alienpick wrote:Sloth wrote:rogers49 wrote:
Is there some reason fishes are seen by some as a lesser form of life so they can be eaten?
And plants too?
Fish are practically vegetables (Ron Swanson), so if you're pascatarian, just go ahead call yourself a vegetarian.
But that is a great point, and I have raised anytime someone tried to use "morality" to convince me to be a vegan. What makes an animal's life more important than a plant's? or a Chicken's life more important than that of a fish?
Also, there is a school of thought that suggest it was the agricultural revolution that has directly lead to many of the problems we have today. I.E. we stopped hunting and gathering and started farming. In turn we had more food than ever, and more free time, so we started to reproduce, so we needed more food, meaning we needed more land, and the constant expansion of these civilizations, due to the need for space and resources is what lead mankind down the wormhole of perpetual war.
So on a "super-woke level," becoming a vegan perpetuates all these evils. What's up, Kyrie?
A good (fictional) book about it, that is recommended reading for high school kids is "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn.
Yeah, if we ALL went vegan/vegetarian the world would be ****. There wouldn't be enough land to make enough food. If anything vegans/vegetarians pit more stress on agriculture and therefore the environment. Plus it's really expensive for the average joe to afford a vegan diet
At least in the US, most cropland is used for commodity crops like corn, soy, hay/alfalfa, and wheat, in that order. The majority of the first three are used to feed animals or for fuel (ethanol/biodiesel). Not counting wheat, cropland for food accounts for only 3% of total acreage. (Source: USDA Economic Research service:
https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/84880/eib-178.pdf?v=42972)
But crops to feed animals are not an efficient use of that land, calorically speaking:
Jon Foley, Stanford University wrote:Yes, the corn fed to animals does produce valuable food to people, mainly in the form of dairy and meat products, but only after suffering major losses of calories and protein along the way. For corn-fed animals, the efficiency of converting grain to meat and dairy calories ranges from roughly 3 percent to 40 percent, depending on the animal production system in question. What this all means is that little of the corn crop actually ends up feeding American people. It’s just math. The average Iowa cornfield has the potential to deliver more than 15 million calories per acre each year (enough to sustain 14 people per acre, with a 3,000 calorie-per-day diet, if we ate all of the corn ourselves), but with the current allocation of corn to ethanol and animal production, we end up with an estimated 3 million calories of food per acre per year, mainly as dairy and meat products, enough to sustain only three people per acre. That is lower than the average delivery of food calories from farms in Bangladesh, Egypt and Vietnam.
(Source:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/time-to-rethink-corn/)
Which is to say, we have plenty of cropland to feed every American a vegan diet. Whether we should is another discussion.
It's time for 5 refs.