Posted by: IDK2013 October 4, 2013
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
Absolutely ready to answer your question, Brother! I think I already touched upon that. It’s a pyramid of food chain. Human is in the same level of the food chain that’s why, we don’t eat it. Even further, out of many choices in the levels below; we can easily choose to eat or not to eat a particular food. Meat is nothing different.
If you ask me, it’s better to be vegetarian for HEALTH REASONS (I think it’s obvious enough, so not going in detail in this one). I think you are taking it totally wrong here. Question is not whether or not we should eat meat. Do we follow non-injury if we eat. This is the question. As mentioned above about the levels in the pyramid, people may prefer one over another. Should you make intelligent choice? Absolutely. We are strictly talking about non-/injury aspect of our food.
Just because, you can see reactions in animals and not in plant life doesn’t mean that it is non-injury. Just because plants don't have or animals have less, it doesn't make it right. Killing is killing. Just like hitting a person in coma doesn't make it right because he cannot show emotions. It’s just your ability, or lack thereof, to see it. A plant or fruit or seed has a life form contained within. See a lush green baby tomato plant shooting up to enjoy its life and you mercilessly cut it into pieces; you are essentially taking its life. It cannot bloom any flowers, pollinate (basically sex), grow new baby tomatoes, any seeds and so on. A mother cow doesn’t go through a complex bodily process to make milk for you; it is to nurture her baby cow. You ruthlessly push away calves’ hungry mouth, and you steal their mom’s milk to fulfill your hungry selfishness. Brother, that is injury. You don’t have even kill to injure. (Your penis doesn’t have to penetrate a vagina to loose your sexual abstinence in its real meaning. It is all the mental activities that goes on inside you.) You don’t have to poke a goat, if you in fact contemplate for awhile you’ll find that the same injury will be observed in any life form. Another example I can think of is like finding it perfectly ok not to give any raise to other well qualified employees who didn’t complain, but to give some just because they approach to the boss to complain for the raise.
So my position is that it’s very hypocritical to define non-injury on what suits us. We cannot live without injury. That’s way how that natural law is set up.
“Animals lack intelligence.” You may want to do some fact check on this. May not be as intelligent as human, but they do have both emotions and intelligence.
“Humans are not ultimate goal of evolution.” If you actually believe in evolution, there is not goal. Your statement contradicts in itself. Evolution is dictated by the surrounding environment itself. Million years ago, nature (perhaps God in your terms) didn’t have ‘goals’ to make giraffes with such long necks. Had the climate then been different and grass been available in the surface or in the lower branches, giraffes would have shorter necks. I don’t want to go in details of ecology on how both the plant and animal ‘bodies’ are adapted to the environment, but I think you got my point.
I do agree with rethink that we human being has higher intelligence, so are capable of and should be thinking higher ideas. But it is very unethical to distort the fundamental facts to sound mystic or to control other people, like unfortunately a lot of Hindu ‘books’ have been misused today.
Last edited: 04-Oct-13 03:08 PM