps.

This is true of a lot of tasks.

[Yelnoc]

Absolutely not, I have a sausage and egg biscuit with a tall glass of 2% milk every morning.  Dinner always involved some sort of meet also, usually chicken.

[Sibboleth]

But the point was - what meat?  Kippers? Lamb's kidneys?

Ah, I see now. Generally either a pasty or something someone else has cooked that also involves gravy. Or fish, I guess, if that counts.

False teeth?  If meats are too tough for you, try organs.  And also a steak knife helps.

Haha, no, it's a couple of minor issues related to a medical condition.

[So the Heroes Fall]

So who thinks this video is pro-vegetarianism? I wonder if that's the message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZxk1l3u7OQ

[Hatman]

There are third parties affected by capitalism and religion as well. One could argue they are more harmful to humans than meat intake, although some would argue eating meat is harmful to one's self as well.

As for myself, I am guilty of dabbling in all three. I eat meat, I go to church, and I participate in the capitalist system.

Right...and you're evidently willing to governmentally enforce regulation of the negative effects of capitalism.  You're not even willing to personally limit the negative effects of meat consumption.

I'm also not sure what kind of ethical excuse "we do it, even if it's wrong" is in the first place.  If it's wrong, shouldn't we try to seek a means to limit this harm or stop this behavior?  I assume that's why you support government regulation on capitalism.  I'm not sure I follow your argument.

I think if in power, I would make rules limiting meat consumption, but I wouldn't abolish it. For example, ensuring all meat be free range (or at least not have the animals in appalling conditions). That will drive up the costs to the point that meat consumption will be less.

There are some parts of humanity that can never be taken away. That's why communism didn't work, and that's why purely atheistic societies will never be achieved. A society that doesn't eat meat can never be achieved either.

[Grumps]

I think if in power, I would make rules limiting meat consumption, but I wouldn't abolish it.

You whacky Canadians.