Morality of Eating Meat

[turnandburn]

the question is not to blame the horse-rider/meat-eater but to show him the point of view of the animal

no, i don't think any horse like to come out of its box just when its owner wants to ride it; to run just when told to; not being able to stop when it wants; have to turn right when the bit tears on the right side; jump when told to; etc.
would you want someone else to decide of most acts of your life for you?
neither would a horse

These statements that you have just made have made me lose all respect for your opinions. You have just shown your own ignorance of how animals think and feel, and and the realities of what horse riding and owning really is.

This is obviously a subject about which you are very passionate. It is also a subject about which I am very passionate, actually like I said I work in a vet clinic and am studying to be a veterinarian and dedicating my life to helping animals and educating owners, so I am going to educate you a little, because you have just proven how ignorant you really are. You are taking a human's perspective and wants and needs and are saying they are the same as a horse, when in fact they are entirely different.

For the millions of years horses have been evolving, up to the modern horse, they have lived in herds with a very specific pecking order; they are used to following an alpha male and female. The alpha horse in the herd gets to eat first, gets to drink first, leads the herd, and controls what the herd does. Any horse stepping out of line or challenging promptly gets a swift bite or kick. Rarely are there actual fights except among stallions. This is seen in the wild and in smaller domesticated herds.

In my 2 creature herd of my horse and myself, I am the alpha. This is easily understood between both of us. My horse is always getting told what to do, whether by pasture mates or by myself. Same as is would be in the wild. That said, my horse is never forced to do anything he doesn't want to do. Guess what? A horse has more power in his neck than I have in my entire body. I can't "make" him do anything. Having said that, my horse LOVES his job. On him, I compete in barrel racing and other speed games, hence my name "turnandburn." I NEVER have to encourage him to run, but frequently have to hold him back. When we are at a show, or on a trail ride, he approaches with confidence and excitement; ears pricked, neck arched, and prancing, he LOVES to move. He is an athlete.

Bits tearing at their mouth to force them to turn. Right. Do you know anything about riding? Not only are bits not the only cue for turning/gait regulation, they are a form of subtle communication between horse and rider.

"Making" horses jump when they don't want to, and "making" them do other things they don't want to do 8) Most horses love their jobs. If they didn't, most riders wouldn't be wasting their time on them "making" them jump.

Granted, I feel sorry for some horses, like tourist carriage horses and whatnot, but that's a whole different situation.

 

[vegan]

Well from that perspective, aren't we all predestined to be murderers?

no more than we are predestined to have an accident and end up in a vegetative state

doesn't the vast majority of life on earth benefit (sustain it's life) from the life of others?

yes
that doesn't prevent us from choosing to hurt this life the less possible

Semi-synthetic insulin (the kind she is taking) is made from pork insulin.

okay
she then falls in the category of exceptional situations than protovack was trying to use to dismiss the ordinary cases
since totally synthetic insulin doesn't exist, her case is of do or die
the same case as "if on an island with only animals and no vegetables around would you eat them?" which doesn't change the argumentation for when there is the choice of food

I never said it was better. I just said it must not be looked upon as any worse,

i find it much worse
i'd prefer a thousand times to be a free homeless than to live in a jail with tv and free food

These statements that you have just made have made me lose all respect for your opinions

You have just shown your own ignorance of how animals think and feel, and the realities of what horse riding and owning really is.

i think i have some idea of what horse riding and owning is, as my uncle was a horse riding instructor and this part of the family still have horses

ask yourself if instead of "ignorance" you haven't been fast to choose the "knowledge" that suits you
it's common to see people credit animals of the feelings that they want them to have rather than those that logic would credit them
last week i was in a house with a cat
every single time someone opened the door, the cat rushed there trying to escape
not once did the owners consider that the cat was suffering from being locked in a house
they just credited it of the feelings they wanted it to have : the cat was really happy with them. point

For the millions of years horses have been evolving, up to the modern horse, they have lived in herds with a very specific pecking order; they are used to following an alpha male and female. The alpha horse in the herd gets to eat first, gets to drink first, leads the herd, and controls what the herd does. Any horse stepping out of line or challenging promptly gets a swift bite or kick. Rarely are there actual fights except among stallions. This is seen in the wild and in smaller domesticated herds.

