Meat of the Matter

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Daily Nebraskan columns)

Meat of the Matter

Jeremy Patrick (jhaeman@hotmail.com)

February 16, 2000

I'm probably the most cynical bastard I know. I want a clean environment, but I'm not a stereotypical tree-hugger, willing to sacrifice all progress for the sake of some foliage.
I have a dog back home, but I'll never be one of those old ladies who keeps 27 cats because she can't bear to see a stray. And if I'm ever starving in the middle of a frozen wilderness, with nothing around but me and a deer, I can say without hesitation that I'll be feasting on venison.

My support for reducing the harms we inflict on animals doesn't stem from a bleeding heart or from the theoretical constructions of the learned from on high. It stems from common sense.
There are two main reasons to respect animal rights: health and ethics.

Health

"The new fitness fad," shouts the magazine headline.

Americans seem to be trying anything and everything to improve their health. Some attend expensive fitness centers, while others scrupulously cut fat and sugar out of their diets. For millions of Americans, however, a simple and effective way to eat healthier is by becoming a vegetarian. The strictest of vegetarians (vegans) do not eat any foods containing animal products. Others make exceptions for eggs and milk.

Medical research clearly shows that eating vegetarian is a good way to improve your health. Johanna Dwyer, a registered dietitian at New England Medical Center Hospital, said, "Vegetarians are at lesser risk for obesity, atonic [reduced muscle tone] constipation, lung cancer and alcoholism. Evidence is good that risks for hypertension, coronary heart disease, type II diabetes, and gallstones are lower" (FDA Consumer, October 1995).

Most of the vegetarians I've met have lost weight and have more energy since they stopped eating meat. Although eating vegetarian won't guarantee a healthy diet, it's certainly a good start. And, of course, you don't have to quit cold turkey (pun intended) like I did. Some people start with one meatless meal per day and then gradually eat two or more a day until they're completely meat-free.

Even in beef-infested Lincoln, with a little work, good vegetarian food can be found. It's certainly worth the effort for the sake of better health.

Ethics

St. Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant embody the traditional philosophical view of animals. This view is that animals are a mere resource to be exploited for man's use. Therefore, we have no duties towards them whatsoever. Some modern philosophers, such as Tom Regan and Peter Singer, believe animals have an inherent value. They believe using animals in science, agriculture and hunting should be abolished.

The debate is certainly interesting and worth more attention, but I don't have the space to go into it here. Instead, my support for animal rights stems from the simple fact that animals feel pain.

I think it a defensible proposition that the infliction of pain without a purpose is wrong, and animals suffer in many needless ways because of our selfishness. The meat we eat and the leather we wear does not come from an idyllic, farm-like creature from "Charlotte's Web."
James Rachels, in "Elements of Moral Philosophy," describes the living conditions of a veal calf as one example. The calves "spend their lives in pens too small to allow them to turn around or even to lie down comfortably," because exercise toughens the meat and additional space is expensive. The calves cannot perform natural functions like grooming themselves or suckling from their mothers.

They're fed a diet deficient in iron and roughage (which means they cannot form a cud to chew) and they are not given any straw for bedding -they might eat it, again affecting the quality of the meat. "As terrifying as the process of slaughter is, for them it may actually be a merciful release," Rachels says.

The terrible thing is that all of this suffering inflicted on animals is unnecessary. We have alternatives to meat, animal clothing and animal research in cosmetic testing.

Even from a utilitarian perspective, I could not justify the lifelong suffering of a sentient creature for the transitory pleasure some jerk feels downing a Big Mac. The same principals that would evoke outrage in seeing two teenagers stomp a puppy to death on the curb should evoke anger in seeing a pig butchered. Both are unnecessary, even if one animal is cuter than the other.

Respecting animals doesn't mean we're perfect. I support the use of animals in medical research because it provides real benefits to suffering people. I still eat eggs and cheese because I don't have the money or the skill to be vegan in a place like Nebraska. In an imperfect world, all we can do is the best we can with what we have.

But give the animals the benefit of the doubt. It won't hurt you one bit, and it'll help them tremendously.

© 2001 Daily Nebraskan Online (www.dailyneb.com)