Animals Eat Meat, Why Not Humans?

"Turkeys and chickens eat meat," wrote member Diane.M in a thread she titled "

?". "

?"

For vegetarians, this was a clear shot across the bow. In the 209 posts that follow (as I write this), several rushed to defend vegetarianism as an ethical choice, citing the horrific treatment of livestock ("

," writes lunababy_moonchild), and the diversion of resources to cattle that might otherwise feed the Third World. "We could ship all that grain to our fellow humans who are starving to death in various parts of the world," writes aksjg in post #55.

Loopy adds a surprising dimension to the usual debate by quoting an article in the Times of London exposing the secret pain of plants: "'Scientists at the University of Bonn have discovered that

. The more stress we subject them to, the more noise they make." This prompts wandering_layman to observe, "I've yet to find anything more delicious than a nice, medium-rare filet mignon, with a screaming salad on the side."

Woven through these warring views is a compelling discussion of whether natural law corresponds with moral law. "

," says uzpez2000 at post #13. Marianah notes that the meat doesn't justify her end: "If a cannibal came and ate me, would that be right just because he wanted some meat? I have the right to live and my life overpasses his need for meat."

Packy, meanwhile, homes in on the social/natural divide. "Eating or not eating meat has nothing to do with morality. . Morality is the code by which humans within societies exist together. Obviously it would prohibit violence against its own people, but

."

But cdave protests that meat eating is a social crime. "I prefer to leave most matters of morality up to the individual. Swearing, smoking, consentual extramarital sex, etc are all personal choices. However,

."

"Also, why do we humans use animals for moral guidance on meat-eating but nothing else?" cdave adds mischievously. "

!"

Continued on page 2: »