In my 2 creature herd of my horse and myself, I am the alpha. This is easily understood between both of us. My horse is always getting told what to do, whether by pasture mates or by myself. Same as is would be in the wild. That said, my horse is never forced to do anything he doesn't want to do .. Guess what? A horse has more power in his neck than I have in my entire body. I can't "make" him do anything.

since you have one horse, you obviously haven't seen their behaviour in herds and have read about it in a book and put on your alpha suit hat because it justifies you exploiting an animal
in what i've seen, and which qualifies much more as "smaller domesticated herds" than "you and your horse", there was no such alpha male

so if in a group of 6 horses there's no such alpha male, it hardly justifies the control of one human over one horse's actions

also, the question is not as much if in individual cases the relation between a human and a horse may be good, but the fact to impose such a relation on the horse (cutting it from access to other horses, putting it in a box when not ridden and so on)

the horse may have more muscle than you, but it doesn't have willpower to the same scale
if horses wanted to be ridden, they wouldn't have to be tamed

i've seen horses being tamed, don't make me laugh by saying they like it

I NEVER have to encourage him to run, but frequently have to hold him back

that's an example of what i'm saying : you don't realize that preventing the horse to run when it wants to also is an instance of limiting its freedom
an animal shouldn't be dependant on a human to be able to act

Bits tearing at their mouth to force them to turn. Right. Do you know anything about riding? Not only are bits not the only cue for turning/gait regulation, they are a form of subtle communication between horse and rider.

hey! when i was a kid an tried to ride, i could taste how "subtle" this communication is when the horse doesn't want to turn!
more like tearing at its mouth until it finally obeys because it hurts

Most horses love their jobs. If they didn't, most riders wouldn't be wasting their time on them "making" them jump.

that's wishful thinking
if (all) horses loved to do what they are taught to do, there would be no time wasted at all, they would do it spontenously

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

no more than we are predestined to have an accident and end up in a vegetative state

But couldn't one consider that an accident is an alteration from what we are predestined to be? If a young individual has extreme talent for baseball, wouldn't we say he's predestined to play baseball? What if that person was then accidentally killed in an plane crash. We don't say that he's predestined to die at a young age. Schaivo was not originally intended to be a vegetable.

since totally synthetic insulin doesn't exist, her case is of do or die
the same case as "if on an island with only animals and no vegetables around would you eat them?" which doesn't change the argumentation for when there is the choice of food

This is what I'm trying to say. Full synthetic insulin DOES exist, it's called Humulin and has been around since the early 1980's. It is produced by recombinant DNA and several organisms can be used, e.g. E. coli, and some yeast I believe. While the trend is to fully depend on this synthetic insulin, we still have a "choice" and she doesn't make it a secret that she chooses the animal derived insulin. This is no different than the "choice" we have to either eat meat or other foods, therefore I do not take anything PETA says with credibility.

i find it much worse
i'd prefer a thousand times to be a free homeless than to live in a jail with tv and free food

A homeless man in a city has a higher rate of survival on the streets. An animal in an urban setting has a much higher chance of being hit by a car, abused by passers-by, and starve to death. And whether or not you'd rather be in jail or not depends squarely on your individuality. Some people may want a warm environment, guaranteed food and shelter, and at least some form of social interaction. Besides, the vast majority of homeless people have no better chance of improving their situation on the street no more than they would have the desire to get out of jail - otherwise they wouldn't be homeless in the first place.

