Roadkill, dogmatism and cannibalism

[missbettie]

oh I see sorry!:D

Well then I know that most people don't go around and purposly hit deer with their cars but just the fact that they are driving a vehicle that weighs over 2,000 pounds down a road that just happens to go through a deers enviornment at sometimes speeds of 65 mph....I mean if I hit a deer or another animal, I would totally blame myself, I don't see how I would be able to eat it...

but maybe I am missing the point, sorry!

[sandra]

Rami.................it is ethically wrong to eat the flesh of any animal whether it lived a happy life and died happy or whether it lived a horrible life and died horribly............this debate is rather pointless, I have to say! :)

[Korn]

The question is, does the eating of the flesh of an animal that lived free and then died a natural death present an ethical dilemma for the the vegan. I say no. The reason I personally became a vegan last summer was because I decided to no longer contribute to the demand for more animal exploitation, torture and killing. So, living in a consumer society, to me that means "no animal products" and that rule covers pretty much all of the choices I have had to make so far. But here we are talking about biking down the road and seeing a dead deer off in the distance that apparently died a natural death. All personal tastes aside, is there an ethical issue with eating the flesh of this animal? I say no.
I hear that you say no, but if you own anything, eat anything, use anything you don't need to wont/eat/use... by not giving whatever you own/eat/use to someone who needs/wants it, that other person is going to get it from somewhere else. When he does (eg. buy meat) he contributes to animal suffering exploitation, but wouldn't have done it if you had provided him with some free 'food' from a roadkill.

People don't become vegans for health reasons, but they may eat vegan food for health reasons... it's important not to mix up the terms here...



That is not an exact parallel. We are not talking about supporting an industry. You are, I'm not, and have been people avoiding meat an animal products centuries before such a thing as a meat industry existed...



I do not see the eating of the flesh of this animal as an ethical issue. No industry of animal exploitation is being supported. Frankly - I don't care. What matters is that by doing one thing instead of another, you can save some animals' lives.

I wouldn't eat the meat of an animal killed in a car accident or of old age for the same reason an average meat eater wouldn't eat human meat from the same situations.


An average meat eater doesn't look at human meat as food for humans - I don't look at animal meat as food for humans.

[Klytemnest]

Rami.................it is ethically wrong to eat the flesh of any animal whether it lived a happy life and died happy or whether it lived a horrible life and died horribly............this debate is rather pointless, I have to say! :)

So it is ethically wrong because you say it is and that's that? A debate with such silly arguments would indeed be pointless. Luckily Otter and I are not engaged in such a debate. If you'd like to join, you are welcome to, but you'll have to do better than making a mere assertion and declaring it to be true by fiat.

[sandra]

Yes Rami it is ethically wrong whether I say it is or not! :)
Hope you are enjoying the forum, I would love to hear more from you. It's always nice to hear from another vegan isn't it? :)

[Klytemnest]

Yes Rami it is ethically wrong whether I say it is or not! :)

But Sandra, honey, you did it again. You made an assertion without providing any evidence or reasoning behind it. Just a dogmatic statement. :D

Hope you are enjoying the forum,

I am, very much.

I would love to hear more from you.

Oh, try and stop me...

It's always nice to hear from another vegan isn't it? :)

Indeed it is.

[sandra]

Hi Rami sweetie.............you don't need evidence and reasoning to know some things are wrong and abhorrent. I don't need evidence and reasoning to tell me for example that paedophillia is wrong...............it just is!

[Klytemnest]

Hi Rami sweetie.............you don't need evidence and reasoning to know some things are wrong and abhorrent. I don't need evidence and reasoning to tell me for example that paedophillia is wrong...............it just is!

But Sandra, my love, don't tell me you believe pedophilia is wrong.. just because! I don't believe you!

Child molestation is ethically right or wrong for some very specific reasons. In our civilized world, despite religious efforts, we still own our bodies and lives. To use someone else's body without their permission is unethical. Minors are (according to the law) deemed to be incapable of informed consent. In the US this ability differs from state to state. So, having sex with a minor is having sex with someone who is unable of offering informed consent. If this is indeed the case, then adult-minor sexual relations are indeed unethical. And this is why, not... just because. There ARE reasons for prohibiting child molestation. It is not just an axiom. Recall also that there are places in the world where child molestation is perfectly OK. There is a tribe in New Guinea in which pre-pubescent boys have to perform oral sex on the older men in the tribe because, it is believed, the ingestion of semen will turn the growing boys into strong, virile men. So clearly, this is not just a universal moral axiom.

