The Instigator
ScienceJunky101
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
The_Master_Riddler
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Should We Have a Meat Free Diet?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
The_Master_Riddler
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/24/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,070 times Debate No: 27475
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

ScienceJunky101

Pro

Humans were made to eat a plant centered diet. Don't believe me? Take a look at our biology compared to other animals. Carnivores have long, sharp, pointy teeth. We have short, relatively flat, duller teeth. Carnivores usually have very good night vision. We do not. Carnivores can digest raw meat. We need to cook meat in order to not get food poisoning. The list goes on and on!
The_Master_Riddler

Con

First, I would like to say that my opponent started off his argument on the wrong foot. He stated arguments that support why humans weren't made to eat meat, but the debate topic he proposed says should we have a meat free diet. Although those might sound like convincing arguments, meat is a vital ingredient to healthy living. Health food programs promotee the consumption of meat. Protein, a vital nutrient to our body, is in meat. Even God gave meat to the Israelites when they were in the wilderness to show the promises of God and that meat is a vital ingredient to our survival.

Definitions
meat- any non human living thing that doesn't come from the ground that has protein
should- be allowed
we- the populace
free- lack thereof; without
diet- a way or lifestyle of eating

We should not have a meat free diet because of these two reasons(more reasons are to come in roundd two).
1. God gave it to us- In the book of James, it says that every good gift comes from God, and because meat came from God, it is good. And because we are built upon the basic principles of Christianity, we must observe the fact that God gave us meat to eat (Genesis- Covenant with Noah).
2. Most of the protein we get comes from meat- We need protein to survive. In fact, protein helps us grow, transport cells, fight diseaes, and other things. Most of the protein we receive comes from meat. Of we remove meat, that might lead to sick midgets running around America.

Please know that protein is a necessity to our diet. Removing meats will do more harm than good.
Debate Round No. 1
ScienceJunky101

Pro

Sorry about not knowing the rules, this is my first debate. Going on....

There are many ways to get protein in a vegetarian diet. In fact, many plants have more protein than meats. As for the religion aspect, there are many religions (such as Buddhism) that have eating either any meat or one type of meat as a sin, will send you to hell, won't achieve oneness, etc. In the modern world, meat is often very processed and the animals are treated as cargo rather than living beings. Many aren't even "put under" when they are killed, meaning they are fully conscious. Eating meat you catch in the wild is one thing, but today, that isn't available to most people. The best way to not support the mistreatment of animals is to not give money to the companies that kill them inhumanely.
The_Master_Riddler

Con

My opponent says that many plants have more protein than meats but doesn't verify what plants or even gives proof showing that certain plants have more protein. This argument has been refuted.

My opponent says that many religions say that if you eat meat, you will go to hell (Buddhism), but our government wasn't primarily built on Buddhistic beliefs. We were built on two beliefs: In God We Serve, and a republic government. The religion he said in particular (Buddhism) has no main influence in our government, and because most of America is composed of Christians, the government will support 2 policies: 1. to please the people and 2. to please God.

My opponent says that meat is treated as cargo instead of living beings but the definition of cargo, from Merriam-Webster, says the goods or merchandise conveyed in a ship, airplane, or vehicle , and because meat is shipped through planes, vehicles, ships, and meat is also a merchandise, it is appropriate to treat meat as such.

My opponent says that many animals aren't even put under when they are killed, which means they are fully concious. But how can you kill a dead thing?

My opponent says that eating meat in the wild is one thing but today it isn't available to most people. Processing meat gets the toxins and makes meat healthier to eat.

My opponent says we don't have night vision, but does that matter? Dogs are color blind but they can tell the difference between grass and hay.

My opponent says we can't digest raw meat, but according to my definition of meat, sushi can be digested.

My opponent went off on a tangent with his last statement talking about treating animals cruelly. We are talking about why or why not should we have meat free diets, not animal cruelty.
Debate Round No. 2
ScienceJunky101

Pro

A serving of peas has 8 grams of protein, chicken breast only has 3.5 grams.
What does our government have to do with our personal food choices, besides the FDA approving of food quality?
I mean the live animals should not be treated as merchandise, just as breeders should treat puppies justly.
I am saying they could use drugs like they do for surgery to cause minimal pain to the animal.
Many meat products are made unhealthy by being processed with large amounts of sugar, being fried, etc.
Night vision is when you can see easily at night, which dogs, cats, and other predators can.
Many people have gotten tape worms from sushi. The FDA says "It may be harmful to consume undercooked or raw meat and fish" (If you look carefully, you will find this on sushi menus)
Animal cruelty is one of the many reasons to not eat meat, which is relevant.
The_Master_Riddler

Con

Fact Check: My opponent says that there is 3.5 grams of chicken. The source I found says that a piece of chicken that is 3.5 oz has 30 grams of chicken. http://lowcarbdiets.about.com...