 

[turnandburn]

ask yourself if instead of "ignorance" you haven't been fast to choose the "knowledge" that suits you
it's common to see people credit animals of the feelings that they want them to have rather than those that logic would credit them
last week i was in a house with a cat
every single time someone opened the door, the cat rushed there trying to escape
not once did the owners consider that the cat was suffering from being locked in a house
they just credited it of the feelings they wanted it to have : the cat was really happy with them. point

since you have one horse, you obviously haven't seen their behaviour in herds and have read about it in a book and put on your alpha suit hat because it justifies you exploiting an animal
in what i've seen, and which qualifies much more as "smaller domesticated herds" than "you and your horse", there was no such alpha male

so if in a group of 6 horses there's no such alpha male, it hardly justifies the control of one human over one horse's actions

also, the question is not as much if in individual cases the relation between a human and a horse may be good, but the fact to impose such a relation on the horse (cutting it from access to other horses, putting it in a box when not ridden and so on)

the horse may have more muscle than you, but it doesn't have willpower to the same scale
if horses wanted to be ridden, they wouldn't have to be tamed

i've seen horses being tamed, don't make me laugh by saying they like it

that's an example of what i'm saying : you don't realize that preventing the horse to run when it wants to also is an instance of limiting its freedom
an animal shouldn't be dependant on a human to be able to act

hey! when i was a kid an tried to ride, i could taste how "subtle" this communication is when the horse doesn't want to turn!
more like tearing at its mouth until it finally obeys because it hurts

that's wishful thinking
if (all) horses loved to do what they are taught to do, there would be no time wasted at all, they would do it spontenously

This is lunacy. And your offending me by supposing all my knowledge of horses is by a single horse and reading books; you have no fucking clue. Your uncle is a trainer (and a bad one, from what I read). Though you watch things you clearly don't understand. I already mentioned I'm studying to be a large animal vet, and my horse experience (aside from reading countless books and videos)

-ownership of 3 horses (currently 1)
-riding since I could walk
-starting volunteering at age 12 at a stable with ~50 head of horses (yes, that is indeed a large herd)
-internship at a large upscale dressage barn
-working with breeding stallions
-lessons in barrel racing, jumping, driving, pleasure
-attending clinics
-etc

I was a horse obsessed youngster. Don't tell me I don't know herd dynamics. You clearly don't, by supposing that in a group of 6 horses there is no alpha (and it DOESN'T need to be a male) because that is FALSE. There is ALWAYS a herd leader, and then there is a trickle down effect; meaning, a #2 horse, a #3 horse, etc down to the lowest on the chain, always the last to eat and drink and often driven off and picked on by others. Size of the herd doesn't matter, even a group of 2 has a lead horse.

Horses are tame. Horses need to be *trained* to be ridden. They are domesticated, yet retain "fight or flight" instinct, usually the flight instinct. They are easily frightened, and need to be shown that riding equipment (eg saddles etc) are nothing to be feared. I'm sorry your uncle or whatever is such a sorry horsetrainer; good ones don't need force or frighten young horses in training.

When you were growing up hauling on a horse's mouth to "force" it to turn because "it hurts" shows you don't know how to ride. You confused the hell out of the horse, or, alternatively, the horse knew it had a 'greenie' on it's back, took advantage of you, and wanted to do it's own thing (probably head back to the barn).

Yeah, sometimes I have to rein my horse in. OMG I know, I'm 'restricting his freedom' but sometimes, letting a horse do what he wants to do isn't in his best interest, as in, letting him run full out over muddy terrain where it's likely he'll step in a hole and pull a tendon injury or worse.

BTW my horse is kept in a pasture 24/7. He is never in a stall, or "box." I agree, horses weren't meant to be kept in stalls, it's more the convenience of the owner, thus I choose not to use one for my horse (plus it's cheaper boarding :D )

Your views are so twisted and distorted. So all horses and animals should just be running freely and happily in nature? Right. Sorry, but I'm sure my horse is a lot happier in a safe environment, with good food and veterinary care. Reality of the wild: parasitic infestation, biting flies, horse flies, migrating many miles per day in search of grazing and water, droughts, predators certain to pick off old, young, and sick horses (where he is also certain to die a much earlier death, and likely a grisly one), no veterinary care (horses are notorious for colic and foot problems), no one to take care of him in old age.

You are in denial that a horse being ridden can be happy and content, instead you are choosing you own ideals and fixating that upon the horse, because it's being ridden and can't do anything it wants to do at any point in time, it must not be happy.

