"If we had to slaughter our own meat, we'd all be vegetarian"

Associate
Joined
20 Nov 2002
Posts
1,385
I was a Butcher from the age of 7, my dad, his brother their dad and my two brothers, meat is just another commodity, had little say in the matter tbh. Trips to the slaughterhouse weekly, you like meat we provide meat nothing more.

I have always argued this to people but the figures now elude me, if cattle and sheep were not killed for meat and there are millions of them (you goggle the number) they would all still have to be slaughtered as they could not be allowed to roam free, so anyway you look at it they die, for meat or culling makes no difference. To be killed in the wild is 100 times worse than almost instant death in a slaughterhouse. Then if you are not going to eat or milk them what use have they in a modern world, they would become vermin, eating crops etc the breeds would have to be exterminated to make way for swaths of crops, to feed all the vegetarian's, plus no natural fertilizers for the land and so on.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,618
Or the veggies that wear leather....

Or the veggies that consume dairy products, what do They think happens to the male calves? Let lone the act that it means an animal was raised in captivity, forefully impregnated an unnatural amount of times and then slaughtered when its productivity falls below a threshold.

Vegetarians just don't make sense, one would have tone a strict vegan for starters. But then intensive arable farming also leads to the deaths of many animals and the unnatural cultivation of land and environmental destruction.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
25,821
Location
Glasgow
I have always argued this to people but the figures now elude me, if cattle and sheep were not killed for meat and there are millions of them (you goggle the number) they would all still have to be slaughtered as they could not be allowed to roam free, so anyway you look at it they die, for meat or culling makes no difference. To be killed in the wild is 100 times worse than almost instant death in a slaughterhouse. Then if you are not going to eat or milk them what use have they in a modern world, they would become vermin, eating crops etc the breeds would have to be exterminated to make way for swaths of crops, to feed all the vegetarian's, plus no natural fertilizers for the land and so on.

I'm not and never have proposed that everyone should become vegetarian but out of interest why is it always presented as a sudden thing i.e. one day the world is omnivorous and the next it is vegetarian leaving millions of meat animals bereft of purpose in life and awaiting a futile death? Would it not be more likely that if vegetarianism was an option pursued by more people the levels of animals bred for meat would simply decline as a result of a fall in demand so it would be gradual rather than a mass cull of millions of animals all at once?

Or the veggies that consume dairy products, what do They think happens to the male calves? Let lone the act that it means an animal was raised in captivity, forefully impregnated an unnatural amount of times and then slaughtered when its productivity falls below a threshold.

Vegetarians just don't make sense, one would have tone a strict vegan for starters. But then intensive arable farming also leads to the deaths of many animals and the unnatural cultivation of land and environmental destruction.

It's amazing how absolute everything has to be for some people - you can't make small changes or improvements, it has to be all or nothing. Suppose for a second you want to get fitter - do you have to become an Olympic level athlete or it's all a complete waste of time? If the answer is no then perhaps you've got a reason why absolutes don't always apply.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
15,861
Location
NW London
The difference is, we don't kill animals instinctively.

If shops were not selling ready killed/packaged meat and we had to go and "hunt" our own meat, we would absolutely kill instinctively.

Would you not hunt to feed your family?

Nature states that a father and mother will kill to keep themselves and their children fed. Humans are no different.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 May 2010
Posts
10,110
Location
Out of Coventry
There would be more vegetarians, but certainly not everyone.



My eating habits would change, but thats because I'm lazy. You get more meat per unit time killing cows and pigs than you do chickens, so I'd eat less chicken.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Aug 2005
Posts
15,552
Or the veggies that wear leather....

...or the veggies that say "I don't eat meat, but I have fish now and then"

If I had a dollar each time I heard that one....:D

These double standards really ****ing grate me which is why I gave up being a vegetarian myself as I wasn't mentally strong enough to go vegan. Unless you go vegan then whats the point, you're full of **** being a vegetarian and eating fish, eggs and dairy products!

I once got a vegetarian to eat an Aberdeen Angus steak. :D

 
Soldato
Joined
5 Jul 2005
Posts
17,995
Location
Brighton
To be fair leather is a byproduct, they aren't raised and killed specifically for it. As for people who eat fish, they aren't vegetarians, they're pescetarians which is entirely different.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 May 2011
Posts
10,200
It's amazing how absolute everything has to be for some people - you can't make small changes or improvements, it has to be all or nothing. Suppose for a second you want to get fitter - do you have to become an Olympic level athlete or it's all a complete waste of time? If the answer is no then perhaps you've got a reason why absolutes don't always apply.

