The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Veganism shouldn't be that big of a deal

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 460 times Debate No: 97384
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




I like to eat meat, and I don't care. Veganism is when someone doesn't eat or use animal products. I normally wouldn't have a problem with people being vegan, but when it comes to a point where people won't shut up about, then I have a problem about it. Some of the arguments I've heard are just dumb. So say its the right way of life, some make it sound like a f*cking religion, and some will wish upon you cancer if they discover you eat meat. Call it distaste, but I think being a vegan doesn't mean anything. If you are a vegan and you agree with me, okay. If you're a vegan who's debating me because you fit what I just said, okay. My main point here is that I don't care if you're vegan, just be quiet about it.


(I would like to start by saying I'm not vegan, but I do approve of the choice/lifestyle.)

Being a vegan does not make you superior to others, and vegans should not lambaste those who choose to use and consume animal products. However, it is a fact that veganism is better for the environment and animal rights. 4.6 billion animals are slaughtered each year in the US alone, and those animals contribute to deforestation, water and air pollution, greenhouse gases, global warming, desertification, erosion, and human obesity. Not to mention that 2 out of 3 animals are raised in slaughterhouses, which is a disgusting practice in and of itself. These animals, if not put in slaughterhouses, would contribute even more to environmental damage as they would need more land to be happy.

Veganism is also proven to be sustainable for the human body, so if you want to be environmentally cautious, it is probably one of the best things you can do.
Debate Round No. 1


How do animals contribute to things like global warming and water/air pollution? Meat doesn't cause human obesity, junk food, sodas, and eating too much in general are some of the things that cause human obesity, meat is not one of the reasons. In fact, meat has protein in it. Erosion is something that happens naturally, and what does erosion have to do with veganism. The other examples you've brought up are caused by humans. Now, if you were referring to humans, then I would understand. As it is, animals are going to kill each other anyways. Also, from how you worded you statement on animals being in a slaughterhouse, you make it sound like its a good thing these animals are in a slaughterhouse. If that's the case, then whats the problem. You don't want animals in nature because they contribute to so many things, and you don't want them in a slaughterhouse because they'll be killed. Do you know how to be consistent, or do I have to slap consistency into you. The last point I want to bring up is the fact that humans live in a society and are on top of the food chain. Until cows start building my house or a rooster becomes my co-op partner, I'm not changing how I eat. As for the food chain, humans are omnivores, meaning we naturally eat both plants and meat. Not eating meat isn't going to help the animals because they'll still kill each other because it's the wild, there will still be factories which aren't going to stop because someone yells "But, my veganism," and people will still kill animals for hunting purposes.


Animals directly contribute to global warming, and water and air pollution. Air pollution can also be the same as global warming, at least in this case. The main greenhouse gases are Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, Tropospheric Ozone, CFC-12, HCFC-22, and Sulphur Hexafluoride.

Methane in particular is emitted during coal, natural gas, and oil production and transportation. The emissions also come from livestock and other agriculture, and by the decay of waste in solid waste landfills. Nitrous oxide is also emitted during agriculture and industrial activities, as well as combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste. So, agriculture that raises food for the animals increases methane and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere; the livestock produces methane. Therefore, both of these things contribute to global warming. Manure is one of the largest contribution to greenhouse gases - have you ever been around a cow pasture? If you have you would know that there is air pollution within a large radius of any livestock.

As for water pollution, this is simple but juvenile: livestock poops. What happens to it? It's washed away by rain and into other bodies of water, and it causes various water borne diseases: cholera, diarrhea, jaundice, dysentery, and typhoid, for example.

Meat contributes to human obesity because (in America, at least) we feed our livestock antibiotics in order to make them larger and "healthier." Not only are we becoming immune to antibiotics in part due to this; but if antibiotics make animals fatter, what makes you think it doesn't do the same to us? The fact that meat has protein in it has no relation to health, as you can get protein from other sources.

Livestock causes erosion because when they live in one place, they eat the plants and trample the ground. Without the plants, the ground is more likely to be eroded by wind and water. Therefore, erosion deals with veganism in the fact that if we didn't eat them, there would be less erosion.

