Do you remember your first dog or cat? Perhaps even your first boa constrictor? Whatever your preference, pets can play a huge role in our lives, even becoming full-fledged family members. But is domestication really in an animal’s best interest? Does pet ownership create a loving bond between human and animal, or does it only serve our own interests?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
You are arguing against nature on one hand, for it on another
Morality is Not a Matter of Choice
You wrote: Humans who wish to be vegan have that choice. Those who don't should also have that choice just as ursine, canine, feline and other carnivorous or omnivorous animals do.
Carnivores have no choice, but humans do have a choice (as omnis). When a cat hunts at night, she is not making a moral choice, she is acting out of instinct. She has no choice about what she eats. As humans with moral thinking capacity, we can choose to make choices to live our lives without hurting anybody else.
Some people say about many different issues, "Well that's your opinion and this is mine". Opinions are fine in most situations except for situations where morality is concerned. A man should not be entitled to act on his opinion to have sex with children for instance. A personal opinion does not make something right. It's either moral or it isn't.
Killing animals for food is no more morally acceptable than killing humans for food. It's the same act done on a different species. We all feel pain. It's not less painful just because they aren't human. They don't have less of a will to live because they aren't human. To think it's ok to kill a non-human animal just because "it's only an animal" is quite simply speciesist, which is just the same as any other form of discrimination like sexism and racism . The fact that the animal was killed for the purpose of food is no justification for the act of violence, just as it isn't for killing a man. As we discussed before, we do not need animal products to be healthy. That means that eating them and killing them is totally unnecessary.
If a violent act is unnecessary then it is immoral (no matter who the victim -whether black, white, woman, man, child, old person, gay person or animal). Therefore killing animals for the purpose of food and clothing is immoral because it is unnecessary.
- Desert Girl
June 14, 2009 7:24AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Respect, but disagree
A couple of points here. Your statement "either it's wrong or it isn't" is a pretty black and white statement. And who gets to make the decision what's right? You? Me? No. Since one person can't be relied upon to make moral decision as a whole, we leave it up to society .
That's why it's considered amoral for a man to have sex with a child. Because as a whole, society says it's wrong.
And not to get off topic, but to make a point, in most cases abortion is unnecessary, and it is a violent act, so it's amoral too, right? But many who would advocate animal rights would, in the very next breath, advocate abortion as well.
- LagerHead
June 23, 2009 1:53PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Slavery, Torture, Sexism & Racism Used to be Societal Norms
G'day Lagerhead. You have such trust in your society ! So wherever the sheep are going must be right? Society as you know never agree on everything, and there are as many opinions out there as there are people. There are indeed majority thinking about one issue and another, but each person is an individual with variations however small they may be. Surely you must be aware that there are countless examples throughout our human history of the majority (society), including the law , being wrong. Slavery, monarchy, dictatorships, child labour, torture , forbidden religions, unfair imprisonment, forced marriages, sexism, racism , etc, etc. Many times we got it wrong and people suffered. Sometimes we learned from it and changed. Then we look back and think, "I can't believe we used to do that to people and call it normal." In the case of animals , we are asking the same questions we used to about our unfair treatment of people, and seeing if the same discrimination is applied to animals. Is it really necessary for us to make animals suffer and deny their most vital needs (life and freedom), in order to satify our trivial needs (for fashion and food pleasure), when all the non-animal alternatives exist offering a completely non-violent option for living.
Abortion I hear is a big issue in the US, but not in Australia. So I assume that's why u brought it up. Yes, it is common for animal rights activists (many but not all) to support pro-choice and this may seem contradictory at first, but here's the reason: it's about sentience.
Sentience (self-awareness and the ability to suffer) is all that is required for a being to be a part of the moral community of which we may respect basic rights to life and liberty and happiness. This is why vegans choose to eat plants (that are alive but possess no sentience or feelings), but avoid animal products like dairy, eggs and meat because they involve great suffering in animals. Vegans choose to stop participating in violence on animals because it is unnecessary to sustain a healthy life using any animal products, we can get every nutrient we need from plants. According to what extensive science has proven, (so far) foetuses are not sentient. A small group of cells and a tiny foetus do not have enough brain cells to be capable of sentience. They may move and react to stimuli in the womb, but cannot experience pain or self awareness. That is until about 20 weeks of pregnancy when science has observed that foetuses may develop sentience around this time. Hence terminations are recommended before 20 weeks. The other reason is that, unlike most people who are adults or children , a foetus is sharing a situation with another body who is a right holder. The two are connected and affect the other in a very unique situation. So considerations must be given to both beings in this instance, hence the option for choice.
