Meat-eater's State of 'The Nation' (Mickey Z.)

[Tace]

Mickey Z. -- World News Trust

Jan. 24, 2007 -- The (so-called) alternative press rarely "gets" vegetarianism, animal rights, and related issues. Case in point: The February 5, 2007 issue of The Nation featured a book review by Daniel Lazare called "My Beef With Vegetarianism." The book in question was The Bloodless Revolution by Tristram Stuart (full disclosure: I have not read Stuart's book).

The "review" reads like a personal vendetta against those who choose a plant-based diet, as Lazare dedicates as much space to his own opinions as those of author Stuart. "My Beef With Vegetarianism" also includes a wide range of uninformed assertions. For Lazare, death at a slaughterhouse involves merely "dispatching" the animal "quickly and efficiently" for the "good utilitarian purpose of feeding the hungry." He also engages in Fox News-level mind games with questions like: "If life is the highest value and taking it is never, ever permissible, then what are we to do in the case of a poisonous snake that is about to strike a sleeping infant?"

I'm wondering: Did a vegetarian spokesperson decree that taking a life is never permissible? Plus, we don't need imaginary examples like snakes and infants. The animals being slaughtered on a massive scale are not threatening anyone or anything, they do not die "quickly and efficiently," and the hungry are not being fed as a result of their grisly deaths.

Lazare dusts off another line of "reasoning" one might expect from a 12-year-old: "Cruel as it is to kill an ox or a pig, nature is even crueler. A tiger or wolf does not knock its prey senseless with a single blow to the forehead and then painlessly slit its jugular; rather, it tears it to pieces with its teeth." Lazare not only embarrasses himself with an absurd comparison, he yet again diminishes the horror and cruelty of the slaughter industry.

more

http://www.worldnewstrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=870&Itemid=1

[BoneDaddy]

1. As someone who was a vegetarian for many years

and now has reverted back to a meat supplemented diet, I can tell you that there is enough demonization of the "other" from both camps, maybe even moreso from the veg camp.

That said, I don't have a problem with the vegetarian argument as I think it has some real valid points. While I do have meat and fish in my diet, I enjoy a primarily vegetarian based diet. I try and buy mostly organic and the least processed, organic fed meat as possible.

I think that the world can greatly benefit from a vegetarian based diet for many reasons... health, hunger (cows take up more room than using the area for grains or vegetables), and the processing of the meat from a moral sense.

But like the total of the animal rights movement, they will not get their points across by shoving it down someone's throat. It is a tactic that is so very counterproductive. Nothing will turn off the mainstream average American than some dirty hippy (and I like dirty hippies)screaming in their face. It is a public relations issue. Attempting to shame, instigate or force a view down anyone's throat is NEVER successful. Acting out in a way that is perceived as hostile, damaging and confrontative often solidifies the opposition. Some of the more vocal active "animal rights" groups come to mind.

But change is occuring, albeit slowly, which is how change often occurs. The very same "meat and potato's" crowd I grew up with are now enjoying a diet based in organics, limiting meat intake, getting rid of empty carbs and breads, vitamin supplementation and an overall conscious food planning mindset. Truth be told, they are doing it mostly for selfish reasons regarding their health, but unless we can tie the benefits to something that is important to them (their health and their children's health) change may not occur.

But in the end, vegetarians need to respect non-vegetarian's choices and vice versa because when everyone is screaming, no one is listening.

[Stuckinthebush]

2. As someone who is a vegetarian

I agree with your assessment that pushing a diet down someone's throat is foolish. However, I don't see most vegetarians doing this. Certainly there are radicals in any lifestyle, but they don't define the entire group. I don't eat meat, I think it is unhealthy, and I wish there was a way to encourage more people to think about meat consumption in a different way. I don't jump up and down screaming at meat eaters about this though, and I find that most of my vegetarian friends don't either.

I do think that we all are resistant to change. We will defend our actions violently in some cases. You are exactly right that it is ridiculous to ridicule others to try to get them to change. Only through example and sensitive public education can we ever hope to encourage others to look at the world differently.

[BoneDaddy]

3. Agreed

Most vegetarians are pretty down to earth and when I was, I never pushed an agenda either. I guess I am referring more to the PETA folks, who may have a good message, but who shoot themselves in the foot when it comes to public relations.

I may return to a full veg diet, I just like meat too much.