"Animals are going to kill themselves anyway" is an argument that makes no sense. We're talking about livestock in pastures and slaughterhouses, not predators in the Savannah. These prey animals are protected by us so we can eat them; I think we both know that cows don't eat each other, at least not naturally.

You've misconstrued my words in regard to slaughterhouses: I believe that confining animals to the smallest possible area they can stand in, abusing them, and not killing them mercifully are crimes against nature. However, I know that slaughterhouses are built for efficiency and minimum space requirements. I was predicting that you would say that if they weren't confined, where would they go? The answer is that they would go to open pastures - and they would do more damage. However, the point I was making was that if we didn't eat the animals, they wouldn't be in slaughterhouses or pastures; therefore they wouldn't cause damage to the environment.

I wouldn't say humans are the top of the food chain. The food chain is the natural order of who-eats-who. Note the word natural; without our tools and defenses, we only have our intellect. Our hunter-gatherer ancestors got eaten by predators regularly. It's also agreed upon in the scientific community that plants are at the top of the food chain because they produce their own food. Also, the food chain is a deceptive term; a more accurate description would be a food web, as every animal is connected in some way. Humans only define it as a food chain because of ego.

You are correct that factories won't stop killing livestock/people won't stop hunting unless EVERYONE decides to go vegan. Any logical person knows that this simply will not happen; and the people that are underweight need efficient protein sources. Unfortunately, animal meat is one of the most efficient source, since you can eat a small portion of meat as opposed to a large portion of cheese or seeds.

Also, "slapping consistency into me" is a laughable idea, and the comment has no place in a debate.
Debate Round No. 2


I just like to point out that you don't talk about humans being are the reason we're using fossil fuels and exhale carbon dioxide. Yes, animals contribute to to carbon dioxide, but you make it sound like you're putting a blame on animals. Second, animals that live in water will poop in the water, you make it sound like every animal goes to the nearest water source and takes a dump, as if its a toilet. Third, human obesity is caused by humans and what they eat. Don't blame the meat for human obesity. Fourth, erosion is usually caused naturally. What if the animal lives in a desert or any area with with no water sources (rivers, pounds, lakes, etc.)? Animals killing themselves, IN THE WILD, is basically a natural thing. Herbivores can't really defend themselves against a carnivore or an omnivore. Humans are omnivores, so ergo, we eat both plants and meat. Finally, you can't get EVERYONE to be vegan. Have you ever thought about the fact that people will kill animals for fun (hunting) or for pouching, or killing animals to take something they have. For example, killing elephants for their tusks. Also, when I said "slapping consistency into you" was referring to the fact that you worded you first argument in a way where it may be efficient to get rid of all animals because they're a negative either way. Either way in the fact that you said that its bad for animals to be in slaughterhouses and its bad for animals, and its bad for animals to live because they can hurt their environment. Is it good for animals to live, or is it not. I think the reason that some people won't be vegan is how vegans on the internet take veganism either so seriously or try to force other people to be vegan. Let people do what they want.


If you clicked the related source, you would have seen that it includes information on all of the greenhouses gases, including human's effect on the environment. I use the word "contribute" to describe animals effect on all of these things - that means that there are other factors for each point I'm making. It was just irrelevant for a debate about veganism because veganism deals with animal products/meat, not human products or waste. When any animal defecates, their waste sits on the ground. The rain comes by and washes the waste away. The water is either A) absorbed by the earth, so the waste can pollute the ground and underground water sources, or B) runs into a waterway and directly pollutes the water. That's just how the water cycle works.

"Third, human obesity is caused by humans and what they eat."
You directly stated that human obesity is caused by what humans eat. Humans (with the except of vegetarians and vegans) eat meat. You seem to place humans on a pedestal, but scientifically we are still classified as an animal. Livestock's food supply is laced with antibiotics so that the animals get fatter, for butchering later. We use antibiotics make these animals fatter: cows, chickens, pigs, turkeys, sheep, and goats. These are the most common livestock to raise. If these livestock get fatter from antibiotics in their food, we can get fatter from antibiotics in our food - and the antibiotics are in the meat. Of course, there are some farmers who realize the detrimental effects antibiotics have, so they refuse to add it to the feed. I thank them for supplying untainted meat for us to consume. Erosion is caused naturally as well, by water and wind primarily. If you are in a desert, yes, sand blows around and things start to erode. In a grassland or the plains, if animals trample all of the plants, they expose the dirt to the wind and what was once solid ground can be blown away by the breeze. That's also erosion, and it's still from a natural source - animals.