 

[socko]

I tried being a vegie for a few months, but I got tired of being sick all the time. I put a lot of time into planning a balanced, non-flesh diet, but nothing worked. Maybe eating meat is bad but not as bad as being sick.
BTW, plants are alive too. That also makes killing them bad.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

turnandburn - No matter what you do, certain people will always point out that what you do is wrong. For every 3 thousand kind gestures you have towards animals, people will always point to your faults. It's much easier to criticize than say "hey, I appreciate the steps you 'DO' do in terms of harm reduction." This is why I bring up the vice president of PETA situation.

 

[turnandburn]

^ Your right. This subject, especially the horses, really pisses me off though!!! I've spent most of my life deeply involved with horses and other animals, and the ignorance apparent in vegan, and his ignorant statements critisizing me really bothers me.

If people choose not to eat meat/animal products, it's totally fine by me, it doesn't bother me at all. I can totally see their point of view as far as factory farming goes; I also dislike the practice of factory farming and choose not to buy that particular meat, when I do eat meat, which isn't more than once per day, at best.

But vegan takes it to the next level saying that animals are so unhappy being owned by people, and horses shouldn't be ridden, etc shows how little he actually knows about animals. Given: some aren't happy. I can't deny that. But I can speak for the millions of people who do own and love their animals, and their animals love them in return. I love animals as much (probably more) than most people I know, and if I felt riding was cruel/degrading/forceful in any way, I wouldn't be engaging in that activity.

It's like, what, you really think creatures would be better off roaming the streets? Someone else mentioned that would be suicide, especially in a city/suburban community. Cars, wild animals, people who like to shoot animals, disease, constantly looking for food, often starving, antisocial, dehydrated, and parasitic; is this an ideal life for any animal? I have a cat I rescued from the humane society in my apartment. Maybe not the ideal situation, but here he is loved, played with, given lots of attention, a giant velvety body pillow to sleep on, guaranteed fresh food and water, toys, and a big picture window. He seems quite content to me.

I just hate when people who know nothing about animals have this ideal picture in their mind of what a "free" life for an animal should be, and that animals surely dislike humans and being around people when they cannot be 100% "free," when that "freedom" usually means a short life of suffering and difficulty on the streets.

There. I said my piece.

 

[protovack]

the "but if you had to save a human or an animal" question is as meaningless to me as "but if you had to save your dad or your mom"

You expect me to believe that?

Quote:
wouldn't you have to keep killing animals as long as you wanted to survive? How many animals, exactly, would you kill before you let yourself die?

either in this thread or the closed one, that's what i've referred to as a senseless way of surviving
killing many lives to maintain one is senseless to me

Why is it senseless? Just because you say it is?

Would YOU let yourself die instead of killing animals to survive? That's pretty much what it comes down to. You hinted that you knew some people who would rather commit suicide than kill an animal. Perhaps you could ask them to come on here and explain their psychosis to everyone.

you forgot the third option (already developed in this post) : not establishing any hierarchy between them and caring about both equally

Oh I see. When it comes down to the choice between you starving to death and killing an animal, you are just going to flip a coin and see who wins?

That's what it always come down to...the moral crusaders lamenting their own inability to fulfill their moral code. They say,

"Of course *I* would probably save myself, that's a bad example....but just listen...that doesn't mean humans are more important than animals."

Give ME a break!

 

[protovack]

the horse may have more muscle than you, but it doesn't have willpower to the same scale
if horses wanted to be ridden, they wouldn't have to be tamed

i've seen horses being tamed, don't make me laugh by saying they like it

But vegan, humans tame themselves in the same way. Do you WANT to get up tommorow morning and work? Maybe you do, maybe you don't. The point is, a life of freedom without structure is not free at all.

 

[DJDannyUhOh]

But vegan takes it to the next level saying that animals are so unhappy being owned by people

As much as I'm passionate about this subject, that is the reason why I try more to stick to the bare ethics of the argument. I view people who claim to know what animals think no differently that religious people who claim to know what God wants us to do.

