A Friendly Conversation: Exploring Omnivorous vs. Vegetarian Diet

[Steppingfeet]

Indeed. A lot of things done by myself would ensure that they were done to my particular standard on the matter. But in an interdependent complex society, we rely on sources we trust to produce that which we need or desire. Whether it's my kitchen table, or the seatbelts in my car, or the clothing I wear, or the foodstuffs I consume.

Right. But meat 'foodstuffs' involve the taking of the lives of beings who feel pain and emotions.

I understand that.

Why are you interested in knowing my reasons for retaining meat as a part of my diet?

I'm not. That's not what I asked. My question was a general one, out of sheer curiosity, and it was asked in the context of your idea of replacing factory farming with 'love-based' killing. I said I didn't think that idea was feasible on a wide scale, but if it were feasible, why would that be preferable to just avoiding meat altogether? I said nothing about your personal choices.

Meat hasn't been part of my life for 30 years. It's really no big deal to avoid it, and it's even easier now, with all the veggie options at even fast food restaurants.

So I was just curious: With veggie options freely available, that didn't cause the death of an animal, why go to all the trouble of trying to find 'humanely slaughtered' meat? Seems like a lot of hassle to me, with dubious results, so I was just wondering why, in general, meat-eaters go to such great lengths. It seems a lot easier to just quit eating animals.

And in order to answer your question, I would have to explain why I keep meat in my diet rather than, as you suggest, eliminating it altogether. Allow me to illustrate.

"Gary, why would you prefer this, what I am calling, "love-based killing" over avoiding meat entirely? It seems easier just to avoid meat than to go to the trouble of finding what you call humanely raised meat."

In order to answer, I would have to say, "Well Monica, I prefer inclusion of ethically raised and slaughtered meat in my diet over total abstention because _______." Or, "It is worth the trouble to eat humanely raised meat because _______."

And no matter what my reasons, you would, if in the mood for further conversation, seek to counter or negate any reason I might offer. In your valid perception, eating animal body complex is a categorical non-necessity and absolute moral wrong and thusly cannot, no matter the reasoning, be justified. (Excepting cases of self-defense or survival.)

You would, if interested in the energy investiture, put forth great, solid, well-researched and well-informed reasons to substantiate your point of view as the ascendent. I would acknowledge them and their validity, but I would remain unmoved because I see things differently, though I respect and commend the compassion you feel for other portions of the Creator.

In your question above, you say, "So I was just curious: With veggie options freely available, that didn't cause the death of an animal..."

Your question doesn't quite acknowledge what I had already put forth. The National Geographic article I quoted makes clear that I don't desire to avoid the death of the animal for food. I just desire to support a more humane system that reflects my own ethics; ethics that were given the catalyst to evolve thanks in part to this thread.

The crux of my whole position is that it is okay, acceptable, and ethical to eat animal meat *provided* the animal is able to live a relatively natural life and does not needlessly/excessively suffer in the process of death. You think otherwise, and that's fine, but those two points of view aren't going to be reconciled any time soon.

Much love, GLB