meteorologist said:
Hi, I'm not exactly a vegetarian, but considering it. I really can't see why you would become one, other than the fact that animals we consume are mistreated, the way they are produced is sick and harmful to the environment...
...(snip)
You've asked a lot of questions here and many of them are those quite commonly asked. I'm going to try to answer some of them for you and I'll try to be as delicate as I can be while not avoiding some important but little-known truths.
SUFFERING
You seem to be very well connected with the fact that the human consumption of meat leads to cruelty and suffering on the part of the animals. Perhaps I've misunderstood what you've said but it seems that you see only a small problem in that. If I'm wrong about that, I'll apologize ahead of time.
Most people don't grasp the full aspect of the cruelty and suffering involved. To be honest, many others don't seem to care. But if you could follow a single animal from it's birth or hatching through the meat production of factory farming, I doubt you would be able to sit down to a table and consume the now lifeless body of that animal. Even the simple chicken is treated with a disrespect unbefitting any living creature. From the moment of birth the processing begins. Since they will be housed in quarters which press them together, it is necessary that the tip of the beak be removed to lessen their ability to peck one another. This is usually done with a mechanized hot knife which slices through the beak of several chicks per second. Often the tip of the tongue is caught in the knife as well. The smoke from the birds own burned tissues fill its nostrils and often the beak twists slightly making the cut uneven and eating difficult if not impossible.
Imagine if you can, being in a crowded elevator. You stand shoulder to shoulder with the other passengers with no room to even take a small step. Now imagine being in that elevator for your whole life. Federal law, (in the United States) requires that each bird have 2-square feet of space in which to live its life. It's not infrequent to find this law ignored. Some years back McDonald's was facing another in a series of court orders to comply with this minimal space per bird. Last I heard, McDonald's had still failed to comply and continued rasing chickens in quarters which offered only .55 square feet of space for each animal to live its entire life. Even with 2-square feet, some birds will be forced into corners where they will be unable to move. Some must have their feet cut away from the wire on which they stand before they can be sent to the processing plant, because they have been unable to move and have stood in the same place for so long that the flesh on their feet has actually grown around the wire. Think back to the last time you stood in uncomfortable shoes for a few hours. Is there any comparison? By the time they're ready for slaughter, most of these chickens are unable to stand at all because the muscles have atrophied and the joints have failed. I'll spare you the details for now but pigs, sheep and cattle are treated no better.
ANIMALS EAT OTHER ANIMALS, WHY SHOULDN'T WE?
What you've said is widely known. Many animals do eat other animals so the question is a good one. Why shouldn't humans take their place along side the other omnivorous animals and continue to eat other species?
The answer raises a lot of criticism but I find the data to be indisputable. We're not omnivores. Despite what we were taught in school and despite what our great grandparents, grandparents and parents all thought, we're herbivores. I know that sounds like a strong statement and most will begin to object immediately. But there are ways to tell what animals are designed to eat. The physiological traits are quite well established by nutritionists, biologists, naturalists, paleontologists and archaeologist. Animals which are designed to catch and consume other animals are born with the tools they need to perform such actions. Among mammals these usually come in the form of specialized teeth and claws. Do humans have claws? No, we have fingernails which are useless for the function of piercing hide and establishing a grip on a struggling animal. Certainly we do have teeth and we even have teeth we call "canines". But if you look at the function of a true canine tooth, and then apply that function to the teeth in the human mouth, you find that our canines could not pierce tough animal skin. Nor could our canines provide the grip necessary to hold an animal. Even the size and shape of our mouths display the characteristics of an animal not designed to eat meat. We lack the wide gaping maw of an animal capable of hunting successfully.
There are those who will argue that we have a brain which enabled us to develop weapons to overcome the lack of these built-in hunting tools, but that illustrates the point more than offering an argument. Nature provides us with what we need and we weren't provided with a body designed to consume flesh. As far as physiology goes, that's just the tip of the iceburg. Other human characteristics which help to classify us as herbivores include; jaw structure, jaw hinge location, salivary glands, quantity of saliva produced, pH of saliva, enzymes in the saliva, facial (biting) muscles, jaw motion, quantity of stomach acid, stomach capacity, importance of chewing in digestion, length of digestive tract, routing of digestive tract, internal colon contours, liver's ability to detoxify vitamin-A, and the concentration levels of the urine. All of these traits and more suggest that we are naturally herbivores. I'll include a picture of some teeth in a followup post. Take a look and decide for yourself about what it tells you.
"The grading of forms, organic functions, customs and diets showed in an evident way that the normal food of man is vegetable like the anthropoids and apes and that our canine teeth are less developed than theirs and that we are not destined to compete with wild beasts or carnivorous animals." -- Charles Darwin
Whether or not you believe in the process of evolution which Darwin brought to the forefront, his observations here are those of a biologist -- one who studies life and specializes in the classification of life forms. Darwin was sufficiently convinced that he himself, became a vegetarian.
HUMANS HAVE ALWAYS EATEN MEAT
This is a very common argument to suggest that meat consumption is natural for mankind. But is it really an argument? Does it raise a valid point? Man has always waged war on one another, raped, stolen, kidnapped and defrauded his fellow man. Does this mean we are intended to do so or that if we were to discontinue such practices that it would cause harm to the lot of mankind? Or does it mean that we have, throughout our history, acted on some poor assumptions and ignored what many of us seen to instinctively know - that we have the capacity to act out of conscience and not ignore our natural understanding of right and wrong.