Animals killing themselves is natural, including humans killing any other animal. Again, the debate is over veganism, and the animals that vegans are boycotting include commercial livestock. Livestock are herbivores, and herbivores may kill each other for territory, but in the wild they wouldn't kill each other for food. You're saying that animals "would still kill each other" as if the same amount of livestock would be getting killed in the natural wild by predators, which isn't true. The primary predator for livestock to worry about is us. If we didn't eat these animals they would not be getting killed in such depressing numbers. I said "any logical person... [knows that humans won't stop eating meat]"; I didn't say everyone would go vegan. Why are you acting like I did? Most vegans are aware of this fact too. Only those who are fanatical do and say horrible things to attempt to convert everyone. I don't know where you live and what the population is like there, but I can tell you that there are more vegans that understand human nature than those that believe that you should be punished for eating meat on this planet. And have YOU thought about the fact that hunting elephants for ivory is not only a disgusting, awful thing to do, but it's ILLEGAL? Elephants are endangered, and it's perfectly reasonable to want those who hunt endangered species for fun and greed to be punished for their crimes, vegan or not. I'm sure you just gave a bad example, but everyone should care about endangered species being killed! Not to mention the fact that even with weapons, humans are not good hunters. Humans miss, and when they miss they often hit the animal in an area that unnecessarily injures them, and then they have to be chased down while bleeding to kill, causing unnecessary pain.

This won't stop us from hunting - but, again, if we were all vegan (which, to reiterate, logical people know isn't going to happen), these animals would be alive. That's what vegans care about! This is the reason they went vegan. They want animals to be alive, and they want us to stop hurting them. That's what I'm saying when I tell you that slaughterhouses are bad - they brutally kill and abuse animals for human consumption, which is why vegans don't like it. Vegans want animals to be in nature, but science tells us that animals cause certain types of damage. I'm just providing the counterpoint that animals also cause environmental damage, along with contributing to obesity. But, this is NOT what vegans are concerned about, they care about animal rights.

In order to debate well, you should look at all of the factors of a situation and consider them equally. Animal raising causes a portion of the problems I'm addressing, and you're not wrong when you say that other things contribute to as well. It's just that you're ignoring the facts that you don't agree with - cherry picking out anything that stands in opposition to your opinion that you can eat meat if you want. In the beginning, I told you I'm not a vegan; I couldn't care less what you eat. All I'm doing is playing devil's advocate, and all you're just repeating the same things over and over and completely disregarding anything that gives a legitimate reason to be a vegan. My point is that there are perfectly logic and moral reasons to not eat meat or use animal products. This doesn't mean that veganism should be a big deal, or that you should be harassed for not being vegan. All I'm saying is that they have a reason to do what they do, and all of those reasons are backed by facts and science. Veganism isn't wrong. It's just a lifestyle choice.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by stuntman.k 1 year ago
Let's get something straight. Vegans are often a$$holes. I'm aware of that. But in the end, they are right.

Meat, dairy and egg eaters don't care about animals. They don't care about what pain they cause on others. As long as they get their bacon, they are fine with animal abuse. They make the same excuses that Nazi's and slave owners made. They say that just because someone is different, they are inferior. That type of mentality is evil. pure evil. Nothing justifies the meat and dairy industry.

In the end, veganism is the only compassionate way to live on this planet because eating the salted corpse of a murdered living being is the opposite of compassion. Humane killing does not exist. To determine if something is humane, examine if you would want it done to you, even if it is painless.

You don't lose anything when you go vegan, you just stop taking what isn't yours.
Posted by TheBenC 1 year ago
Vegans are that annoying because they cannot eat meat and cheese.
No votes have been placed for this debate.