Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 211 posts

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#121

Post by chollida1 »

swombat wrote: post #107
chollida1 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Killing animals may still be acceptable in western society, but it's wrong. It's wrong just as slavery in the United States in the 18th and 19th century was once acceptable but wrong. Just as hanging, drawing and quartering to an audience of thousands in Europe was acceptable but wrong. Wow, wait until you watch an animal kingdom video. Your mind is about to be blown but the amount of animal on animal violence you'…

Nature is not morally right. In fact, nature is amoral. Pointing to nature and saying "nature does it so it's ok" is a bit like pointing at a landslide and saying "nature does it so it's ok to build my house like this". It's meaningless. Unlike most animals (as far as we know) we are in the unique position of being moral creatures. We created this morality idea, which was not present in nature before us. Killing any…

> Nature is not morally right. In fact, nature is amoral. Pointing to nature and saying "nature does it so it's ok" is a bit like pointing at a landslide and saying "nature does it so it's ok to build my house like this". It's meaningless.

Completely agree here, luckily I never made that argument:) I basically made a tongue in check throw away remark

> Killing any kind of sentient creature whose death could have been avoided is immoral (whether legal or not)

Here we disagree if by sentient creature you included animals, which I'm assuming you do or you'd just say humans:)

Look I recognize your name on this site now and I respect a lot of what you say but you just can't make this statement and assume its a fact that isn't debatable. Because its very much debatable.

Look we just disagree on this point, which is fine as its all opinion based and no right or wrong here.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#122

Post by 001sky »

Jgrubb wrote: post #103
famousactress wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I mentioned it because the conversation is about eating meat, not because I need you to think I'm awesome. In fact, I think the joke has some very relevant truth to it. I think heralding veganism is a ridiculous mission from a practical standpoint, and lots of people and organizations are spinning their wheels converting a tiny fraction of the population to a totally meatless diet when instead it makes so much m…

I totally agree with you on every point, except for the one about heralding veganism being ridiculous. I don't think it's ridiculous at all, especially when I look around at the average morbidly obese guy here in Northern NJ, and then go to Thanksgiving out in Michigan with my wife's family and the meat eaters are in the minority. Everyone at Thanksgiving looks amazing and healthy. I think the greater and more meanin…

I look around at the average morbidly obese guy

Morbid obesity is likely due to overeating plant-based carbohydrates. Hi Fructose corn syrup is basically vegetarian. As are Pringles and coke. Doritos and guacamole. Don't forget Beer and Margarits! Snickers really satisfies your vegetarian cravings too. Nuttella tastes great but is mostly hot choclate made with palm-oil rather than milk, which makes is closer to a vegan health-food, but there are traces of powdered milk in it. Pop-tarts are a great vegetarian breakfast, too at 400 calories per pack. Not to mention the greatest caloric density in snack foods, the humble almond at 180 cal/oz. You can find those in your grocer's health-food isle, tho. Not too far away from the 250 calorie cliff bars and the the sucrose loaded "vegetarian" gatorade. =D

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#123

Post by spikels »

api wrote: post #51
huherto wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware that we are causing pain to animals. But eating meat gives me so much happiness that I am not willing to live without it.

Totally tangential point: I sometimes draw an analogy between veganism and the extreme anti-force / volitionalist stance of radical libertarians. In both cases is may be radically moral, but the problem with the libertarian case is similar to what you just said. Government force is just so easy. Is there some systemic social ill that manifests in an emergent fashion from the market? Pass a law and force it to change.…

I'm glad to finally see someone who supports wealth redistribution clear that it requires force (as well as being in their own self-interest). While I can respect this widely held position I am personally uncomfortable with this aspect. I wish we could achieve the goals of redistribution (btw-these goals need to be clarified) without force (i.e. voluntary charity). This actually seems possible to me because of the strong interest in charity by so many especially the very wealthy and the incredible inefficiency in the delivery of aid to the poor.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#124

Post by jules »

vijayr wrote: post #84
redidas wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The animal as people logic doesn't hold up. With this reasoning what do we do about animals that hunt and kill other animals for food. Are they behaving immorally because they must kill to survive?

There is a difference between animals killing animals for food, and humans killing animals for food. Animals kill other animals, only when they are hungry. They also don't raise animals in a confined, cruel environment, pump them with drugs, don't beat them, treat them like crap etc. Humans do all of these. Animals also don't waste - every inch of meat is eaten, while we liberally waste.

> Animals kill other animals, only when they are hungry.

False. I've seen cats killing birds and then not eating them many times.

> They also don't raise animals in a confined, cruel environment, pump them with drugs, don't beat them, treat them like crap etc.

Strawman. He didn't say that we should treat animals like crap. It is possible to treat animals well, except for the killing part, and that's what this discussion is about.

> Animals also don't waste - every inch of meat is eaten, while we liberally waste.

Also false. Lions kill animals and then only eat a small part of it. Sure, later other animals & bacteria eat the rest, but the same applies for humans.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#125

Post by jessaustin »

colanderman wrote: post #43
iambateman wrote: post #38

"If you’re a broiler chicken... you weigh at least double what you would in the wild, but lack the muscle even to waddle, let alone fly." So...yeah chickens don't fly. Otherwise this article is good. There's a lot to be said for responsible consumption.

