In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

I don't think cows that are humanely slaughtered are tortured, either.

Animals in factory farms are routinely tortured, on a daily basis. And even those who say they buy only 'humanely' slaughtered meat, still eat in restaurants, most likely.

I think the term 'humanely slaughtered' is an oxymoron. Why? Try applying it to a human and it falls apart.

I feel similarly about killing and eating animals. In moderation, and done with care and respect, it is appropriate for some people.

Yes, to the extent necessary for the individual metabolism.

I know the feeling.

My questions remain unanswered, even though I've asked them several times:

1. Is it as easy to butcher a cow as it to pull a carrot from the ground? What is the significance of this?

2. And, even IF plants did feel pain, how can that justify killing animals? (Especially when eating meat causes more death to plants, since plants must first be fed to the animals.)

3. The whole argument about plants seems to be skirting the issue, when we cannot survive without eating plants. But most of us, with a little education, can survive quite well without eating animals. Eating plants is necessary. How is eating animals ever justified, when it's not necessary?

---

I'm concerned the transaction would be against the law. The scenario is quite silly to me. You created the hypothetical scenario to try to explain how we must already know compassion towards animals by using a pet as the example. This example has no bearing on eating meat because it only shows that people take issue with an other telling them what to do with their property.

This has nothing to do with my relationship with my pet, and nothing in this conversation reveals my relationship with my pet.

It reveals a great deal, actually. Your words reveal that you view your dog as a mere object, a thing, a possession. Your concern is the same as with any other piece of property. YOUR words, not mine.

I had hoped to elicit some feeling of compassion towards an animal that one already loves, rather than broaching the taboo subject of the obvious love we all (presumably) have for other humans.

I had hoped that an analogy of a beloved dog might trigger a sense of compassion that others could relate too, because I (mistakenly) assumed that we all have love for our dogs, not just as mere property, but as members of our family.

The point was to show that we naturally have more love for an animal, than for a plant. (Just as most of us naturally have more love for our human family members than for our animal family members, though that isn't always true, especially in cases of lonely people whose only family might be their dog or cat.)

Unfortunately, my analogy didn't work. Perhaps the point wasn't lost on everyone, hopefully.