If someone is pro-life and in disagreeance with mainstream science about the sentience status of a foetus (and perhaps believe that they are sentient from conception even without a brain, or they believe that simply being alive is all that is important), then to be consistent with their values for "life" then they should absolutely go vegan. If they don't, it doesn't make any moral sense. Fighting for the rights of an unborn "life" whilst sticking forks into non-human animal "life" causing death and torture to that animal is utterly inconsistent. An animal is a "life" too.
- Desert Girl
June 24, 2009 7:59AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
O_O
"A man should not be entitled to act on his opinion to have sex with children for instance."
Are you seriously comparing rape to killing an animal for sustinence? Are you that extremist?
And you vegans can say what you want but the human body needs protein. We are designed for it. And as for morality are you going to call Jesus immoral? He ate meat .
- Songbird21
October 22, 2009 5:39AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
There is protein in almost everything/dogs
Firstly, the person who wrote about sex with children was speaking against animal rights advocates and secondly - there is protein in just about every plant based food you can think of.
Here is a site that has pretty good charts showing the protein content of fruit , vegetables, nuts, seeds and animal products. http://www.vegparadise.com/protein.html
As for Jesus, neither you or I can prove 100% what his diet was, his choices were made at a particular time and place, but there are many who believe Jesus was at one point, an Essene. The Essenes followed a vegan diet, even back then - so who knows?
I just think we have a choice about whether we think it is OK to eat animals for food or not. If you think it is OK - that is your moral choice. I don't think it is - so that is my moral choice.
As far as the original queston about keeping ' pets ' - I live with two dogs and do my best to give them a decent life, and when they pass on (after crying a lot) I will open my home to another two dogs, but I will always have them sterilised because there are just too many dogs with nowhere to go in the world today.
I do enjoy their company, and they seem to like hanging out with me too, but domestic dogs are a human creation, which today is taken to extremes with breeding dogs to look a certain way in spite of how that may affect their lives and even inbreeding so bad that many 'pedigree' dogs are born with terrible health problems.
As much as I have loved having dogs in my life, I have to agree that the practise of breeding dogs to be our companions needs a rethink. I'm all for providing homes for needy dogs now, but companion animals are just another way that we have turned animals into a commodity in my opinion.
- Trish108
October 28, 2009 1:24AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Yes, there is protein...
...in almost everything, but not the right *kind* of protein. Animal protein is very different from plant protein. Our bodies need animal protein. There was a couple a while back who fed their baby a strict vegan diet and the baby died from malnutrition http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=185948
Most vegans do start out healthier than non-vegans, but over time (years) there is cumulative malnourished effect and their health begins to fail. I've done a fair amount of research on this. At least vegitarians still consume milk and eggs and get their animal protein that way.
A vegan diet in Jesus' time would have been impossible. Vegan diets are only possible (For the few years they work) because of modern technology and dietary discoveries.
Actually, if you look into the history of humans and dogs, the first companion dogs came to the humans by choice and hung around with them for food and such. I do agree with you though that the breeding of dogs should be stopped for at least a few years to let the population wind down. I also agree about certain pure bred dogs. Breeds like the bulldog and the Boston terrier frighten me because it's a clear indication that the people who buy/breed those dogs only care about astetics and/or money . No dog breed with that many breathing problems should ever be sanctioned.
- Songbird21
October 28, 2009 4:07AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
That protein myth was dispelled long ago
Hi Songbird21
The idea that vegetable protein is inferior is a very old myth that has been dispelled many times since I first went vegetarian 26 years ago. Back then I carefully made sure I ate rice with my lentils so that I was getting a complete protein etc.
