Richard_V

In that case, I respectfully bow out of this conversation. .....And whoever is dishing out the red & green reputation points is defo a salad-dodger. Completely irrational statements made by meat-lovers get left alone whilst any point made by an animal lover is jumped on and 'red carded' almost immediately. What gives?

No need to be sorry. I just don't agree with the 'facts' in your post. I find it unbelievable that you don't believe animals have the capacity to feel pleasure, pain, joy, misery, fear. Have you ever met a dog? I don't agree that fish are just waiting to be food for other animals. I don't agree that killing animals is necessary for survival. I am just one of many (living) examples - having not consumed any animal products for almost 2 years now. Unfortunately, this is not the case 9 times out of 10 given the way livestock is treated in industrialised nations.

An example of speciesism is in your quote, below: Who are you to say what a fish feels or experiences / does not feel or does not experience? Is this fish just waiting to get eaten? This guy was an expert: Charles Darwin There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher animals in their mental faculties.… The lower animals, like man, manifestly feel pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery.

Genuine lol

It's very difficult to have a debate about animal rights with a speciesist. Just as it would be impossible to have a debate about human rights with someone who holds racism as a core belief. It has been universally accepted that non-human animals have the same capacity as us when it comes to feeling joy, happiness, sadness and fear. Just to be clear, are you saying you agree with the below? - and I really hope this is humour! It sounds like an old Derek & Clive sketch (Peter Cook & Dudley Moore) where they are talking about what the whales have ever done for us humans-- "Show me a whale that's ever written a top 10 song, or written the equivalent of Othello by Shakepeare. Whales were at the Nuremberg rallies! etc etc " Great stuff! Go to about 3 minutes 20 seconds in....

So which is more harmful? Killing some small ground dwelling animals as a result of crop harvesting or Exploiting, torturing and killing countless billions of animals in oder to enjoy their flesh, secretions and skin What's wrong with living healthily and happily whilst minimising the suffering and impact on other living beings?

I love this Facebook page: Christians Against Vegetarians & Vegans

Lions are carnivores. They do not have a choice. Their physiology dictates that they must eat meat. In this society, we can have vitamin B12 in products like nutritional yeast (which is also delicious by the way) http://www.vegkitchen.com/nutrition/nutritional-yeast-a-great-source-of-b12-and-other-b-vitamins/ Organic vegetables (grown in natural, nutrient dense soil) will have natural B12 within the trace soil embedded in their skin -- another reason why it's always good to eat your organic fruit and veg with the skin on. Nori seaweed is a great natural source of Vitamin B12: http://www.naturalnews.com/035138_nori_vitamin_b-12_iodine.html A lot of people are unaware that livestock are frequently given B12 supplements - which means meat eaters are often getting it 2nd hand through meat.

My argument is this: In the society we live in, it is completely unnecessary to consume animal products in order to live a healthy life. *(see below) it is therefore unnecessary to fund the exploitation, torture and killing of animals. Funding the exploitation, torture and killing of animals is something one chooses to do based solely on one's taste for animal flesh, secretions and skin. *This has been proved time and time again by independent nutritionalists. The British National Health Service also agrees. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Vegetarianhealth/Pages/Vegandiets.aspx

The disgusting treatment of animals is the reason most people become vegan and stop consuming animal products.

For anyone who wants to open their eyes to the reality, here are some examples of the typical treatment animals suffer on large-scale farms. Pig torture: http://www.peta.org/videos/mother-pigs-and-piglets-tortured-in-a-north-carolina-factory-farm-2/ http://www.walmartcruelty.com Veal calf torture: http://www.cratedcruelty.ca Dairy cow torture: http://www.sliceofcruelty.com http://www.mercyforanimals.org/dairy/ Sheep torture: http://investigations.peta.org/australia-us-wool/ Fur farm torture: http://www.peta.org/videos/a-shocking-look-inside-chinese-fur-farms/

That Youofsky speech is a classic, but I have to say, I prefer Philip Wollen's approach Incredibly succinct and very, very difficult for any rational person to argue with.

http://www.mfablog.org/indian-city-becomes-first-vegetarian-city A whole city of heartless, psychopathic plant butchers! Palitana becomes first city in the world to outlaw animal slaughter and the sale of meat & eggs.

Oh OK. Well, good luck with that then.

I couldn't agree more. Cut the head off a flower and see how many people get upset. Cut the head off a dog and see how many people get upset. It's a pointless and childish argument often made by people who have run out of arguments to justify the consumption of animal products. Clutching at straws so to speak. Also, there are a great many plants which actually rely on being eaten by animals in order to spread seeds and propagate their species.

We could see how that could work, maybe at some point in the future if that ever happens. It's purely hypothetical. What can you do now? How can we help make the world a better place for every living being NOW?

If the soy bean industry is government subsidised, it's only because of the demand for meat. The percentage of worldwide soy bean produce used for human consumption is minuscule. The rest is for feeding factory farmed animasls. I try to avoid soy when possible anyway - almond milk is way nicer. If every man woman and child on this planet wants to eat meat, where are these grass fed pasture cows going to graze? Another planet? Have you any idea what kind of space is needed for what you are talking about? Factory farming is a solution for the demand for meat. Were it not for factory farming, meat would cost 10 times what it does now. Grass fed beef (or any other animal) for everybody is impossible.

I guess the two biggest questions which divide us are: 1. Is it necessary for human beings to consume animal flesh and secretions in order to live a healthy, happy life? AND 2. Do non-human animals have the same fundamental right as human beings to live free from exploitation, enslavement, torture and murder? Until these fundamental (and clearly linked) points can be agreed upon, there will be no end to the debate. Regarding dinner, it might be a tough one! Screw the food, let's just have cocktails!