For instance, if I come home really late and my rabbit runs up to the edge of the cage and (under my emotional assumption) gives me a sort of sad look, is he really sad or possibly angry 'cause his dinner is a little late or that he's been alone all day? Nobody knows for sure. However, the one thing I DO know for certain is that, if it not for Red Door finding him at a public park, he would probably have ended up in the tread of a Goodyear SUV tire. Of course, other will argue about animal freedom and say no, that would never happen, but of course it's "their" opinion and no more important or meaningful than mine. That's why threads like these go on for ever. If you think about it, it's purely fundamentalism and as we've seen in the world, fundamentalism doesn't always listen to reason.

In my opinion, we haven't learned to take care of ourselves yet, let alone how to treat the rest of the animal kingdom. I used to react just like you (turnandburn) to these threads, but that's just emotion reacting first, 'Cause when the smoke clears and the dust settles, nobody here is any different than anybody else. Debates like these are healthy. They allow you to view other people's perspectives while reinforcing your own convictions.

 

[doesntmatter]

My point may have been mistaken. I think that there should deffinately be a change in the way that meat is produced. It may cost more money, and us meat eater would have to fork up the good if we choose to eat meat.

I also think that the way most produce is farmed should be changed drastically. People who refuse to buy completly organic and unfertalized produce should pick up the slack here.

Both of these situations would be reasonabley detrimental to our economy.

My point about PETA was referring to the comment about the polorization of this discussion. It made me think about the extremist like PETA who are willing to attack humans versus someone who is just willing to live life how they see fit and tell others their point of view while accepting those that differ.

I've personally never tried to live on a vegetarians diet, so i don't know how much it would cost. I imagine it wouldn't be more, and probably ends up being less costly. I would assume that organic foods are slightly more than regular products though. Maybe some people can't afford to live up to their morals. Say I don't agree with effect that mass farming and its chemicals has on animals, but can't afford to buy food that has had no impact. They can however buy only vegetables which is a step better from a reasonable persons standpoint.

Again on the other side, say i have no qualms with neither the consumption of meat nor the way inwhich it was produced so long as i can continue to get a big steak on my plate. I then see a video or personally witness the cruelty and disregard for life that occurs in all aspects of meat production. Still not having a problem with eating meat directly and more so the treatment of the animals, i go and try to find free range products.

One step would be better than none in both cases.

However again this isn't for people that are on an extremely tight budget.

I think the overpopulation of humans has, at this point, left us with very little options in the ways of overall environmental choices regarding the way we gather and distribute some of the necessities.

 

[Judas]

Sorry, haven't been able to access my computer in a while.

I wanted to summarize my view and answer some of the comments posted.

In summary, 1) animal lives have less value than humans. I don't care if someone states that they believe that animals are equal to humans. Deep down, almost everyone knows this is crap. Think about it. We all believe that all people are equal. But even among people, some are more important than others. Our parents and siblings are more important than that stranger, or that person we recently met. Even among our own species, there isn't equality, yet some will proclaim the equality of animals?

2), eating meat follows the natural path of an organism using another to sustain itself (herbivores eating plants, and carnivores eating meat), therefore, humans being omivores, there is nothing unnatural therefore unethical about eating meat. I am really sick of the argument that just because we live in the West that we have reached a point where we don't need to eat meat, and therefore we shouldn't eat meat. In that argument, nothing is said about the ethicacy of eating meat. Nobody disagrees that its unnecessary to eat meat in modern times (provided you have access to the necessay nutrients.) But how does that translate into the argument that we shouldn't? To argue that we shouldn't, you need to be able to argue one of these three 1) an animal cannot take advantage of another for any reason even survival, and 2) all animals are equal, and that humans are not more important than other animals, 3) eating no meat at all is healthier than eating some meat. I don't see how anyone can argue any of these points.

that's what i have been saying :
we're not sure that plants feel pain as we know it
we're sure that animals feel pain as we know it
eating directly plants lower the consummation of both animals and plants anyway
so what justification is there in eating animals instead of plants?

