Food Chain Argument

[singing4every1]

My fiance doesn't agree or disagree with a lot of things. He is always in between on issues. An independent in politics. So basically while he does support my veganism, he still always questions. Which is good to have an open mind, but it is also good to develop your own beliefs as I have (And I still have an open mind). He is at least being mostly

Comments

[_veganrella_]

might does not make right and in this case, i don't recall any other animals mass producing their food in the 'natural process'.

[januaryfm]

how many meat eaters would be able to go out kill, prepare and cook/eat their own prey (as the carnivores in the animal kingdom to)? not that i support hunting, but i can sort of respect the man who kills what he puts on the table himself, versus the average American who disassociates the plastic wrapped carcasses from an actual live that they're taking/consuming.

[januaryfm]

actual *life

[singing4every1]

Yes exactly so it seems unnatural to me. We need "tools"...but maybe fiance would say, "Just because we need tools doesn't mean it's still unnatural..." Some animals have what they would call "tools" that they use to hunt? Hmmm what would I say to that I wonder...

[singing4every1]

*my fiance (We both had typos!)

[ptolemy_rekhyt]

The two arguments that I would use and are pretty much the only arguments you need you've already stated. "Might does not make right," and also the fact that humans really aren't all that well equipped to deal with meat diets. Acid levels in the stomach, length of intestines, levels of nutrients we need; all these are drastically different from animals that do eat meat, not to mention the countless other things I'm sure I don't even know about. (And this isn't even taking into consideration the fact that meat today is so pumped full of hormones and anti-biotics and shite that there is really, really no point to eating meat these days.)

I wish someone would actually talk to me about veganism. :( I'm the only vegan I know IRL and everyone else sort of laughs it off and doesn't take me seriously.

[etomlef]

animals eat other animals because they have to in order to survive. we, on the other hand, do not need to eat animals in order to survive. in fact, eating animals is actually counterproductive to our survival, seeing as how animal products (meat, dairy, eggs) raise cholesterol and have been linked to a mess of problems like cancer, osteoporosis, heart disease, alzheimers, and a dozen others. if you want to take it one step further, our teeth, intestines, and digestive systems more closely resemble those of herbivores than carnivores. the food we are supposed to eat naturally should aid our survival and prolong our lifespans, not the opposite

[singing4every1]

Well I've heard all these arguments before too and I agree with it all. I was just bringing up the whole "food chain" idea.

[bitspike]

I think the first part there was relevant to the food chain idea, though. I mean, even if we have the ability to eat every single animal we feel like (why some people claim we are at the top of the chain) it does not mean our bodies are equipped to handle it. It's not right to eat animals when we don't need to an all, but, ethics aside, it's just not logical to

[darkenedminds]

Food chains don't work that way. Being on top (naturally via instinct or unnaturally via brain power and human nature) doesn't mean you get more variety. Look at polar bears - they're on top, but they primarily eat seals and a few other animals; they don't eat the phytoplankton that the fish eat that the seals eat. Its not exactly common for the species on top to dip their fingers into everyone's food pot, so to speak. Animals function by instinct, not convenience the way humans do. If humans were to function instinctually they'd forage, grow crops and maybe, maybe use simple tools to hunt/fish. If instinct were still that important to us as humans, we probably wouldn't use our brainpower to think of food ethics, or to "think vegan", to put it simply.