Eating meat is not wrong in and of itself. That is what is boils down to, yes, but it is not the consumption of meat itself that is unethical. It is what has to be done in order for the meat ot be obtained that is under ethical scrutiny. A living, sentient animal has to be enslaved and/or tortured and killed. That is the problem with eating meat. Imagine if it were possible to scientifically grow chunks of meat in laboratories. Would there be an ethical problem with eating meat, if it did not necessitate the enslavement, torture and killing of a sentient being? Seriously, do you see an ETHICAL problem with eating meat that is manufactured "in vitro", as it were, in a lab?

Ethics are not axiomatic, Sandra. There has to be a reasoning behind them. To say that eating meat is wrong just because seems to be like adhering to dogma rather than reasoning. I am serious about veganism. This is why I don't want to let you get away with such an unreasoned position. There are important reasons why being a vegan is an ethical choice. To discard those and act as if they don't matter because it's just "obvious" is just not a good use of one's mind. You know what I mean?

By the way, is that your picture? You little hottie, you!

Rami

[sandra]

Rami darling, flattery will get you everywhere, ok, you win, I'm right you're wrong! :)

[Otter_]

Rami darling, flattery will get you everywhere, ok, you win, I'm right you're wrong! :)

now who could argue with those eyes?

[Klytemnest]

If you replace the last 'and' with an 'or' I agree with you. An animal or human doesn't need to be tortured of feel any pain to be killed. Suffering - as such - is only a part of the problem, isn't it?

Please don't misunderstand. It's not just about suffering for me. I am antheist. I think this is our one and only chance to experience existence. And that existence should not be ended if it is not necessary. We recently lost our beloved cat Paolo to cancer (oral fibrosarcoma). Going through that horrible ordeal made me really think about life, existence, suffering... In Paolo's case, his suffering was beginning to get to the point where his death was necessary. We had him put down on January 19, 2007. He took his last breath in my arms. He was peaceful and as heartbroken as I am, I felt good about the fact that there did not seem to be in any pain or panic. He just lost consciousness and stopped breathing.


But in the case of farm animals, even if there were a way to kill them completely painlessly, with no suffering, I would still be a vegan. Like I said, all of us who are self-aware and alive today get to experience life once during eternity. This is IT, boys and girls. To end a sentient being's life prematurely, when it is entirely unnecessary to do so, is unforgiveable.

Anthony Scalia, our very Catholic Supreme Court Justice, thinks this is a ridiculous worldview and thinks that killing someone is not so bad becuase it does not end their existence... Chances are, he is not vegan.

Then it wouldn't be meat in the meaning of the word we use today, it would be a product produced in a test lab that someone chooses to call meat. To use the same words about these two 'things' wouldn't only be silly, it would also make verbal communication about 'meat' complicated.

No, I am proposing a hypothetical situation in which animal muscle tissue could be grown in laboratories, with veins, fascia, fat, etc. It WOULD be what we call meat today. But the difference is, it would not come from an animal. No animal would have to suffer and die in order for us to take its meat. Would eating such meat be unethical, then?

Now, what was this thread about again? :)

I don't care. All I know is, I am enjoying the discussion. :p

[Korn]

No, I am proposing a hypothetical situation in which animal muscle tissue could be grown in laboratories, with veins, fascia, fat, etc. It WOULD be what we call meat today.

Meat today is used about a part of the body of an animal or human which, if eating, has lived and been killed. If/when the 'meat' you talk about becomes common, it needs a separate word, otherwise people would have to explain what kind of 'meat' they are talking about each time they use the word meat...


Would eating such meat be unethical, then? That's a topic that doesn't interest me much personally, because I wouldn't buy it anyway, but others may have something useful to say. (We have a thread about that topic here (http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9532).)




Now, what was this thread about again?

I don't care. All I know is, I am enjoying the discussion.
Others who want to read about 'Did humans always eat meat?' care, because the thread is already long and several pages of off-topic posts makes it harder to find the messages that are related to the topic. I enjoy the discussion too, but please just continue the various topics in other threads.

[BlackCats]

Korn - I think Klytemnest is responding to the first post in this thread.
Mysh titled this thread "Did humans always eat meat?" but then went on to raise some other questions such as the ethical implications of eating roadkill, animals that died of old age, "excess" cow's milk - "in the same vein" as he/she put it, and I think Klytemnest is responding to these as well.

I think this thread has a lot of issues tied up togther and I don't think Klytemnest is taking it off topic, just focusing on certain aspects.:confused:

[Klytemnest]

I recently read this (http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=426) very interesting thread concerning the ethics of eating unwanted and unfertilised eggs.

