wrote:
Jean Clingfilm wrote:
wrote:
Martin Willett wrote:
snip

--

Martin (fatty) Willett


http://mfattywillett.org/
We don't even have to go into the realm of the absurd aliens to
investigate this concept.
True.

India is known for famous man-eating lions and tigers. Alligators in
Florida. Crocodiles in South East Asia, Africa and Australia. Dingos in
Australia and hyenas in Africa. Buzzards and vultures throuhout the
world are known for eating dead human carcasses. Then there are bugs,
worms, rats, bacteria, etc that feeds on humans alive and dead.

And like humans eating other animals, there is no ethical or moral
component involved. It is what it is, survival and thriving in ones
environment.

TC

Most humans do have the ability to analyse and examine their values, and
theories of conduct in order to see if a particular behavior is right or
wrong. - This can clearly be applied to the human meat eating behavior,
and therefore denial of a moral or ethical component to human meat
consumption is fallacious.

I guess it's your method of avoiding a discussion of your morals. -
Perhaps in case it exposes your weaknesses.

Nonsense. There is no denial of a moral or ethical component to my
eating meat.

Please explain why you wrote "And like humans eating other animals,
*there is no ethical or moral component* involved" and now you write
"There is no denial of a moral or ethical component".

It is who we are and what we do, which is perfectly in
line with other mammalian survival behavior.

Do you have to eat meat to survive?

And that precludes
anyones, ie. you and the animal rights extremists, attempt to apply
these misdirected concepts of morality and ethics to the question.

Why have you grouped me with "animal rights extremists"?


The denial is in those who refuse to accept the reality that we live
in, which is that humans are primarily carnivorous omnivores. We eat
other animals. That is who we are and what we do. We do not do it with
malicious intent. Nor do we do it with immoral or unethical intent.

It is ethical to you. (If you believe there is an ethical or moral
component).


And the vast majority of us meat eaters are as concerned as you that
the animals we eat be as healthy and well raised as possible.

I'd like to see the evidence for that assertion. I would hazard a guess
that most people buy meat based on price, availability and aesthetics.

And we
object to producers who abuse animals anywhere in the process of
raising them. We care about the welfare of animals. We just care in a
much more reasonable and realistic fashion.

This sounds like an ethical or moral component.


Our morals or ethics are not compromised by harvesting and eating meat.
Any more than are those of other animals who do the same.

I'm sure you have a choice of what to eat, animals do not.


But they are compromised when we lie to people and tell them that an
unhealthy diet (veganism) is healthy in order to convince them to eat
that unhealthy diet in the name of animal rights and a severely skewed
sense of moral outrage.

Any 'type' of diet can be unhealthy. There are many other reasons to
adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet than 'animal rights'.

Who's lying?

Why is a diet without meat unhealthy?

What is and who has a "severely skewed sense of moral outrage"?



TC