But Vegetarianism just seems incredibly half-arsed. Most of them are vegetarians because they don't like the way the animals are killed for us to eat. They don't care/notice that the animal may live a ****** life trapped inside a pen and impregnated multiple times so they produce more milk but as soon as it comes to them being killed for their meat they're all up in arms.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Jul 2003
Posts
14,528
I'd have no problems killing cattle for meat, however I do think that most of my friends would. I spent a lot of time at my friend farm though and they use to kill and butcher on site, not something that's done much these days so I've seen it being done. Not nice but necessary.

I do toy with the idea of going veggie though, but in truth I simply prefer eating fish and meat regularly.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I would go back to being vegetarian, which is something I am considering atm anyway.

I know I'm late to the thread, but there are great reasons be a veggie which don't revolve around how cute the little bunnies are and how horrific it is to strangle them.

For one it's more land efficient, and you feed more people per unit land.

For two if you do it right there are health benefits.

For three... think of the cute little wabbits!
 
Permabanned
Joined
31 Dec 2007
Posts
10,034
These double standards really ****ing grate me which is why I gave up being a vegetarian myself as I wasn't mentally strong enough to go vegan. Unless you go vegan then whats the point, you're full of **** being a vegetarian and eating fish, eggs and dairy products!

I once got a vegetarian to eat an Aberdeen Angus steak. :D

LOL WUT

the point in being a vegetarian is you dont eat any animal flesh, so your point about being vegan is total rubbish

and for the 50th time vegetarians DONT EAT FISH, not much of a veggie were you if you think theres no point being veggie unless you go vegan, cos LOL vegetarians eat fish.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 May 2011
Posts
10,200
LOL WUT

the point in being a vegetarian is you dont eat any animal flesh, so your point about being vegan is total rubbish

and for the 50th time vegetarians DONT EAT FISH, not much of a veggie were you if you think theres no point being veggie unless you go vegan, cos LOL vegetarians eat fish.

What's the point of being a Veggie though? To make yourself feel better an animal isn't killed for you to eat (And a few who just don't like the taste of meat). By being a Veggie but not a vegan, you're basically saying "Don't kill animals but it's fine to impregnate fairy cows multiple times so they produce more milk and kill male dairy cows because they're useless and just take up space". Granted some Veggies will go out their way to make sure their dairy products and the like are sourced from good places that treat animals better than most but most veggies won't.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
25,821
Location
Glasgow
But Vegetarianism just seems incredibly half-arsed. Most of them are vegetarians because they don't like the way the animals are killed for us to eat. They don't care/notice that the animal may live a ****** life trapped inside a pen and impregnated multiple times so they produce more milk but as soon as it comes to them being killed for their meat they're all up in arms.

Thank you for proving the point quite so eloquently about it being always about the absolutes for some people. It's not worth the argument though, if that's the way you want to think about it then it's no skin off my nose.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Dec 2003
Posts
3,585
Location
UK
Killing animals for food and poor treatment before death are not the same thing. The former is required. The later is about saving cash at the expense of kindness.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
But Vegetarianism just seems incredibly half-arsed. Most of them are vegetarians because they don't like the way the animals are killed for us to eat. They don't care/notice that the animal may live a ****** life trapped inside a pen and impregnated multiple times so they produce more milk but as soon as it comes to them being killed for their meat they're all up in arms.

Half an arse is better than none...that's stretched the figure of speech past breaking point. :)

I'll point out here that some vegetarians won't eat eggs or dairy products for the ethical reasons you refer to. That's not veganism - veganism is about more than just food.

Lacto-ovo vegetarianism is half-arsed if it's done because of an ethical stance on the treatment of animals. Well, maybe not half-arsed. Maybe three-quarters arsed. Which stretches the figure of speech again, but it helps make the point. If a person is saying that humans shouldn't treat animals as things to be used for food, then doing it less is still something. Half-arsed, but not pointless.

Although I suspect you're right in thinking that most lacto-ovo vegetarians just don't think about the way the animals were treated in order to provide them with food. Which makes them like most omnivores.

Hmm...I seem to have invalidated my own argument :)
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Shame that no other animal apart from a human has the ability to think rationally about the ethics and morality of what it is actually doing.

The difference is, we don't kill animals instinctively.

Only when we don't have to because we've arranged some other food supply (usually involving other people killing animals for us).

Put me out in the wild and in very little time I'll be bashing animals' heads in with a club. They die or I do and instinct says it ain't going to be me. I'll use my hands and teeth if I don't have more effective weapons available.

Humans can over-ride their instincts to a large extent with thought and willpower, but we still have them and they're the instincts of an apex predator. We're not a classic apex predator, but we've used our cunning and aptitude for tool use to take the position by force. It's why human babies can make so much noise - they don't have to be silent because they don't have to hide.
 
Back
Top Bottom