: How many of you people believe all of the following three things?
: 1. It is wrong to eat meat.
: 2. Humans are not superior to animals.
: 3. Homosexuality is not wrong.
None of these are particularly leftist positions, Stu. The Left consists of those who support freedom and equality, and the right generally consists of those who defend established power and privilege. There are plenty of conservative Hindus who would say that eating meat is a sin, for example.
: Lots of you I am sure!
Personally, I think that eating meat is....well, not "evil", but certainly an act of violence against a sentient being. I eat meat, personally, but i do view it as a shortcoming. Obviously, i think that I have many more important causes to devote my life to than vegetarianism- spreading socialism, for example. Of course, I think that consensual homosexuality is perfectly OK, although I have absolutely no taste for it myself. "Superior" is a somewhat meaningless term. I think that a man is more spiritually and mentally developed than a slug, for example. But I would hesitate to say the same about a chimpanzee. of course, "superior' is in itself a totally subjective term, so I can only ask, superior according to what definition?
: Invariably, the argument against eating meat always boils down to the
: notion that humans have the choice to eat meat or not so it is incumbant upon mankind to choose not to eat meat to spare that animal.
No, the argument doesn't 'invariably" boil down to anything of the kind. Stop trying to look at the world through a [pair of blinkers. There are many reasons why people choose to be vegetarian.
1) the religious argument. Two of the oldest world religions, as well as many other smaller ones, condemn eating meat as a form of unnecessary violence against a sentient being. This is inarguable.
2) the environmental reason. eating a vegetarian diet is more energy-efficient. A;lthough i don't advocate universal vegetarianism, I do think it is inanely stupid, as well as invcredibly selfish, for Americans to be eating as much grain-fed beef as they do, seeing as how these grain supplies are desparately needed by poorer countries.
3) the health argument, about which I have my doubts,
4) the secular animal rights argument.
Obviously, the religious argument against eating meat is the strongest, because it depends on undebatable axioms. If you accept teh axiomms it's hard to deny the conclusion.
:But what code is man obligated to follow? Is man not an animal too?
Yes, obviously, but the more intelligent animals may possibly have a code of morality- at any rate, tehy ahve a capacity for empathy. Humans have a moral sense which tells us right and wrong, we also have a capacity for evil that dwarfs that of any other animal.
: If man is an animal then he is superior to other animals because he can practice morality where the others cannot.
Questionable, among the higher apes morality may exist....the data is currently insufficient. Anyway, an alien onbserver rpobably wouldn't conclude that humans were moral either- our behavior doesn't seem to show it. Only we knwo we have morality, because we can see inside our own minds...similarly, i would hesitate before judging chimpanzees.
: Indeed, if we are to practice the morality of meat abstinence and spare the lamb our animalistic urges then what of sexual abstinence and morality. You know, the kind that suggests it is proper to enter into a normal sexual relationship only in the context of a committed relationship.
Non sequitur, first of all you have to explain to me WHY homosexuality is immoral. I've already given you an argument why meat eating may reasonably be regarded as wrong, though I feel somewhat silly since I eat meat myself. i haven't seen a good argument why homosexuality is wrong. I don't wwant to hear legal arguments, tehy ahve no moral force. Give me some moral arguments, please.
: You see, I find it rather odd that examples of same gender sex in the animal kingdom are used to rationalize homosexuality.
They're not, they're ponly used to deny the premise taht homosexuality is unnatural. Too many right-wingers, unable to argue taht homosexuality is harmful to anyone, fall back on the false cliche about being unnatural.
:This argument flies in the face of the first premise. If man is an animal when it comes to his sexual urges, why can't he also follow his dietary urges?
No one says that all sexual desires should be gratified. Sex without consent is wrong, e.g. sex with children, comatose people, mentally disbaled people, etc.
:Are not the instincts to survive both engendered equally in sex and food?
Erm?
: Why must we practice the preferred morality of the left and disregard time honored morality?
Time honored according to whom? Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and several other religions all condemn meat eating. most of these religions don't particulalry condemn homosexuality. Homsoexuality is fully accepted in many societies including ancient Greece, traditional Samoa, Tibet, and most progressive countries today.
: Stuart Gort