MEAT IS A BIG PART OF OUR DIET
This is true but not for all parts of the world and not for all cultures. This turns out to be a wonderful research tool and one that hasn't been ignored. As you look around the world you find many cultures which are vegetarian or mostly vegetarian and they lack many of the things we have. Mostly they lack strokes, heart attack, diabetes, our cancer rates and our preventable death rate. Placing meat as the central focus of the diet introduces a vastly increased level of fats, particularly, saturated fats into the diet. As you check the various parts of the world and plot a chart showing the death rate from colon cancer and the quantity of fats consumed, you quickly find that wherever fat consumption is highest, the death rate from colon cancer is also highest. Where fat consumption is lowest, the death rate from colon cancer is lowest. The larger the role of meat in the human diet, the greater the incidence of heart attack, stroke, cancer and diabetes. If you check the causes of death in the United States, you find that they account for well more than half of all deaths. In 2001 and 2002, in the U.S., those four diseases were responsible for more than 77% of all deaths. And all of those diseases are most prevalent where meat consumption is the highest. So yes, meat is a big part of our diet. But that only further illustrates what is wrong with the human consumption of meat.
THE BIBLE DOESN'T SAY WE SHOULDN'T
Just as many won't hold much value in Darwin's findings, others won't hold much value in the Bible when it tells us we may eat meat. But if you read Genesis, particularly 1:29, you find that God clearly outlined what he wanted man to eat in paradise. Meat wasn't mentioned. Most agree that God's original plan for man's diet was a vegetarian diet. Since we already know that all animals are designed for a specific type of diet, can we find any biblical reference to God redesigning man to be able to handle meat consumption without suffering a greater risk of disease and a shortened life? I've never seen one. And the strong correlation between meat consumption and fatal diseases along with what we've already covered about man's physiology suggests that we still have a body designed for a vegetarian diet.
IS IT A CRIME TO KILL AND EAT AN ANIMAL?
The word "crime" has to do with man's laws. Those differ from continent to continent, from country to country and from state to state. Even within states laws may vary from county to county or region to region. But it's true that in most places, there is nothing criminal about killing and consuming animals. In fact, in the U.S. where we do have laws to restrict cruelty toward animals, livestock are specifically excluded from those laws. So it's not criminal. But is it right? Is it right to knowingly cause or promote cruelty toward another living creature when it provides us with a greater opportunity for serious disease and a shorter life, filled with more suffering?
"But for the sake of some little mouthful of flesh, we deprive a soul of the sun and light and of that proportion of life and time it had been born into the world to enjoy." -- Plutarch
"A man can live and be healthy without killing animals for food; therefore, if he eats meat, he participates in taking animal life merely for the sake of his appetite. And to act so is immoral."-- Leo Tolstoy
Plutarch, Tolstoy, Plato, Pythagorus, and Socrates were all vegetarians.
WHY IS IT EVIL TO EAT AN ANIMAL?
Personally, I have trouble with the word "evil". I tend to prefer seeing things as either right, wrong or neutral. So I can only address whether it is right or wrong to eat an animal. Medical/nutritional research has already established that it's the wrong thing to do for human health. But I suspect you're looking for something a bit deeper than that when you ask this question. So let's take a look at natural human compassion. When we are born, we seem to have a natural compassion for other living things. As we grow, we are often taught that this natural compassion is childish or impractical and often, especially in the case of males, we are taught that we aren't manly unless we abandon the compassion we naturally feel for animals.
I won't suggest that anyone actually try this little experiement, but I think in walking it through we can pretty well imagine the outcome. If you have small children in your home, preferrably 4 to 6 years old, bring home a carrot. If possible it should have the tops still on and perhaps still have a bit of soil clinging to it. Offer it to your child or children to play with. Chances are they won't play for long but whether they do or not is beside the point. Once they've had some contact with the carrot, pick it up and rip the stalks and leafy portions off and observe the reaction of the child. Wash the carrot off and slice it into pieces. Then offer them to the child to eat and see what their reaction is.
Now bring home a small rabbit and allow the child to play with the rabbit. After a time pull the rabbit away and quickly twist the head to break the rabbit's neck. (Again, I ask that you imagine this, and request you not actually do it.) Then take a knife, (the same one you used on the carrot will work.) and begin to skin and gut the rabbit in front of the child. Then cut up the carcass, cook it while the child watches and offer them some of the cooked meat to eat. Observe their reactions thoughout the process.
Now bring home a small fluffy mouse and offer it to your kitten. Will the kitten play with it as it would another kitten or will it instantly show its predatory nature and begin to hunt, stalk torment and "play" with the mouse without any signs of compassion toward it?
Animals who naturally eat meat show no signs of natural compassion toward those animals which provide a food source. The natural compassion still found in young children suggests that we feel a kinship, and a sorrow for the suffering or death of most any other animal. Our compassion betrays our true nature. How many times do we watch a heart-warming television program depicting how a community comes together to rescue a dog from a sewer pipe or a horse or deer from a mud bog? Then we turn off the television and take a quick trip to McDonald's to consume a lunch made from creatures very much like the ones we just spent half an hour offering hopes, perhaps even prayers for because we didn't want to see it suffer or die. We practice a kind of denial and separation in order to consume animals. We do this to protect our psyche from the trauma of the acts promoted by our food choices.
"You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson "Fate", The Conduct of Life, 1860
I hope that helps to answer some of your questions and perhaps gives you a bit more insight as to why some people choose to eliminate animal flesh from their diets.
So if anyone would like to share tips on healthy vegetarian meals, especially quick-and-easy ones, I'd love to hear them!