But here are some hard facts: The type of exhaustive and unnatural corn / grain / soy etc. farming you mention is mostly for feeding animals in the animal agriculture business. Look at the statistics - it's shocking. 60% of corn grown in the US is used for animal feed. The percentage of worldwide soy production used for animal feed is off the charts. The Amazon rain forests - the lungs of this planet - are being chopped down so more farmers can plant soy in order to feed cattle bound for consumption in the west. It's all completely upside down. Some would say insane. Add onto that the methane and excrement produced by these billions of animals every year and it's a ticking time bomb. Because of insane government subsidies given to farmers in the west and all of the environmental issues, the true cost of meat is simply hidden... people who choose to eat meat should be paying far more for it. Far more. Instead, everyone is forced to pay for meat-eaters choices indirectly through taxation. So yes, consuming animal products is a choice... just not a very fair one. "I support animal cruelty and the destruction of the environment" is not a choice I believe people would make if they were educated about the facts. Alas, so many people simply do not want to hear facts. Otherwise sane and rational people will bring out the "lions do it" and "plants have feelings tho" arguments. I mean, bacon tastes good... but not THAT good :-)

I think perhaps you have a very romantic vision of 'animal husbandry'. Even the phrase sounds benevolent. Unfortunately, the truth is as far from benevolent as it gets: http://www.meat.org Please post some concrete evidence that the animal agriculture industry (as it exists today) is not single-handedly the most polluting, destructive and unsustainable form of farming in existence. I recently watched a documentary called 'Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret'. It opened my eyes to just how devastating the animal agriculture business is to the environment. It is literally killing the planet - and not very slowly either. For anyone interested in this topic, I highly recommend it. http://cowspiracy.com

99.9% of the population pay someone else to murder (and in most cases, torture) animals so they can enjoy the taste of their flesh and secretions because they definitely don't want to know what those beings have to endure in death - let alone 'life'. Hang a dog upside down, slit it's throat, chop it into bits and throw it on a barbecue and people will scream bloody murder and call the police. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs. Scientists have learned that pigs have the cognitive function of a three year old human child. Do some proper research and see how animals are treated on factory farms - there is undercover footage available on many websites. One doesn't have to use the NAP or any other three letter construct to see that it is just plain evil. Anyone worried about plants 'having feelings' (one of the more hilarious arguments brought up when people feel morally inferior to vegans) should go ahead and become vegan. If the entire human population switched to a plant based diet, many many more plants would be saved due to the sheer quantities used in animal agriculture to feed livestock.

It's one thing to talk about humans being willing to sell themselves into slavery - presumably under terrible / desperate circumstances. To talk about animals in the same context as humans is, in my opinion, futile. This quote from Henry Beston sums up my position: "We need another, wiser and perhaps more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature and living by complicated artifice, man in civilization surveys the creatures through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronise them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein we err... we greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with extensions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren; they are not underlings; they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth."

You are posing a hypothetical question based on animals having the ability to reason and enter into contracts with humans. Why don’t we pretend there is an advanced alien species who enjoy the taste of human flesh / milk and enjoy wearing our skin. Regarding milk, the conversation might go something like this: "Hello human female. My friends and I own a farm and we would like to make you an offer. We agree to keep you safe, house and feed you in return for the following: 1 - We will need to inseminate you (forcefully if you resist). 2 - Once you have given birth, we will need to take your baby away so that we can have your milk. Don’t worry! As long as your baby is female, we will put it in a pen with other babies and feed it. If it’s male, we will kill it as cheaply and efficiently as possible because we enjoy eating human babies very much. We call it veal. 3 - You will have to stay indoors all day every day, in a pen just big enough for you to stand in. Sitting or resting is not an option as we need maximum milk yields to make a profit. 4 - You will be hooked to a machine which will constantly pump your breasts for milk. This may result in painful, infected and pus-filled sores, but we do provide antibiotics. 5 - This will go on continuously for 3-4 years and then, once you are ‘spent’ we will send you to a slaughter house to be hung upside down and either have your throat slit or a bolt rammed into your skull. Alternatively, you can take your chances on your own and in the wild. "

I didn’t word that very well - sorry - I meant equality across species (in terms of their right to be free from torture and exploitation) As far as we know, animals are not capable of being moral or immoral, but they clearly have preferences. It’s safe to assume that all beings (in a natural, healthy state) prefer to live than die. They prefer freedom to imprisonment and nurture to torture. The fact that certain beings cannot communicate these preferences using a recognisable human language does not diminish their clear and demonstrable ability to feel them. To quote Charles Darwin: “There is no fundamental difference between man and animals in their ability to feel pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery.” In industrial nations, most animals are treated as commodities and products purely for exploitation and profit. Approximately150 billion are slaughtered each year and it’s safe to say that the majority of them live out their short, tormented lives in horrific conditions. Then there are pets, which people enjoy and ‘love’. This clear contradiction creates a cognitive dissonance in many people when the subject of animal rights is discussed. It is known as speciesism and on a philosophical level, it simply does not compute. Anyone who eats pig, lamb or beef should have no problem with someone else eating dolphin, dog or cat. India has made some headway by declaring dolphins ‘non-human persons’ and protecting them as such. Should this extend to all animals, everywhere? Perhaps animals can be looked at in a similar way to (human) toddlers who cannot express their preferences in recognisable language and similarly cannot grasp abstract moral & philosophical concepts. We don’t expect small children to be subject to or conform to philosophical or moral ideals. Yet we (hopefully) respect and recognise the inherent rights they were born with. I believe that every action from a being capable of grasping the concept of morality towards any other being has moral content - regardless of species.

Lab created meat does not violate animal or human rights as far as I can tell! Nutritionally speaking, I have no idea.