Now I would like to ask, in the same vein, what are the ethical considerations on eating, for example, roadkill? Or animals that have died of old age?
Before the flaming starts - I have no plans to do either, and I understand the responsibility borne by humans in the creation of roadkill. I also understand that "VEGANS DO NOT EAT ANIMAL PRODUCTS". That isn't the issue though, is it? I mean, do you not eat animal products because you don't eat animal products (i.e. is the not-eating the goal of your veganism), or do you not eat animal products because you refuse to partake in the exploitation of animals? If the latter, it would seem (to me) somewhat difficult to use that to forbid the eating of the carcass of an animal that died of old age. And please don't use the "that's gross" argument, as that always reminds me somewhat of the purile tone of the omni argument of "if animals weren't meant to be eaten, why do they taste so good".

I am also interested in a hypothetical situation of consuming cow's milk (another bad habit I have rid myself of). Now, obviously, the issue is once again the exploitation of the animals. As we all (rightly) view animal keeping as slavery, I will take an analogy from slavery. It is obviously unethical to use a shirt made by a slave. Yet if the slave is freed, and continues making shirts, for a good wage, in good working conditions, of his own free will, it is clearly entirely acceptable to use this shirt (once you've paid for it). The Indian philosophy of "a'himsa" (sp?) claims that cow's milk is a gift given by the cow, and as such not the result of doing harm to the cow. Again, we would all agree that this is incorrect, as nobody can claim that were able to make the cow understand all the implications of these actions, as well as getting full buy-in from the cow.
So my second question is, if the cow were able to clearly and unambiguously communicate to us her desire to share her excess milk with us, would veganism allow us to partake of this gift?

Here is the original poster's post. I think I have pretty much stayed on topic. Perhaps the title of this thread is what needs to be changed. Thanks, Aphrodite. So far you are my favourite deity on this forum :)

Having said that, I do understand the importance of staying on-topic. This board is not merely for entertainment, but also a source of information. And so keeping this information organized makes it easier for people to obtain the information they need. I'll keep that in mind for the future.

[Korn]

Aphrodite, Klytemnest... you're probably both right - I haven't read the initial post of this thread since it was written back in 2004. I guess the thread is both a little bit about the topic itself and a lot of other things too, and I'm not really sure how it got the title it got. :) We'll figure out what happened one day, and maybe split the thread into two threads...

[xrodolfox]

Eating meat is not wrong in and of itself. That is what is boils down to, yes, but it is not the consumption of meat itself that is unethical. It is what has to be done in order for the meat ot be obtained that is under ethical scrutiny. A living, sentient animal has to be enslaved and/or tortured and killed. That is the problem with eating meat. Imagine if it were possible to scientifically grow chunks of meat in laboratories. Would there be an ethical problem with eating meat, if it did not necessitate the enslavement, torture and killing of a sentient being? Seriously, do you see an ETHICAL problem with eating meat that is manufactured "in vitro", as it were, in a lab?

This is interesting!

I agree that with those reasons for why it's wrong to eat meat.

However, I think that until we get to an ideal social situation, there also exists many political reasons why eating any meat, manufactured in a lab or not, would not fit that agenda. My first reason for being quite strict about my veganism is ethics. Father down the line is Politics, and with that comes being aware of what social impact my veganism plays. For me to have a more powerful social impact, I try to also be consistent with the meaning of my actions. If my actions regarding animal consumption can be seen as inconsistent, then my impact is lessened. Thus, to consume one kind of meat produced in a lab while not another, produced by suffering or usery is at the very least muddles my social impact.

There is also one other political aspect. I believe that other beings should not be used against their will. In the case of growing meat in a lab, some animal, at one point, had to have their genes harvested for the production of the lab meat. It's the same as with grafting seedless plants. There has to be an original source of DNA.

[Korn]

Aphrodite, Klytemnest... you're probably both right - I haven't read the initial post of this thread since it was written back in 2004. I guess the thread is both a little bit about the topic itself and a lot of other things too, and I'm not really sure how it got the title it got. :) We'll figure out what happened one day, and maybe split the thread into two threads...

Hi everybody,
the posts about 'Did humans always eat meat?' are now here (http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=356007#post356007).

(There's also some discussion about roadkill (etc) in the What do vegans have against quick, momentary killing of animals? (http://www.veganforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13314&highlight=roadkill&page=2)-thread.)

[Crusty Rat]

I read an article recently about a motorbike roadshow which included a roadkill barbie, advertised with the words "You kill it, we cook it" - i.e. actively encouraging people to mow down animals with their vehicles. I'd be concerned about encouraging such behaviour. Besides, it's fucking grim!