The majority of the reasons for not consuming animal products are fairly straightforward but, unfortunately, the more straightforward they are the less actual persausive power they seem to have(they are the one of those arguments people tend to agree with but are too immaterial to have an effect in a practical sense except in a few people). The main reasons fall into the following categories:
- Ethical
- Environmental
- Health
Health is the most obvious, as animal products contain cholesterol, fairly large amounts of saturated fats, more calories, and are more a strain on your digestive system than most plant foods. As long as one pays attention to their diet(which most vegans do quite closely due to natural reasons) then protein will not be a an issue: Legumes, soy products, grains(especially wheat gluten, which is over 70% protein), some vegetables(more notably broccoli), and nutritional yeast all contain good sources of protein. Furthermore, there have been notable athletes who did fine on a vegan diet(look up UFC Fighter Mac Danzig as an example[no, I don't watch UFC]). The only real issue is vitamin B12, which is only from animal based sources, and that can be solved by taking a supplement or fortified foods. But honestly, I find this argument the least persausive; Americans, as a culture, have a habit of being more talk than action when it comes to healthy intentions and we often brush aside such intentions when the plate is put in front of us.
Environmental is a bit less obvious but is often cited as a reason for vegetarianism/veganism so people are often familiar with it. It takes an extraordinarily large amount of resources to raise animals, especially cattle(pigs are actually the most "efficient", I believe), for slaughter. The UN estimated that around 18% of the world's greenhouse gases are from animal production, more than all the transportation sectors in the world combined(I still want electric cars though). Furthermore, I've read it takes anywhere from twelve to twenty-two pounds of feed(comprised mainly of corn and soy, unless you explicitly buy grass-fed meat) to make one pound of beef; most of the estimates I've seen are actually towards the higher end of this margin but even giving the benefit of the doubt this is atrocious(which will be addressed in the ethics section). Finally, the literal rivers of waste filled with antibiotics that can easily destroy land it is put upon is another reason as well. However, due to the disconnect between the people and the methods of production and the tainted land, this argument often fails.
Ethics is the most persausive argument, in my opinion, but also most dependent upon personal philosophy and morals. I'm not going to say anyone's morally wrong because they fail to adhere to this philosophy, just that I think this is a sound system. I'm not going to address the wrong of killing animals(that's a much more elaborate argument that I do not think I can do justice to here), instead focusing on the other main ideas. The principle one is the idea, often based off of utilitarianism but does not have to be, that causing unnecessary pain is a moral wrong. Whether or not it is to a non-human animal doesn't really have a bearing on that idea, as people become outraged when they see people abuse their animals, farm animals are malnutrition or harmed, or the pain caused by things such as horse or dog racing. Animal welfare laws exist for this reason as well as bans such as the one recently passed by Massachusetts getting ride of greyhound races. Getting back to the point, the vast majority of the meat created in the developed world comes from inhuman conditions(they are worse in the US than in Europe) that cause a large amount of unnecessarily cruel pain to a millions of animals just to provide people the pleasure of eating meat. Causing a pig to live a life where it is crammed in small cage and brutalized for its entire lifespan cannot be justified by the pleasure of eating meat, no matter how much you love your bacon. Additionally, that pig is smarter than most dogs(pigs are quite intelligent animals) and definitely animals such as horses(which aren't usually the brightest animals relatively); the reason we protect the latter animals, as one cannot kill a dog or horse for meat, is purely sentimental reasons that have no logical foundation. There is no real reason to make a distinction between a sheep, pig, horse, dog, or pretty much any such animal on the basis of pain, though some do have a cognition of a future and therefore make it more unjust on the basis of pain (I'll explain that more if requested). Now, there is a more elaborate argument that argues against the common notion that humans have the right to exploit "lower" animals and that we are distinctly separate from them but I'm not going to go into that here because I have the feeling this is already along enough for our brains during the summer.
Finally, as a short blurb, the actual difference between Welfare and Rights: Welfare activists do not think it's intrinsically wrong to raise animals for meat, eggs, or the like as long as it is done within a humane fashion; Rights activists disagree with this stance, saying it is intrinsically wrong to exploit animals due to inherent immorality and cruelty involved with such a thing. I, and most vegans(I think), are more on the Animal Rights side of the argument thought there is a lot of gray area. However, this is why I disagree with people when they say they can still consume animal products and be for animal rights—they are contradictory. To help finish explaining that, I leave you with an excerpt from Peter Singer's Practical Ethics:
Killing animals for food makes us think of them as objects that we can use as we please. Their lives then count for little when weighed against our mere wants. As long as we continue to use animals in this way, to change our attitudes to animals in the way they should be changed will be an impossible task. How can we encourage people to respect animals, and have equal concern for their interests, if they continue to eat them for their mere enjoyment?...
Comments? Ideas? Indifferent Shrugs?
No comments:
Post a Comment