From Wikipedia: Domestic chickens are not capable of long distance flight, although lighter birds are generally capable of flying for short distances, such as over fences or into trees (where they would naturally roost). Chickens may occasionally fly briefly to explore their surroundings, but generally do so only to flee perceived danger. So…yeah chickens do fly short distances, unless they weigh too much.

The flight of chickens is much like that of wild turkeys, which they resemble somewhat. A turkey flies when it roosts at night and whenever it sees or hears a predator, which may not happen every day.

The point is, since these two similar species have similar flight habits, and one of them is not domesticated, it's misleading for the editors to say "domestic chickens are not capable..." as if there were some ancient ancestor chicken that soared with the eagles.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#126

Post by coldtea »

kaoD wrote: post #101
coldtea wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, there's no middle ground. Killing is killing. That's a tautology. It doesn't tell us anything. The real question is, what makes EVERY killing wrong? Are you wrong for taking antibiotics? If not, why not? After all "killing is killing". Are you a murderer for killing a mosquito? Why not? Since, you know, "killing is killing". Should a lion be punished for eating an antelope? Why not? After all, "killing is killi…

Using antibiotics is a defensive reaction against an attack. It's not killing if you're legitimately defending yourself (even law considers this situation). Indeed, you're a murderer for killing a mosquito without a reason. About the lion/fishing analogies, bringing law here doesn't make sense. Law is an artificial system. Punishment is essentially arbitrary. Both the lion and the fisher are essentially murderers any…

>But then again, killing another person is just how nature works too, right? I eat meat and will eat meat forever, though I can't help but feel like such an hypocrite for doing so while condemning murdering people.

I fail to see the hypocrisy. You condemn murdering people because a) they are your OWN kind, and b) they have brains capable of writing HN posts.

How about just constraining our moral obligation to just: don't eat/murder your own kind?

Let's get to that first, abolishing capital penalty, war, murder and such, and then we can worry about eating steaks and/or prawns...

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#127

Post by WalterSear »

bane wrote: post #74
WalterSear wrote: post #37

The opinions on this topic around here are so depressing given how easy, cheap and healthy it is to live without meat, or dairy, for that matter.

> how easy, cheap and healthy it is to live without meat, or dairy, for that matter. Given the volume and nature of advice in the vegan community for how not to hurt yourself eating as a vegan, I would say that "easy" or "healthy" is not a word that could be reasonably associated with a sustained, long-term vegan diet. Even long-term vegans have difficulty in getting complete nutrition on their diet which is offered…

My doctors would disagree with that.

Like I said, it's depressing how much ignorance is thrown around here on this topic.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#128

Post by hedning »

lukifer wrote: post #79
contextual wrote: post #26

If the suffering of animals matters, then eating meat is morally wrong. Animals are non-human persons who are aware of their own existence and who feel a wide range of emotions, just like we do. Killing animals may still be acceptable in western society, but it's wrong. It's wrong just as slavery in the United States in the 18th and 19th century was once acceptable but wrong. Just as hanging, drawing and quartering t…

To take it to the extreme, we can't know for sure that carrots don't experience suffering due to our raising them for food. We have canines for a reason; meat is part of our evolutionary heritage. I respect the moral decision not to eat animals, and the fact that we do not raise livestock more humanely is unforgivable; but eschewing all animal proteins is extremely detrimental to one's health (the poster child being…

Steve Jobs had cancer for the most of those 10 years. It seems he tried a vegan diet to treat it among other things, that was silly. That does not make him a poster child for vegans, it seems like he wasn't even vegan before the cancer.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#129

Post by elif »

coldtea wrote: post #76
contextual wrote: post #26

If the suffering of animals matters, then eating meat is morally wrong. Animals are non-human persons who are aware of their own existence and who feel a wide range of emotions, just like we do. Killing animals may still be acceptable in western society, but it's wrong. It's wrong just as slavery in the United States in the 18th and 19th century was once acceptable but wrong. Just as hanging, drawing and quartering t…

> It's wrong just as slavery in the United States in the 18th and 19th century was once acceptable but wrong. Just as? Are you kidding me? For one, animals kill and eat other animals ALL THE TIME. It's what they do. > To disregard the pain and suffering of animal persons without regard for their interests - just because they're not human, is a form of racism. Peter Singer[1] calls it 'speciesism'. That's just a word…

You are reading too much into the "just as"

The author is trying to communicate equivalency in the seemingly paradoxical categorization of being both "acceptable" and "wrong" through providing examples of things which also fit this hard-to-grasp classification.

Re: The Price We Pay for Cheap Meat

#130

Post by arsenerei »

timje1 wrote: post #59
huherto wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware that we are causing pain to animals. But eating meat gives me so much happiness that I am not willing to live without it.

This is a good reply to the argument that I hear used a lot: "You just need to educate yourself. Read this website and watch this video: you'll never want to eat meat again!" What if I'm educated, have read the books, the websites, and still choose meat?

That was not GP's argument and it certainly wasn't a good reply. GP simply effectively said, "The circumstances are irrelevant to me, it makes me feel good so I'll do it." Your argument is you have an intimate understanding of where you food comes from and you're okay with that.
Post reply on HN