Just saying it is so, doesn't make it true. It is simply not true that the human body requires animal protein. Many hundreds of thousands of vegans around the world have shown this to be the case.
As for the idiots who gave their baby just soy milk and apple juice, well they were neglectful parents. There are soy based infant formulas on the market for babies who are allergic to dairy and eggs, if you can't breast feed.
My son had no animal products until he was 12 months old because I am asthmatic and I read that animal products in the first 12 months could put him at higher risk of having asthma himself. I was a lacto ovo vegeatarian back then and I breastfed him soley for the first six months as is recommended, then added some mashed fruit and vegies at 6 months, but continued to breastfeed until he was 12 months old. He was a 10 pound baby at birth and put on weight very well just from breast feeding . Now he is a healthy, strong 6 foot 2 young man.
Please point me to the studies that have lead you to believe this stuff about vegans being malnourished in the long term. You can be vegan and have a terrible diet or vegan and have a very healthy diet. Anyone not following a varied diet with lots of whole foods can become malnourished, whether they eat meat or not.
The main concern for a vegan is B12, not protein. B12 used to be abundant in the soils but is not anymore and anyway we are pretty obsessive about cleaning dirt off our vegetables nowadays so we would miss getting the bacteria that contains it due to that too. That is where vegetarian animals get their B12. Vegan humans generally take a B12 supplement to make sure they don't get deficient - because the alternative is relying on getting it from bacteria in dirt.
I googled do we need animal protein and found this article and no it is not a vegan site http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/healthy-food-do-you-need-animal-protein.html
The Essenes are well known to have been vegan and there was an archeological dig at a site said to be where a permanent community of Essenes lived and they found not one animal bone - which is unheard of in archeological terms. This is clear evidence that the community did not keep any animals. You can read about it in this archeological zine article http://www.archaeology.org/9905/newsbriefs/vege.html
Your comments about veganism being impossible without modern technology are puzzling and make no sense to me at all. What is behind your thinking here?
There is a lot more modern technology involved in the slaughter of animals and the milking of cows and most modern day non-vegans would have to go vegan if meat and dairy didn't exist for them neatly package in the supermarket.
- Trish108
October 28, 2009 5:24AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Baby Who Died Was Not a Vegan
The story about the baby who died from malnutrition on a diet of soyamilk and apple juice was not technically a vegan . The parents were not vegans either. They never intended to raise their baby on a vegan diet. They simply made poor choices about what to feed their infant and failed to read the warning that is on soymilk cartons stating that it is not a complete baby milk formula and not suitable for infants. They said they fed the baby a vegan diet on the advice of their lawyer to try to get out of being responsible for the infant's death. They wanted to blame the baby's death on a vegan diet rather than take the blame themselves. The media gave more attention to the vegan diet than the parents' poor food choices for the baby.
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:23AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Eaten for Pleasure, Not Subsistence
Hello Songbird,
Having an Opinion Does Not Make it Right
I was using one example of an immoral act that I knew you already agreed was immoral to demonstrate that simply having an opinion does not make something right. I was not comparing rape of women to killing animals . I believe both are wrong, but they are both very different actions and wrong in different ways. To start with, most people do not believe it is wrong to kill animals, just as many early cattle farmers in Australia did not believe it was wrong to shoot aborigines.
Eaten for Pleasure, Not Subsistence
Nobody these days kills animals to eat them for subsistence. We kill animals to eat their body parts and secretions because they taste good, not because we need to survive. These days there are very extreme and rare circumstances in which someone would be starving and forced to kill to eat and survive. These days we are surrounded by food and have a choice about what we eat.
Would Jesus Work in a Slaughterhouse?
