The Instigator
ethicalinvestor
Pro (for)
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)

Killing animals for their flesh and secretions is unethical.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
ethicalinvestor has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 2,143 times Debate No: 108318
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (69)
Votes (0)

 

ethicalinvestor

Pro

I don't see why this is relevant as it's obvious what I mean by killing.
Killing = Cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing).

I'm reposting this debate as the previous CON executed a complete strawman and dodged the debate by saying that "meat" can be referred to fruits and nuts. Well I'm stating it now that by meat I intend the flesh of animals. Let's not play semantic games as it is an important issue to discuss. Not only it is unethical but it also damages our environment, our bodies and the future of humanity.

This argument has been formulated by vegan youtuber Ask Yourself, in this video he tackles point by point the most common arguments used by non-vegans.

It is a long video but to be fair non-vegans have a lot of retarded arguments.
If the video is too long I'll try an summarize it here, but before debating this topic I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the counter arguments.

Let's cast aside the 4 N's
http://rvgn.org...

Eating meat is "Natural" - Appeal to Nature fallacy.
Saying that something is natural doesn't mean it's ethical.
Rape is Natural, is it ethical?

Eating meat is "Normal" - Another fallacy.
Similar argument to the one above. Slavery was normal few hundred years ago, is it ethical? Rape is normal still today in some cultures, is it ethical?

Eating meat is "Necessary" - No it isn't.
The American Dietetic Association states that a vegan diet can be adequate for all stages of life, including pregnancy and infancy.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Also these reputable doctors have done plenty of research and published peer reviewed scientific papers showing that a plant based diet is healthier than a diet which includes meat:
Dr. Michael Greger from nutritionfacts.org and author of "How Not To Die" a New York Times best seller.
Dr. Neal Barnard from pcrm.org
Dr. John McDougall author of The Starch Solution
There are many other doctors, nutritionists and scientists which have evidence supporting this argument, eating animal flesh and their secretions (dairy, eggs, honey) isn't necessary in our modern society.

Eating meat is "Nice" - Insane position
I think everyone agrees that "I love meat" isn't a proper argument.
You wouldn't agree someone trying to eat you because you taste good.

What is the justification then?
Wylted

Con

My opponent has left the site and I doubt he"ll return. I don"t want to waste my time writing arguments that will be ignored. If he returns I will finish the debate and just take the one round disadvantage
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
69 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
Wow that's a new level of lame.
Yeah, he got all butt hurt.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Hopefully he reopens it before his turn comes up
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Did this fvcker close his account to avoid debating me. I actually looked forward to this
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
You don"t really respond to arguments. You just relentlessly drone on about the same thing without responding to the points others make
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
I just said how animals can"t enter into the social contract. You aren"t even explaining what gives humans a right to life let alone giving us a reason that should be applied to animals. So saying human rights naturally extends to animals when you haven"t even given a reason why humans should have rights is silly
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
"Damn I would love to be in your head to feel how stupid you are. Can't keep going in circles with you guys, you can't comprehend basic logic. Cya"

Translation:
I have no response to sentient micro-animals or lack of neurons, or using my survival as a reason to kill micro animals antithetical to my entire point.
Posted by ethicalinvestor 3 years ago
ethicalinvestor
Damn I would love to be in your head to feel how stupid you are. Can't keep going in circles with you guys, you can't comprehend basic logic. Cya
Posted by MagicAintReal 3 years ago
MagicAintReal
EI, you admitted that neurons were a trait that some animals do not have.
Your #namethetrait has been debunked by neurons and neuronal substrates of sponges and trichoplax, who LACK THESE TRAITS.

Either you respect all animals equally or you don't.
Clearly you have no care about sponges, trichoplax, or any of the micro-animals you would support killing.

Let me quote you.
"my survival comes first"

Point for the other side.

"I don't have a problem with killing [micro-animals]"

Point for the other side.

"if they are in the way of things that I need for survival, eating, showering and sleeping are things that I have to do for my own survival."

Point for the other side.

However micro-animals are sentient, because they have nervous systems, and you are just animalist and don't care about them.
Bad vegan.
Posted by ethicalinvestor 3 years ago
ethicalinvestor
Don't have any opinion on abortion at the moment, haven't researched the topic enough. If you do have an argument pro or con I'll be happy to hear it.
But let's get back to the point:
If you scroll down I explained why veganism follows from universal human rights.

You have to name a trait that is present in animals which if present in humans would make it ok to stab a human for their flesh.
If you can't find such a trait then there's no qualitative difference between animals and humans when it comes to a right to life.

And no, I'm not saying humans and animals are the same. I wouldn't give an animal a right to vote, in this case the trait would be "conceptualize voting" , since I named that trait I have to hold the position that a human that can't conceptualize voting doesn't have a right to vote, newborns and mentally retarded people for example in my opinion shouldn't vote.
Get it?
Unless you name the trait that justifies killing animals you can't be eating them and at the same time agreeing on a human's right to life, your own for example.

I'm telling you guys, the #namethetrait argument hasn't been debunked yet, look for it on google, many people attempt to debunk it but fail.
Here's a short video on the #namethetrait argument done by the creator of the argument:

All the vegan argument requires is logical consistency and a personal belief in human moral value, veganism will follow logically from that position " the objectivity or subjectivity of morality is irrelevant. Unless you deny the importance of logical consistency then veganism will follow.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Assuming humans have some right to life, how would that give my cheeseburger a right to life?

A humans right to life seems to rest on the social contract. We aren"t allowed to go around killing people because it puts ourselves at risk of being killed. We are banding together for mutual self interest, and form laws and a government to represent that mutual self interest.

I don"t see how a pig can enter into a social contract.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.