My opponent says that what does the government have to do with our personal food choices, besides the FDA approving of food quality But the FDA is a designated section of the government that says eating meat is healthy. That statement is invalid.

Fact Check: merchandise- a product you sell at the market, If an animal is sold at the market, then it is merchandise. Treating merchandise like merchandise is very logical. It makes no sense to treat merchandise not like merchandise.

My opponent says to refute my argument saying that they could use drugs, but either the drugs might kill the animal, the animal might wake up, or the drugs might not work. Also, putting an animal to sleep doesn't make them unconscious. The animal will be subconscious. So therefore, putting an animal to sleep doesn't make an animal unconscious.

My opponent says that many meat products are made unhealthy by being processed, but most of the things we eat are being made unhealthy. Most plants are being made genetically modified. These foods are intoxicated with viruses that can cause many harm to humans.

What does night vision have to with people eating meat? People in Black Ops have night vision goggles.

My opponent says people have gotten tape worms from sushi, but many animals get tape worms and other parasites from other animals.

My opponent says that animal cruelty is one of the reasons not to eat meat, but protein consumption is a reason why we should.
Debate Round No. 3
ScienceJunky101

Pro

ScienceJunky101 forfeited this round.
The_Master_Riddler

Con

My opponent forfeited. In the last round I said chicken but I meant to say protein. I will restate the last round. Please don't take off points for the chicken statement made in last round. Vote Con.

Fact Check: My opponent says that there is 3.5 grams of protein in chicken. The source I found says that a piece of chicken that is 3.5 oz has 30 grams of protein. http://lowcarbdiets.about.com...

My opponent says that what does the government have to do with our personal food choices, besides the FDA approving of food quality But the FDA is a designated section of the government that says eating meat is healthy. That statement is invalid.

Fact Check: merchandise- a product you sell at the market, If an animal is sold at the market, then it is merchandise. Treating merchandise like merchandise is very logical. It makes no sense to treat merchandise not like merchandise.
Debate Round No. 4
ScienceJunky101

Pro

ScienceJunky101 forfeited this round.
The_Master_Riddler

Con

Meat is good for us. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
First off, one point to PRO for participating, welcome to the website.

1) CON was able to get the protein in chicken eventually lol, so sources for that.
2) I think PRO made some great points, but couldn't tie them together and didn't follow through in the debate. I think the animal cruelty argument is valid, and when CON challenged it, PRO could have simply put two and two together, but he didn't.
3) CON went overboard on semantics IMHO. I was a bit offended by the cargo definition...but again PRO did nothing about it, which IMHO was even more offensive lol
4) Overall, CON was very aggressive, which IMHO is good in debating. Good job.
Posted by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
The debate lacked sources. A web search would have revealed that humans are "designed" to be omnivorous, and that humans evolved to digest cooked meat in preference to raw. Humans can get enough protein from a vegetarian diet. Caveman diets were heavy in animal fats, which provide a lot of calories in a concentrated form.

This was a fair start for new debaters. Looking up some of the past vegetarian debates on DDO would be helpful to both sides, as well as web search specific points. Be sure to respond to each of an opponents contentions.
Posted by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
Oh duck, I put chicken but I meant to put protein.
(I meant to put duck on purpose!)
Posted by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
Oops forgot to cite a source. bangmfoods.org
Posted by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
Welcome to Debate.org. I am relatively new here too, but no worries.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
ScienceJunky101The_Master_RiddlerTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: For explanation, see comment. "...a piece of chicken that is 3.5 oz has 30 grams of chicken" DAMN, I NEED MORE CHICKEN IN MY DIET!
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
ScienceJunky101The_Master_RiddlerTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has the burden to prove that we should have a meat free diet. He argued that people are "designed" to be vegetarian and Con didn't respond. However, a "design" argument does not necessarily require that we now eat meat. Peo didn't claim any specific reason that followed from the alleged "design" other than danger of a health problem wit contaminated meat. I think the burden is heavy because humans have lived for a long time with a diet that includes meat. Con adequately answered the contamination issue, and established that meat is an important source of protein. Pro loses conduct for forfeiting the last two rounds. The forfeits left Con arguments unanswered.