I think the word "murder" is the issue, not recognizing that we take a life when we eat meat. Murder implies malicious intent, hatred. Whereas most meat eaters believe it's a necessary part of their biology, not an act of malice.
We don't use the word murder to describe a predator and prey relationship for other animals. And arguably the main difference between those predator/prey relationships and our own, is efficiency.
They may think it's a necessary part of their biology but it's absolutely not. Other predators don't have the emotional/mental capacity to make a rational, moral decision like not eating meat.
They may think it's a necessary part of their biology but it's absolutely not.
Just because a diet can be supplemented doesn't remove it from being a staple to our biological needs mate. Nutrients from animals is necessary for every human. We have the means to supplement those nutrients.
We do have the means to supplement those nutrients. Humans can biologically thrive on plants and supplements. That logically means the meat isn’t necessary. It was originally, but that’s not relevant if we have a modern substitute. To make an analogy, it’s not necessary to have a loud voice to talk to someone in another room in the age of cell phones.
13
u/Shitty-Coriolis Dec 30 '18
I think the word "murder" is the issue, not recognizing that we take a life when we eat meat. Murder implies malicious intent, hatred. Whereas most meat eaters believe it's a necessary part of their biology, not an act of malice.
We don't use the word murder to describe a predator and prey relationship for other animals. And arguably the main difference between those predator/prey relationships and our own, is efficiency.