The Ethics of Eating "Happy Meat"

  • Thread starter Thread starter spencelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pnewton said:
No, they don’t. And when times get lean, people turn to Ramen noodles, not crime. Calling eating meat an addiction is illogical rhetoric. If the time comes that the economy can not support as much meat, it will become less common over time.
Click to expand...
I don’t follow your response to me. I didn’t say we had an addiction to meat. I was showing that we don’t. Hence the statement that no one is selling there parents refrigerator to buy meat ( I had a client who’s child did this while his parents were out in order to purchase drugs). I clearly made the point that I don’t believe we are addicted to meat and that addiction is an over used term. You see to be reiterating what I said?

Confused,
Mark
 
There are people on this forum who try to interject certain beliefs (virtually all derived from liberalism) into the Catholic faith that were never really there to begin with.

How am I to respond? With laughter?

Or with sadness?
 
spencelo said:
How about with rigorous argumentation?
Click to expand...
Why? Your mind is made up. Nothing anyone says here will change your mind so the argument is over. The only thing you seem to want is for us to feel guilty about killing animals and eating meat. FAT CHANCE. Afew years ago, my daughter went through several surgeries which drained her protein levels to a dangerous low. Her body wouldn’t heal itself. I found out that deer meat was one of the highest protein foods on the face of the earth and she would eat it. It took a few months but her protein levels finally rose and the incisions healed. I guess in your world it would have been better off if she died, that way your precious animals would have had more air to breathe. :mad:
 
I suspect most Catholics on here consume meat, though if they were sufficiently reflective, they would stop consuming factory-farmed meat given the terrible suffering inflicted upon sensitive, sentient creatures
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
spencelo said:
Would you ever seriously ask this question about a human subjected to torture?
Click to expand...
Would you seriously ask that question of a masochist? Do you condemn masochism? If so, on what moral ground?

Although you are well-convicted of your feelings on this matter, the rest of the world remains very far from being convinced.

Inasmuch as your beliefs are extremely recent and unprecedented in human history, should we not then attempt to establish some sort of moral foundation for those beliefs? In order for morality to be rational and consistent, it must be based on more than just emotions or feelings, correct?
 
spencelo said:
Or it could be because: (a) I’m genuinely puzzled about what the difference is, if it exists (not because I know there is no difference and “refuse” to acknowledge it, or (b) there really is no difference.
Click to expand...
The difference is in the soul of the person committing the act. The vet that chops a head of a dog because he is concerned about the life of a child it bit does so out of his humanity. The sadist that does the same action to watch the blood flow and the animal suffer does so out of his inhumanity. Killing an animal, or anything we do to the animal, that is done out of love of humanity or in service to community is not unnecessary and does not diminsh our human nature. Deliberately maing animals suffer for the sake of suffering diminishes our human nature.
 
spencelo said:
The fact that animals lack many interests that humans have doesn’t mean they don’t have many interests which should be respected in their own right – why should human experiences be the yardstick by which we should measure value?

I suggest you read the full article; those terms have very specific meanings beyond the simplistic definitions you ascribe to them. The underlying idea behind the article’s claim is that animals’ inner lives, in many ways, are as rich and deep as ours.

The claim that animals only really care about “eating, drinking and breeding” reflects a profound lack of understanding of their inner lives. An example (whales): wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/whalepeople/ And here (pigs): wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/whalepeople/
Click to expand...
I will reconsider upon being presented with the very first novel written by an animal.
 
DCNBILL said:
:clapping: ok, how bout a limerick. "There was an old cow from Blake…
Click to expand...
…who painted a defective fake.
A Rembrandt she chose,
but left out the clothes,
and still ended up as a steak.

Okay, okay, I’ll quit.😃
 
pete_29 said:
Deer season starts in 3 weeks. Now everyone knows I’m a murderer. Not a very good one, but a murderer none the less. 😃
Click to expand...
May your arrow fly straight:). Wonder if it is truly a Cherokee proverb that “plant eaters were poor hunters”?🤷
 
Ridgerunner said:
…who painted a defective fake.
A Rembrandt she chose,
but left out the clothes,
and still ended up as a steak.

Okay, okay, I’ll quit.😃
Click to expand...
AH, but I will not

There once was an old cow from Blake
Who wanted to learn how to bake.
She was horribly bad
And the head chef got mad,
So she became the first Blake steak cake.
 
I fear that we have now been forever branded by animal rightists as insensitive, or even worse, intolerant. Simply put, rights come from God and Him alone. He created man last and gave him dominion over all the earth. Yet, we are to treat all of creation, living or not, with a mind toward its Creator.
 
DCNBILL said:
I would say that I believe that the mistreatment of animals is wrong, how I would define mistreatment may be different than others however. I believe animals were placed on the earth for the use of and the good of humanity.
Click to expand...
I argue that animals were placed on earth for the glory of God and only under strict conditions, use certain animals. But they do not exist for us, but for themselves and for God.

Do you adhere to the calling from God that human beings are to cherish and care for all of this creation?

Kindly - James
 
po18guy said:
I fear that we have now been forever branded by animal rightists as insensitive, or even worse, intolerant. Simply put, rights come from God and Him alone. He created man last and gave him dominion over all the earth. Yet, we are to treat all of creation, living or not, with a mind toward its Creator.
Click to expand...
Nice post. I agree that animal rights activist struggle with Catholic church because many Catholics come across as insensitive and care more about being “right” than finding a way to bring that person to love the Church.

In my humble opinion, Catholics who argue to the point of further seperating someone away from the Church & Christ is against the Bible.

1 Corinthians 8:1 - 11-13​

And so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. [12] Thus, sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. [13] Therefore, if food is a cause of my brother’s falling, I will never eat meat, lest I cause my brother to fall.

Kindly. James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top