So are you claiming to use reason or not? You just said there is no reason on either side of the debate. I'm glad you have taken this turn because we sure as hell better be able to apply reason to an issue that effects every single human being on the planet and the future of the environment.
It sounds as if you are intentionally misunderstanding me. I said everybody has reasons, but they are based on feelings. Both sides of the debate can think up ample reasons to support their feelings. So by reason (not "reasons" or rationalizations) I intend to support objectivity.
Originally Posted by fia
Data to demonstrate that meat consumption aids in nutrition and in the sustainability of the environment is useful for discussion and reason can then be applied. All valid information is necessary to review in order to work towards comprehending the entire issue and not just the fragments that support one side. I put forward some research in favor of the production of vegetation over meat, but no one challenged it or gave any reason the research was problematic. Two sides presenting research or statistics doesn't result in a "tie" like in a game, but rather conflicting data has to be compared to determine accuracy and to understand which approach is more valid.
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics." But even if I were to support the elimination of all meat (and even eggs and dairy) from everybody's diet, it would be such a slow process that nobody alive today would see the final result. Indeed, I would FAR prefer to see energy put forth toward the elimination of a worse threat: alcohol and drug abuse. But that too will take generations of social progress.
"I absorb energy like a sponge everywhere I go. It allows me to see the world and my purpose in it." Zak Bagans, Ghost Adventures (INFJ)
As much as I love animals, I'm not against killing them for food as long as they feel as little pain as possible. That's where I'm against most of the meat processing industries. There are ways to kill animals without causing them much stress or pain but those industries are so obsessed with turning a profit they'll just torture those poor animals until they die. Thank goodness for people like Temple Grandin for helping that industry become a little more humane.
But I guess that's beside the point. Animals are not as intelligent or self aware as we are. They rely completely on instinct. This doesn't mean it's acceptable to torture them but I believe it's acceptable to kill them to further another species. When you think about it, animals kill other animals for food as well. And that's often a good thing. Our planet would be overrun by bugs if there weren't animals constantly eating them.
I'm against killing them for fur. We don't need fur to live. There are many ways to make clothing without hurting animals. Heck, wool uses animals and doesn't hurt them (I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that shearing actually benefits sheep). It's one thing to kill animals for our health and survival, another thing entirely to kill them for our vanity.
Even setting aside the issue of diet altogether, this idea of treasured traditions could well be the greatest obstacle to reason because it is self-justifying. It is striking what force and persistence this idea has that "we've always done it this way", or "this is our identity". It makes something hands off for no other reason than its familiarity. Many examples of destructive cycles can be cited to demonstrate this line of thinking. There can be value in rejecting any "treasured tradition" that doesn't stand up to reason because the alternative is the inability to ever revise any system.
The circularity of the logic in my argument is a moot point.
Nothing is worth sacrificing your identity.
These traditions are some of the things that make Southerners the hardy folk we are (regardless of your personal position on those traditions).
Who gives you the power to be the ultimate arbiter of what is good culture and what is not.
Should we just leave the hard stuff like thinking for ourselves and making our own decisions to people like y'all who think you know whats better for us than we do?
Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.
- Edmund Burke