I am going to make a few points but first to note this is not my area of expertise and I am not even going to try (for the life of me) to debate using religious arguments. Jesus gave fish for people in need to eat, but did not say that he ate it himself. It is speculated that Jesus belonged to a society of people who were vegetarians. The bible was written so long ago, underwent various edits and changes, and was written 200 years after his death so we cannot really know for sure the true facts. The bible is filled with examples of discrimination to benefit a certain group of people. There is no shortage of sexism , racism , heterosexism and speciesism. In spite of these discriminations, some Christians choose to ignore these parts of the bible and enjoy the good parts of it. They can just as easily ignore the speciesist parts of the bible too by not harming God's creatures anymore. Even if Jesus ate flesh, so what? Just because he did it, does not make it a moral act. It comes down to suffering and choice. Eating animal food MUST involve suffering. Jesus promoted unconditional compassion and protection for the weak and vulnerable. Is this not pefectly expressed eating a vegan diet ? And could you imagine Jesus working in a slaughterhouse, covered in blood, standing ankle deep in blood with the cries of terrified animals as he slits their throats one after another, killing 400 beasts a day, kill after kill after kill? Why all that suffering when you can just as easily eat a bowl pesto pasta?
Protein Deficiency is Impossible
Everyone needs protein and it is found in abundance in plant foods. You would have to be practically starving in order to get an extremely rare protein deficiency disease which is so rare most doctors the world round have never treated it. Gorillas and elephants are strong powerful animals and they live on an exclusive plant diet and they get all the protein they need from plants. I myself have an all vegan family of 6. My husband and I have been vegan for 12 years and we are very healthy. Our blood tests for iron, B12, calcium, etc always come out normal. I do kung fu and lift weights for excerise and I am very strong! I carried normal vegan pregnancies and breast fed healthy babies . Our vegan children are healthy, happy, energetic and smart.
Cheers, DG
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:10AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
World Health Organisation Endorses Vegan Diet
The vegan diet is endorsed by the World Health Organisation "in every stage of life from infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood, athletic training, pregnancy , breastfeeding and old age". Just remember that the WHO is a very conservative organisation.
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:16AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Where to start....
""The Essenes are well known to have been vegan and there was an archeological dig at a site said to be where a permanent community of Essenes lived and they found not one animal bone - which is unheard of in archeological terms. This is clear evidence that the community did not keep any animals .""
There has to be some reason other than vegitarianism. You said yourself that vegans have to take a B12 suppliment. Where would they have gotten such a thing back then?
""Jesus gave fish for people in need to eat, but did not say that he ate it himself.""
Why would he give us something to eat if he found it morally wrong to eat it?
""It is speculated that Jesus belonged to a society of people who were vegetarians.""
Speculated by whom? And the key word here is speculated.
"" The bible was written so long ago, underwent various edits and changes, and was written 200 years after his death so we cannot really know for sure the true facts. The bible is filled with examples of discrimination to benefit a certain group of people. There is no shortage of sexism , racism , heterosexism and speciesism.""
I agree with you entirely that the bible (The most commonly circulated version) has many inaccuracies and contradicts itself often. The most common copy of the bible is the "King James" version in which Kin James added many of his own ideas. I have read the bible directly translated from the original language and it is very different. I am a progressive Christian, which means I look at the bible objectivly and take the parts seriously that I feel God tells me to. I take Jesus' message of "love thy neighbor" very seriously. Any part of the bible that doesn't fit with his teachings I discount. In the original bible homosexuality is not a sin and black magic is evil but not white.
Now, taking all this into account you still have to understand that regardless of what the bible says people had a diet with meat in it. Putting that one archiological dig for a moment, most people back then ate meat. It was just natural to them. Actually, the fact that the results of the dig you posted were "unheard of" makes my point even more. If it's usually "unheard of" then the opposite is the norm.
""Even if Jesus ate flesh, so what? Just because he did it, does not make it a moral act.""
For the moment I am giving you a chance to explain better. Because if you are calling my lord and savior immoral then I am done with you.
""Gorillas and elephants are strong powerful animals and they live on an exclusive plant diet and they get all the protein they need from plants.""
Um, no. Actually gorillas also eat insects. Their diet is not exclusively plant matter.
I have a question for you concerning carnivores. Would you say they are immoral? They absolutely need meat to live. Would you rather they starve to death?
- Songbird21
November 16, 2009 6:54PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Vitamin B12
Hi Songbird, you're awake! What time is it over there??? The time above says 6:54pm. It's 10:40am down here. I'm sure Opposing Views must be running on US time.
