The Instigator
Mobii
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TUF
Con (against)
Winning
36 Points

Is drinking milk "wrong"?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
TUF
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/9/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,497 times Debate No: 25092
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (6)

 

Mobii

Pro

Cows produce milk for the same reason that humans do: to nourish their young. In order to force the animals to continue giving milk, factory farm operators typically impregnate them using artificial insemination every year. Calves are generally taken from their mothers within a day of being born—males are destined for veal crates or barren lots where they will be fattened for beef, and females are sentenced to the same fate as their mothers.

After their calves are taken away from them, mother cows are hooked up, several times a day, to milking machines. These cows are genetically manipulated, artificially inseminated, and often drugged to force them to produce about four and a half times as much milk as they naturally would to feed their calves.

Animals are often dosed with bovine growth hormone (BGH), which contributes to a painful inflammation of the udder known as "mastitis." (BGH is used widely in the U.S. but has been banned in Europe and Canada because of concerns over human health and animal welfare.) According to the industry's own figures, between 30 and 50 percent of dairy cows suffer from mastitis, an extremely painful condition.

A cow's natural lifespan is about 25 years, but cows used by the dairy industry are killed after only four or five years. An industry study reports that by the time they are killed, nearly 40 percent of dairy cows are lame because of the intensive confinement, the filth, and the strain of being almost constantly pregnant and giving milk. Dairy cows' bodies are turned into soup, companion animal food, or low-grade hamburger meat because their bodies are too "spent" to be used for anything else.

VEAL CALVES

Male calves—"byproducts" of the dairy industry—are generally taken from their mothers when they are less than 1 day old. Many are shipped off to barren, filthy feedlots to await slaughter. Others are kept in dark, tiny crates where they are kept almost completely immobilized so that their flesh stays tender. In order to make their flesh white, the calves are fed a liquid diet that is low in iron and has little nutritive value. This heinous treatment makes the calves ill, and they frequently suffer from anemia, diarrhea, and pneumonia.

Frightened, sick, and alone, these calves are killed after only a few months of life so that their flesh can be sold as veal. All adult and baby cows, whether raised for their flesh or their milk, are eventually shipped to a slaughterhouse and killed.
TUF

Con

I stand in negation to the question posed: "Is drinking milk wrong?"

The specific question being discussed is vastly referring to whether or not the act of actually drinking milk is wrong, and that is what I will be debating. I do not feel as if this is semantics, and I feel that this is the exact issue the pro is trying to address. A quick read over of the first round is a testament of this.


I will not be arguing against what is said above, as I basically get the point is trying to pin the fact that animal abuse occurs when preparing for our own foods.

****MY CASE****

C1: Drinking milk is no longer harmful after the animal is already dead.


My opponent makes a very fine case as to how animal abuse occurs. However none of the pre-supposed seems to take any effect on the actual act of drinking the milk itself. My question is this; If the animals went through such harsh treatment to get to the point of where we use them for beef, or milk, should we not use that sustenance rather than waste it? It seems that if we do not drink milk, we are only worsening the situation, because it means that the animal in question died in vain. Vegans who don't eat animals, for the principle, don;t understand, that they aren't making the situation any better by flowing that principal.

So why not drink milk? Drinking milk harms literally nothing.


C2: Harm to the animals is irrelevant.

Having had this debate in high school with a vegan friend, plenty of times, I feel I am qualified to say that the above arguments simply do not matter. We eat meat because we need meat. It's true, that you can you survive off of vegetarian means, but humans need protein and calcium deposits that are given directly from meat. Meat, is what helps humanity survive, and thrive.

http://fitnessblackbook.com...

The main problem that people have, is that we shouldn't harm another life, in order to sustain ourselves with this. This, however, is part of a natural cycle of life. Lions attack the antelope they eat. The antelope undergoes vast amounts of pain before it is consumed. Yes it is sad, but so is life. With ever death, begets new life. There is nothing wrong with the natural process. Milk is a sustenance that is really important and healthy for the human body to sustain every day. It's Vitamin D, and calcium, is essential to the human body.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com...


Drinking milk isn't wrong, because the moral standard for it being wrong is flawed. In order for my opponent to substantiate the statement, he must prove that the act of benefiting one's own body from substances that it needs, is wrong. He must prove how consuming plants (which are considered life) is any better than that of killing an animal.


I so conclude, and wish my opponent luck in the upcoming rounds. Thankyou.
Debate Round No. 1
Mobii

Pro

Mobii forfeited this round.
TUF

Con

Please extend all arguments. Thankyou.
Debate Round No. 2
Mobii

Pro

Mobii forfeited this round.
TUF

Con

WE built this city... We built this city on ROCK AND ROLL!!!!!
Debate Round No. 3
Mobii

Pro

Mobii forfeited this round.
TUF

Con

Wo ho! Living on a prayer!
Debate Round No. 4
Mobii

Pro

Mobii forfeited this round.
TUF

Con

annie are you okay!? Are you okay!? Are you okay annie?

You've been hit by...

You've been struck by...

A smooth criminal!
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by thepasta 4 years ago
thepasta
@TheOrator, the killing of an individual does not harm the specie. the killing of a individual that has not yet produced an offspring harms the specie. humans rarely kill cows that have not yet produced an offspring. the cows that are captured have not been filtered through the "survival-of-the-fittest-system" in the flight-or-fight aspect so there is a big chance that most of them would not survive the predators. they also need grass all year without being killed for being pest to the farmers. and they need a certain climate. so i do not think the cows would survive if they are let free today. (the free cows in India are mostly sick and dying so they will probobly die out within one, maybe two decades)
Posted by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
@pasta, the only way that would work is if the cow somehow needed humans to kill them. There isnt' really any reason to suggest that cows require to be housed and fed by humans to survive. There would be a significantly smaller population, but only because humans wouldn't have mass-bred them as a food source.
Posted by pasta 4 years ago
pasta
I would just like to squeze in a interesting but generally irrelevant sidenote concerning this issue. the cow as a spiece would not live unless humans eat it and use it. It is like a horrible symbiosis. Humans take the meat and milk through cruel circumstances in exchange for food, shelter and general continuance of the race.
It is similar to the bumblebee and the tulip in the way that the tulip as a specie needs the bumblebee to survive but the bumblebe can use other types of flowers instead.
Posted by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
I think the resolution should be rephrased from "drinking milk is wrong" to "the processed used to aquire drinking milk is wrong". The conditions have nothing to do with whether or not drinking milk is wrong.
Posted by Mobii 4 years ago
Mobii
You're right, I just edited it :)
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
So you're Con for "is drinking milk wrong". Doesn't that imply you favor drinking milk not being wrong? But your argument looks like it's in favor of drinking milk being wrong...
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by utahjoker 4 years ago
utahjoker
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by famer 4 years ago
famer
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, concession and la-di-la-di-daaa
Vote Placed by Mathaelthedestroyer 4 years ago
Mathaelthedestroyer
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Even though I agree with pro and thought many of con's arguments were a bit childish, he ultimately addressed the question better and came out ahead. (Plus, pro forfeited.)
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: WE built this city... We built this city on ROCK AND ROLL!!!!!
Vote Placed by Koopin 4 years ago
Koopin
MobiiTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: kfc