I recently wrote about a bumper stick that I've seen quite a bit. Today, I want to write about a bumper sticker that I've only seen once. I wish I could remember the exact wording of the sticker, or at least find a copy of it online, but I only remember the gist of it. It was something along the lines of "I'm doing my part for world peace by being a vegetarian." When I read that, I laughed out loud.
I'm no stranger to people with left-wing agendas (or right-wing ones, for that matter) proudly stating their outrageous claims via bumper stickers, but this one was still pretty outlandish. From my understanding, the owner of the vehicle was claiming that meat-eaters are more violent than vegetarians because violence to animals leads to violence to humans. Just like people argue that violent music, violent movies, and violent video games lead to violent behavior, even though a connection between them has never been proven. I am not advocating partaking in violent media, but one does not automatically lead to the other.
That's also forgetting that one of the most evil people in history, the one person that everyone can get behind as being a bad dude, was a confirmed vegetarian. Yes, I'm talking about Adolf Hitler. A man who committed countless atrocities against his fellow human beings stopped eating animals for the final years of his life.
My point to all of this is that extremism tends to lead to bizarre arguments. If someone wants to be a vegetarian, fine, good for them, but don't claim that not eating a hamburger makes you superior to me. I see animals as resources to be used wisely. I usually only eat meat once a day and, when compared to the average American, I eat a high amount of whole grains and fresh produce. I also believe that animals should be cared for in humane conditions and killed in a fast, painless way. I choose to eat food that is good for me, not because it puts me on some moral high-ground.
ADDENDUM:
While preparing for this post, I looked online for the bumper sticker that I saw and, even though I couldn't find the one I was looking for, I found one that was also silly. It compared eating livestock to eating pets. I think that's silly because I would totally eat cat meat if given the opportunity. Why is it that eating a cow is okay, but eating a horse is not? I've heard, as an argument against eating them, that pigs are about as smart as dogs, but why can't we eat dogs? Squirrels and groundhogs can be pretty cute, but I've eaten them. And deer are beautiful, majestic creatures that can be quite tasty. This isn't a "Modest Proposal" type satire, I'm honestly curious. Leave a comment with your thoughts.
2 comments:
The Mosaic law forbids eating various kinds of predators and scavengers, including dogs, cats, and pigs. One reason that has been suggested is a short, unfiltered absorption process, converting food to flesh without eliminating toxins. Another reason is parasites. A third reason is coprophagia, which increases both toxins and parasites. These are all good reasons to avoid eating predators and scavengers.
We don't live the law of Moses anymore. If we did, we wouldn't eat pigs. Plus, all fish are a type of predator of some kind since there aren't plant-eaters in the ocean. In some countries, like Korea, eating dogs or cats is totally acceptable. And none of that accounts for horses.
We don't eat those animals in America simply because we don't, or in other words, it's tradition.
Post a Comment