In Philip Devine 's "The Moral Basis of Vegetarianism," he, as mentioned in the title, addresses the moral aspect of consuming animal products. In short, the article is a detailed analysis of the arguments of vegetarians. Devine writes that there are two distinct groups of vegetarians: the ones who are against the suffering of animals and the ones who are against the killing of animals. The side against animal suffering will object to eat any animal product; for example, mother cows go through extreme pain when separated from their calves, so, these vegetarians would refuse to consume milk and other dairy products. The side that is against the killing of creatures will simply refrain from eating meat.
Animal testing is a way of trying some sort of product for humans on animals to make sure it is safe enough for people to use and brands to sell. The issue is that animal testing is killing innocent animals and our animal population is also going down. There are many reasons why animal testing should be illegal. One is that animals suffer pain and torture when they’re innocent. Another is that animal testing isn’t a guaranteed option and can work differently in humans than animals.
It is clinically proven that human can still live without eating meat. In my opinion farm animals should have rights and should not be eaten. After reading, “Equality for Animals,” by Peter Singer, I feel like eating meat is a terrible thing that we humans do. Singer quoted, “Meat is not necessary for good health or longevity” (Singer 178). In my point of view it is true because many people out in the world are still living and breathing well by being vegan or vegetarian; therefore we should try doing the same.
The most obvious one is the debate about the consumption of animals: is it morally justified to raise and kill animals for food? It is now widely accepted, even by many meat eaters, that the treatment of animals in factory farms is morally unjustifiable. In contrast to this, less intensive or traditional farming seems to be justified as long as the animals live, on balance, decent lives, and are killed painlessly. The justification for this position comes from the idea of replaceability. However, this position would lead to questions about environmental sustainability and resource distribution that could be enough to cause utilitarians to reject such practices.
However, being fat doesn’t necessarily mean an individual is unhealthy. The context of Foer’s article is the cruelty behind factory farming comparing factory farmed animals to eating dogs. The article revolves around the taboo of eating dog in western culture. The particular food humans eat is based in the culture they live in. There are plenty of societies where eating what are considered tamed animals is the standard and not done with any emotional attachment.
I understand from this quote that Jewish should eat just clean meat which means the animals who does not eat all what they found near to them( cette partie en parle du port mais j ai rien su ecrire helppp me). . The people were taught to make distinctions between the holy and unholy in their daily life. The law forbid, not only the eating of the unclean beasts, but the touching of them. Jewish must be careful to near to impure beasts to avoid all temptation.
Utilitarianism often assesses the consequences of the action to be undertaken and weighs the pros and cons of the outcome. If it is going to yield the greatest outcome and be of benefit to society, then, why not undertake the action? For example, shooting a pack of dogs that have been eating humans and animals (sheep, goats, chickens). This will result in a greater benefit to society; since, Human resources will be saved as well as animals reared for domestic and commercial purposes being preserved. This principle thought me a great deal.
Change What You Eat – Change The World by Natalie Hildebrand Right now someone is crying for help. Someone has just been slaughtered. Simply for humans to consume. Although most of the population believes that meat is necessary for human health and survival, it is not. It has been ingrained into our minds that we need meat for nutrients, milk to grow and to maintain strong bones, and that a plant-based diet, is not enough to keep us alive and healthy.
People are constantly convincing themselves that plant- based foods are enough when it comes to your daily nutrition needs, eliminating all meat from their diets. Unluckily, these individuals may be experiencing lack of vitamins, suffering reduced brain volume, weariness, and misperception. The idea that eating meat is not good for your body in some cases comes from one’s ethical point of view. Such as killing innocent animals in
Vegetarian Diet “Humans can live and be healthy without killing animals for food; therefore, if humans eat meat, they participate in taking life of animals merely for the sake of their appetite. And to act so is immoral.”(Leo Tolstoy). Animals do feel pain as much as humans when slaughtered or hunted. On the other hand, human beings are not designed to eat meat, humans are natural herbivores, and they thrive best when they eat only plants. Although humans eat meat to maintain better nutrition, but the human body cannot digest meat, and human teeth are small and blunt.