You wrote: "There has to be some reason other than vegitarianism"
While the majority of human society across the world have eaten animal parts, there have also been vegetarian societies throughout history also. Even today, traditional diets of the majority of people's diets is plant based, supplemented with small amounts of animal products. It is only in the last 100 years that humans have massively increased their animal consumption due to factory farming methods. Most people today cannot afford to buy animal products including dairy as it takes 10 kg of plant protein to make 1kg of animal protein. As people become more affluent in poorer countries, their animal consumption increases as in the current case of India and China that traditionally eat plant based diets.
You wrote: " vegans have to take a B12 suppliment. Where would they have gotten such a thing back then?"
B12 is an important nutrient that humans must have, but only needed in very small quantities. Unlike vitamin C that must be consumed daily, Vitamin B12 can be stored as a reserve in the human body for many years before being depleted (by about 5 or 6 years). Vitamin B12 used to be obtained naturally in vegetables, roots and grains from the soil as it is a bacteria. With today's modern farming methods, naturally occuring vitimin B12 is removed through thorough cleaning of vegetables, irradiating of food , cold storage, etc, etc. Vitamin B12 is very easy to obtain from fortified soymilks, cereals, soy proteins, nutritional yeast, yeast spread and in supplements. Vitamin B12 deficiencies are just as easily found in people who regularly eat meat .
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:23PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Jesus taught compassion
You wrote: "Why would he give us something to eat if he found it morally wrong to eat it?"
Maybe the fish and the loaves were already there, and he didn't kill the animal himself. With the fish already being dead and so many people to feed, it was logical to feed them what was there. Also we can not say for sure what really happened all that time ago.
Thank you for your insights into your study of the bible . It was very interesting.
You wrote: "For the moment I am giving you a chance to explain better. Because if you are calling my lord and savior immoral then I am done with you."
Absolutely not. I believe Jesus was an amazing man on so many levels. He was famous for being moral, for his deep love of everybody and unconditional compassion. What an inspiration! I can never know what really happened when Jesus walked the Earth because I wasn't there. If I were to guess, I believe that he would have extended his compassion to include all of God's creatures by not eating them. That the basic philosophy of love thy neighbour included animals too, that no-one was left out. Everyone was loved by Jesus whether they be black or white, rich or poor, smart or dull, healthy or sick and human or animal. But if I'm wrong (and we'll never truely know), and he did eat animals then that won't stop me from thinking he was an amazing person or a moral person. If he did eat animals then maybe he did not yet realise it was not right. I believe it is not right to eat animals, but I won't dismiss all of Jesus' other great teachings just because of that. But personally I believe he would have to have been a vegetarian because it fits in so exactly with all of his most important teachings of compassion.
www.jesusveg.com
Even Mahatma Ghandi ate dairy products which behind closed doors involve terrible suffering and death too for the cows and their calfs. I believe that Ghandi in all his wisdom of non-violence and compassion, simply did not know this. This does not make him an immoral person, it just means there was something he had not learned yet. We can still learn all the important lessons from Ghandi. I don't know any great teacher that was perfect, but we can still learn from them what they did get right!
And finally, I am not going to follow someone else's lead blindly just because they do it. I still must make my own moral conclusions. If I were to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, practicing veganism would fit his teachings perfectly.
Thank you for listening.
DG
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:45PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Just Because It Is Doesn't Mean It Should Be
You wrote: "Now, taking all this into account you still have to understand that regardless of what the bible says people had a diet with meat in it."
Just because it's always been that way doesn't mean it has to be. We could say that wars and rapes are morally justified because we've been doing it throughout history. And just because something is normal, doesn't make it right.
You wrote: "Actually gorillas also eat insects"
Yes that's right they do... sometimes, rarely, occassionally. Not enough to say it's a significant part of their diet.
You wrote: "concerning carnivores. Would you say they are immoral?"
No of course not. Carnivores must kill to eat. It's violent but necessary for their survival. Carnivores have no choice about what they eat. Humans on the other hand have a choice about what they eat. We do not need to kill in order to survive, infact we thrive beautifully on an all plant diet, and nobody has to die for it. Lucky for us a non-violent diet is a healthy one too.
- Desert Girl
November 16, 2009 7:59PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.