The Importance Of Ethical Consumption Of Meat And Vegetarianism

Decent Essays
Morality consists of principles that distinguish between right and wrong (Collins dictionary, 2015), which means it refers to certain code of conduct that, under certain provision, would be put forward by all rational persons. Ethical consumption of meat and vegetarianism has been a notable debate for quite a long period of time with a lot of arguments still going on. Vegetarianism has failed to take a strong ethical stand since the nature of all human beings is to adapt to an omnivorous diet. Also, human body demands a huge amount of nutrition that can only be obtained from non-vegetarian diet. Even though it seems wrong to kill animals cruelly for the sake of consuming them, animals are not moral in this world and they do not have any …show more content…
“They cannot live ethically, cognitively and critically in those superior human ways”, Rolston (1988). Ethically, animals are valuable beings whose rights should be respected and given its due.By being herbivorous we can reduce the pain and sufferings of thousands of different lives. Animals are conscious creatures that have feelings and social associations (Grandin & Deesing, 2003). However, animals do not live in an ethical world and are not a portion of the human culture. They can't feel the trouble that they are intended to be eaten. (Rolston, 1988). On the off chance that either a typical human grown up or a dog has to die, it is ethically best that the catastrophe jumps out on the side of the dog because less intrinsic quality of life would be lost. (Li, 2002). Therefore, killing animals in a humane way for consuming them is justified. Moreover, if it is claimed that vegetarianism is ethical because it saves lives, it ignores the fact that plants are also living beings (Pantagraph, 1991). According to Cleve Backster (1968), a man completely not knowing of plant and animal science has not just tested plants for discernment and feeling, he asserts that he has experimental evidence that plants encounter an extensive variety of feelings and considerations. He additionally asserts that plants can read human personalities and he tested his plants on a polygraph machine and found that plants respond to considerations and dangers. We the human beings, animals and plants are part of the food chain. Animals also kill animals in order to survive. Unless an alternative pathway is developed of how to produce chlorophyll and grow roots, we will keep on killing in order to survive. (Pantagraph, 1991). Therefore vegetarianism is not moral either if it claims killing living beings to be unethical. Ultimately, even though it is believed by some that animals are treated unethically for which it is

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    In addition, it is considered a social norm to eat animals, but extremely wrong to eat another human. Although this is a norm, this belief technically makes people Speciests because they are favoring saving their own species over other species. By killing animals simply to pleasure our taste buds and considering animals to be acceptable to eat, humans prove themselves to be Speciests. Not only do humans eat animals, but they also use them as test subjects. It is considered very unethical to use a human as a test subject in an experiment even for biomedical research, so animals are used.…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Vegan Diets Pros And Cons

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Such individuals argue that the consumption of animal products is unethical given the fact that animals are abused and suffer at the hands of humans, in order to provide the latter with food. The Vegan Society (n.d.) argues that one of the main reasons for vegan conversions if the prevention of animal exploitation. Vegans believe that animals, being sentient creatures, should not be abused and exploited by humans for food. Even Gunnars (2013), an opponent of vegan diets admits that ethical concerns over the conception of meat are justifiable. Thus veganism is a stand against animal cruelty and seeks to reduce such cruel practices by halting their consumption of animal products.…

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In conclusion, killing animal have both advantages and disadvantages. Advantages of killing animals are used for food, out of suffering, and dangerous animals. These reasons are the important point that we can kill animals for surviving and helping them. In contrast, we should not kill animals for these following reasons: the cruel thing, the animal extinction, and contrast to religion. In my opinion, killing animals is not appropriate.…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Veganism Vs Vegetarianism

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages

    They’re food of course! Vegetarianism and veganism are wrong because meat is necessary for a human’s diet, it is costly and unethical to distribute vegetarian meals, and animals are on the earth for the benefit of humans and it is more than okay to eat them. Although vegetarian diets seem to be an enlightened idea to help the planet and ease suffering worldwide, this just isn’t true. The side effects of this decision outway and counteract the very issues that they try to solve as well as cause a multitude of other problems. A well known medical journal, WebMD, proves that purely vegetarian diets are harmful to all human bodies.…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Violated interests explain that even the most humane forms of preparing and killing animals for food nearly almost violates the animals most basic interest which is to predominantly keep living. Modern agriculture often violates other key animal rights/ interests as well; to live in natural or decent conditions, to make free choices, to be free from fear again, to live healthy lives without needing medical interventions, to eat a natural diet and to enjoy the normal/social/family/community life of its spaces . The argument for human interest vs animals interests can be made invalid as humans don’t need to eat meat in order to survive whereas if you kill animals for meat you are permanently killing them. Animals are essentially like us so do deserve to have their interests heard. Human interest in this case is classed as trivial because human beings don’t need to eat meat in order to…

    • 891 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    On Eating Animals Analysis

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages

    While considering the ethical aspects of eating meat, I personally find myself imagining the human as part of a natural circle of life where animals kill and eat each other to survive. Genuine disgust at the cruelty has been evident in the response of donations to animal welfare groups. So it's not to say that farm animals get no sympathy in the United States, but only that Americans somehow don't recognize that cruelty is the norm, not the exception, and is incorporated into the very idea of factory farms; what makes meat cheap is the assembly line processing. Treating animals humanely begins with natural diets, open spaces for living, eliminating the use of hormones that manipulate body weight and mutilations, together with more in depth training for caretakers and inspectors, maybe surveillance cameras, and professionals who enforce laws and prosecute violators, and so on all of which would make meat more expensive. Nothing strikes me as more absurd than calling oneself an animal lover while consuming industrialized meat, though people will surely continue to lie to themselves and even offer various excuses to defend their habit.…

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Tristram McPherson enthusiastically sets out to prove that killing animals under nearly any circumstance is morally wrong. In “Why I am Vegan”, he lays out a multitude of different reasons which it is wrong to kill even painlessly. McPherson has several very valid and reasonable ideas however they lack any type of support as to why they should be upheld. McPherson spends a lot of the second section considering the autonomy and future of the animals; however, more importantly he compares the killing of animals to the killing of humans. McPherson does not provide adequate reasoning for why the practice of killing animals is morally wrong.…

    • 1716 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Whatever meat we consume, we end up taking the life of an animal and thus end the respect we had for life. We cannot respect life when it is wrapped up in plastic and know nothing about its origin or what it went through. If we could take more part in the treatment of animals in…

    • 1277 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The absurdity of the first horn forces us into the second. In the second horn we do kill animals, which allows us to live and live well but makes justice impossible to maintain (1, 4). The second horn states that if we allow justice to apply to animals, then we will be forced to be unjust in order to ensure that we either live well or even live at all. Being required to be unjust in order to live our lives is also absurd. As is the nature of a dilemma, neither horn is acceptable.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    As an alternative, there are people who eat both meat and vegetables. However, people who eat mostly vegetables and fruits are known as vegetarians. On the other hand, others prefer to eat meat and are considered as meat eaters. Some vegetarians won’t eat meat because they blame humans for killing animals in slaughter houses and extinguish them. On the other hand, meat eaters are against eating vegetables because they would not consider themselves as "rabbits".…

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays