Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Atheists & Agnostics
Showing Original Post only (View all)Lord Almighty! Vegans try to hijack atheism. [View all]
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/09/new_atheists_must_become_new_vegans_sam_harris_richard_dawkins_and_the_extra_burden_on_moral_leaders/Seriously? I mean... seriously?
... it should seem quite obvious where our moral compass is currently pointed.
Please note the word "currently".
Also, eating meat should be a career-destroying crime.
Though he ... discussed the ethics of meat-eating at length with Singer (describing the argument for vegetarianism as powerful), he only suggested that he might become vegetarian. This kind of moral hypocrisy should be scrutinized and ridiculed accordingly ridiculed to the point where it would be career suicide for any public intellectual to stubbornly persist with it.
...
The poster boys and girls of atheism, secularism, science and reason have done wonders for so many domains of public discourse. While they fittingly weigh in on many moral questions not restricted to religious indoctrination and its impact on human rights, animal rights has so far garnered little attention. However, the great thing about reason is that it is a tool. Reason does not presuppose its answers, but is rather a process by which conclusions germinate under the light of the best available evidence. The best available evidence currently shows that eating meat and animal products is bad for animals, our health and the environment. Many of the New Atheists and their associated colleagues have realized this; they just need to come forth into the light.
1. It is irrelevant in this context that eating meat is bad for animals. That is a moral issue, not a scientific one. And as there are no absolute morals, I am free to use whatever morals I like and/or work within the framework of my society.
2. It's a myth that eating animals is bad for your health. You will be hard-pressed to find food as high in quality as the flesh and intestines of a healthy animal. (If eating animals is bad, why did so many animals evolve to eat animals? Why do even herbivores like deer eat carrion?)
3. Yes, certain kinds of livestock breeding are bad for the environment. But it's ridiculous to extrapolate from that that we should do away with the consumption of any and all animal-products.
If you claim to base your argument on science and logic, then at least use science and logic instead of appealing to emotions.
20 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Letter From The Rubble Of A Salon Article (author is very unhappy about the title Salon gave him)
muriel_volestrangler
Jan 2016
#16