malik@galaxy.DEC (Karl Malik ZK01-1/F22 1-1440) (01/17/86)
Subj; the ongoing vegetarian vs. carnivore debate Not to continue the argument, but hopefully to end it -- It is exactly like the abortion issue - There are *NO* facts that could *ever* come to light that would settle the issue. Both sides are simply rationalizing an aesthetic position. And, as has been said, there is no accounting for taste. So, give it a rest, folks. - Karl p.s. if you feel like debating this, do it by MAIL not in this newsgroup.
cgeiger@ut-ngp.UUCP (01/24/86)
>> Not to continue the argument, but hopefully to end it -- >> It is exactly like the abortion issue - There are *NO* >>facts that could *ever* come to light that would settle the >>issue. >> Both sides are simply rationalizing an aesthetic position. >>And, as has been said, there is no accounting for taste. >> So, give it a rest, folks. I really disagree! Like other people have said recently, there are *ethical,* not just moral, questions involved in the way people get their meat in this society. The whole system of having an industry, in which animals are treated as a commodity, a product, bring meat to people's tables is fucked! This really has nothing to do with people's "aesthetic position"s regarding their preference concerning eating meat. Damn, I really wish I had been brought up where I had to kill my food myself. Then I *would* have been confronted with a personal, moral, or, if you will, an aesthetic dilemma. But don't kid yourself into thinking we have one now. By the way, I think this *does* belong in this newsgroup. So there. Charles S. Geiger U. of Texas
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (01/26/86)
In article <2856@ut-ngp.UUCP>, cgeiger@ut-ngp.UUCP writes: >>> Both sides are simply rationalizing an aesthetic position. >>>And, as has been said, there is no accounting for taste. >>> So, give it a rest, folks. >I really disagree! Like other people have said recently, there are >*ethical,* not just moral, questions involved in the way people get >their meat in this society. The whole system of having an industry, >in which animals are treated as a commodity, a product, bring meat >to people's tables is fucked! This really has nothing to do with >people's "aesthetic position"s regarding their preference concerning >eating meat. >Damn, I really wish I had been brought up where I had to kill my food >myself. Then I *would* have been confronted with a personal, moral, >or, if you will, an aesthetic dilemma. But don't kid yourself into >thinking we have one now. >By the way, I think this *does* belong in this newsgroup. So there. >Charles S. Geiger >U. of Texas Cooooool down. Nobody's forcing you to eat or buy meat or any other animal products at all. The 'fucked' system is there because lots of (most) other people DO choose to eat meat/use animal parts for other purposes. Each pur- chase of meat or animal products is, in effect, a 'vote' for the particular system (and they do differ--e.g., there are lots of bovines still out there in the open fields) that produced it. So you don't like it? Fine, don't cast your vote for it. Or if you still eat meat, or use other animal products, and it bothers you how some sources treat the animals, be choosy about who you buy from. It's that simple, cast your vote as you see fit. Fair enough? -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | yvel nad | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer or the administrator of any computer | at&t computer systems division | upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | -------------------------------- Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy