Why I am not a Vegetarian - Essay Example

Essay, Philosophy Topic: Why I am not a vegetarian of the Student) University Topic: Why I am not a vegetarian Introduction Human being is hailed as the crown of Creation. He has the freedom to pursue his line of thinking and live independently, so far he does not interfere in the freedom of others. Why place restrictions on his food habits and force the theory of vegetarianism on him based on some misconstrued notions? The main objection to non-vegetarianism is the issue of animal cruelty. How can anyone suppose that I am for animal cruelty just because I am a non-vegetarian? These two are independent and separate issues. Since it is universally agreed that human being is the crown of creation, and all the religions are in agreement on this issue, human wellbeing is more important than the wellbeing of (1) the environment and (2) other animals. This, however, does not mean that I will go on the killing spree of animals and do willful destruction of the environment. It is the plain and simple truth that I am a non-vegetarian, and proteins available in eggs and meat are my sustenance. I do not hate vegetarian food either. But as for one’s argument ‘vegetarianism’ only, I am in total disagreement. It is not necessary for you to agree with me and it is not necessary for me to agree with you. I do not like the approach that vegetarianism is a matter of principle! I will never adopt the lifestyle of purely vegetarian! If vegetarians claim that their thinking is scientific, I contend that it is a lopsided view. Excess vegetarian diets have potential health risks. A simple issue is enmeshed with many complications .Many strong votaries of vegetarianism stick to the political correctness of that diet. Many vouchsafe for its correct scientific outlook. Some social thinkers articulate that the problems of world hunger can be solved if people take to vegetarian diet. Some swear the love of “Mother Earth” for their stand. Some associations like “The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM)” resolutely argue for exclusion of all animal products. I consider these as emotional outbursts of individuals, who fail to see that there are two sides to a coin. Think deeper, think profoundly, meatless diets can be healthful, may be desirable to certain categories of people. For example, men with iron-loading gene are not expected to consume red meat; because it is the highly absorbable iron content may increase the risk of the heart disease. Unfortunately too much importance is given to the word “vegetarian” and a “non-vegetarian” is looked down upon. This controversy is unnecessary and the total segregation of these two communities is uncalled for. I love vegetables and I am a vegetable enthusiast. I eat lots of vegetables, sprouted grains and fruits. I believe that these foods are required not only because of their high nutrient compactness and low caloric concentration, but also because of aesthetic and other factors. Being a vegetable enthusiast doesn’t necessitate rejecting the use of meat or animal products. In fact, vegetarianism and non-vegetarianism are like alternative beats of the same heart. I am not a lawyer about the arguments related to food, but I know promoters of vegetarianism gather their data selectively and address those issues which are sustainable from the point of view of their argument. In many cases eating half-cooked and raw vegetables often leads to heartburn and digestive distress. “Darla Erhardt, R.D., M.P.H., (1997) listed five vegetarian postulates: (1) All forms of life are sacred, and all creatures have a right to live out their natural lives. (2) It is anatomically clear that God did not design humans to eat meat. (3) Slaughter is repugnant and degrading. (4) Raising animals for meat is inefficient and misuses available land. (5) Animal flesh is unhealthful because it contains toxins, virulent bacteria, uric acid, impure fluids, and the wrong kinds of nutrients.” (acsh.org) But look at the flaw in each argument. 1. This is an absurd statement. For example mosquitoes spread malaria and many insect-bites are responsible for different types of diseases. Regular eradication programs are initiated by the government health agencies to eradicate them. As such the articulation that all life has got equal life is untenable. In the carnivores segment, the law of food chains is applicable unfailingly. Most of the creatures face death, being prey, before they reach the genomic perimeter of their life-span. 2. The varied eating practices of humankind discredit the postulate that human body is structured for the vegetarian diet. Eskimos eat fresh uncooked meat, whereas a big chunk of Hindu population is vegetarian. 3. Repugnancy is an individual trait. The strictly vegetarian Hindus drink personal urine/cow urine as they believe that it contains medicinal properties. As per the law governing the food chain, most of the animals eat their prey as they struggle for their life, and it is the pointer how the laws of nature are governed. It cannot be construed that Nature is heartless. 4. The argument related to economics that animal-tending is an unproductive way to harvest foodstuff is far from reality. Every animal is self-sustaining, helps the humankind in agricultural activities and provides byproducts and services contributing to the welfare of humans. They sustain on corn stubbles and husks. They take the minimum from the nature’s storehouse and give the maximum. 5. This argument is about meat containing toxins as such it is the bad food. Plants contain naturally happening toxins and some of them are deadlier than the one found in animal flesh. It is also statistically proved that societies that eat animal products have better longevity. There are many animals whose food consists of fresh vegetation grown in the farms. Baird Callicot writes, “The important thing, I would think, is not to eat vegetables as opposed to animal flesh, but to resist factory farming in all its manifestations, including especially its liberal application of pesticides, herbieides, and chemical fertilizers to maximize the production of vegetable crops. (p.336). The humankind is paying heavily for eating such vegetables. The Parable-Tough Situation I would like to reiterate my stand once again. What is to be detested is cruelty to animals and not non-vegetarian food. The craziness of the taste buds is too strong to resist temptation. In the story “Tough Situation” the man is so crazy about the animal protein that he does not care that he is shooting an old and defenseless buck. The author writes, “The buck was so old he didn’t have any teeth, he couldn’t see, and he didn’t even hear the pick-up door slam shut.”(p.6, n. d)Yet he was cruelly shot for the sake of his enjoyment. The true merit of the civilization of the people of a country is judged by the style of their disposition towards animals and birds. When a piece of steak slipped under the knife and fell down on the floor the dog had no problems with it. The author writes, “He swallowed it whole and seemed to enjoy it immensely.”(p. 6, n. d.) It is scientifically proved that as per the laws governing the food chain meat is not an ideal food item for the human beings and it is the proper food for carnivores animals like dogs. As such the dog had no problems in eating it and enjoyed its lucky bounty immensely. Excellent example, but that does not mean that human beings should not eat meat at all. This essay gives the lessons about the desirably of more humane treatment to birds like ducks, and for the sake of proteins, their merciless killing should not be carried out. The economic aspect and ecological considerations For human beings what is important is the economic aspect of the issue, whether they are vegetarians or non-vegetarians. Even the ecological considerations and the so-called ardent appeals for protection of flora and fauna, the criteria applied are economic. Aldo Leopold (1949) writes, “When one of these non-economic categories is threatened, and if we happen to love it, we invent subterfuges to give it economic importance. At the beginning of the century songbirds was supposed to be disappearing. Ornithologists jumped to the rescue with some distinctly shaky evidence to the effect that insects would eat us up if birds failed to control them. The evidence had to be economic in order to be valid.”(rintintin.) My non-vegetarian food does not in any way come into conflict with the cause of genuine protection of animals. Vegetarian ideology Most of the arguments against non-vegetarian food are emotional, and not scientific. As articulated by Reena (2013), “In the research of Jagadish Chandra Bose, in plant stimuli, he showed with the help of his newly invented crescograph that plants responded to various stimuli as if they had nervous systems like that of animals. He therefore found a parallelism between animal and plant tissues. …. According to him a plant treated with care and affection gives out a different vibration compared to a plant subjected to torture.” Vegetarians consider themselves morally superior but I consider it as the act of self-glorification. Who gave them that authority? Oratorical skills of the vegetarian propagandists and their mind-control techniques may be good public relations exercises, but they are mixing up issues that have nothing to do with the merits of the vegetarian diet. Emotional traumatization of people about the use of animal foods is unacceptable. Visit to slaughterhouses and the crude methods to kill the animals there, the resultant bloodshed will appeal to the emotional world of the visitors. Undoubtedly, it is an unethical practice. I once again state that the cruelty to animals must be dealt with severely by framing and implementing tough laws. Does one take the young girls to the hospitals to watch the difficulties and pain undergone by women at the time of childbirth to dissuade them about the institution of marriage? Humans are not equipped to eat meat—an emotional, but un-scientific argument. The argument that humans are not equipped to eat meat is only emotional and not scientific. That is an aggressive propaganda against non-vegetarianism. It is scientifically proved that protein and iron from meat are more easily absorbed as compared to their plant equivalents. Meat provides the most important mineral, the iron. Humans need iron to build the red blood cells. Meat also serves as the main source for the intake of vitamin B12. Protein from the meat is of high quality and the phosphorus content in it gets easily absorbed as compared to cereals. Conclusion: I am a meat-eater and my eating habits are my fundamental rights. That does not mean that I hate vegetarian food. This is a personal choice and I do not wish to convert vegetarians into non-vegetarians and I expect reciprocal treatment by them. If cruel methods are employed for killing, animals feel pain and so do the plants when a wood cutter lands hard blows of an axe to cut a tree. Plans also communicate. I am emphatic in stating that animal cruelty should be severely dealt with. Most of the arguments against non-vegetarian food are emotional, and not scientific. I need proteins and vitamins that are easily available in non-vegetarian food. The issue of nutrition is most important to me. Meat contains excellent quality proteins and all the essential amino acids. Persons depending on only vegetarian food are likely to suffer from retarded growth. Non-vegetarian food has strengthened my immune system and I no more suffer from common allergies and ailments. Vegetarians are most likely to suffer from iron deficiency anemia and energy deficiency in calories. References Cited Callicot, J. Baird. Animal Liberation: A Triangular Affair Web: faculty.smu.edu/jkazez/ar13/Callicott.pdf, Accessed on March 10, 2015 Erhardt, Darla. Why I Am Not a Vegetarian - “The New Vegetarians, Part OneÑVegetarianism and its Medical Consequences,” Nutrition Today, November/December, 1973. Web:acsh.org/1997/04/why-i-am-not-a-vegetarian/ Accessed on March 10, 2015 Leopold, Aldo (1949). The Land Ethic Web: rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil3140/Leopold.pdf, Accessed on March 10, 2015 Reena. The Consciousness of Water and Plants: March 17, 2013 http://www.reenagagneja.com/consciousnessofwater/ Tough Situation (p.6) n. p, n. d Read More