Geez...hasn't this been discussed already? Lets say that animals definitely feel pain. And that plants definitely do not feel pain. In the specific example where you can kill an animal without inflicting pain (this can definitely be done), how would you be able to decide what can and can't be killed? In such a case, pain being the only criteria to consider, the plants and animals are identical in value. Why should we strive to consume less animals because animals feel pain, and plants don't? Why should pain be the only criteria? *in loud shrill voice*, "think of the plants...please... won't somebody think of the plants."

you proposed that plants could desire to live as much as animals
well, grass is as much a plant as tomato

I do not disagree that grass is as much a plant as a tomato. But I believe that a grass or tomato is less valuable than animals which are less valuable than people. All of these are life. If they had choices, all would choose to live over dying. Yet the herbivores eat the plants. And carnivores including us eat the animals. I am not going to complain to the herbivores, therefore I'm not going to complain to the carnivores. But what I will do is urge people to always treat animals humanely while they are living. Since the meat industry is notorious for mistreatment of animals, I urge people to buy freerange (or if they are willing and able) to stop eating meat in order to not support meat industry.

Almost forgot, I wanted to comment on pets. I believe properly treated pets can be happy. They may have been able to have a certain happiness if they were free in the wilderness. But they can also attain such a happiness with their master. And they are certainly better off than being "free" roaming around in an urban environment.

 

[nagual77]

it's not our fault that we eat meat. it's the genoms fault. it's built up on one dna based lifeform eating another dna based lifeform. since millions of years.

and i don't see such a big difference between humans, animals and plants. we're all dna. and kinda have the same origin. and the same history of eating eachother.

nothing to feel guilty about.

i even think that plants might want us to eat them if they could tell us. because we make sure, that their genetic family survives. maybe same for animals... it's the meaning of life of dna to eat and recreate. with humans eating chicken for example they will never be extinct.

but as we know that animals feel pain, we should at least make sure that they have a good life. before we eat them. same for plants...

btw i don't like meat very much, so this is not just an excuse. saying so is weak.

 

[somnifile86]

ahh, if i had the time to read this four page thread of rousing discourse, i would. i'll save everyone else that problem. the entire content of this thread is an argument of morals. in this case, one shouldn't debate what is moral and what isn't, because all morals are are simply sociological forces and feelings of guilt from any given individual. face it, there is going to be suffering as long as the very concept exists. if the meat industry wants to put animals through whatever "suffering" they want, that's fine. I, for one, do not condone such practices. however, i'm not going to make myself feel guilty for eating meat. millions of people have to suffer at the hands of their own race each day. as long as man exists, he's going to inflict pain on whatever. It's a constant. so if people think they're going to solve all pain and suffering by eating tofu, they're wrong. this life is going to be just as much of a shithole as it was before. i'm much more concerned with the practice of people destroying the environment, thusly decreasing biodiversity, which will wipe out life on this planet. by the way, agriculture is a culprit of this. So if i were to base my diet on morals, i wouldn't be eating at all.

 

[redeemer]

For instance, if I come home really late and my rabbit runs up to the edge of the cage and (under my emotional assumption) gives me a sort of sad look, is he really sad or possibly angry 'cause his dinner is a little late or that he's been alone all day?

Yesterday I heard a program on the radio about the human smile. When humans are happy they smile with, opposed to any other animal, their teeth. Amongst animals, the act of showing your teeth implies aggresion because it, for example, feels threatened. She (an animal sociologist of some sort? can't remember exactly) mentioned that what we perceive as a monkey smiling is actually a response to feeling threatened (the "smile" all monkeys are trained to do in commercials, shows etc.), not a sign og happiness. A monkey smiling will never show its teeth they will always be covered by its lips.

Both dogs and monkeys act very differently from humans when downplaying the seriousness of an act. Where humans smile to signal they're joking, dogs jump down with their front paws on its playmate in a certain fashion to signal that they are playing and monkeys exhibit a certain laugh-like sound. I agree that it is very difficult for humans to read the feelings of animals, unless perhaps they've been raised by them, without relating it to a human face/body from which we are used to interpreting signals.

 

[indelibleface]

There doesn't have to be a universal moral for you to feel justified to do it. If you don't want to eat meat and contribute to the harm of animals, don't do it. If you feel it's okay, go ahead. Hooray for free will and freedom to choose!

 

[fairnymph]

I respect those who can healthfully abstain from eating animal protein (as I don't believe that all people can live optimally on a vegan/vegetarian diet, but many certainly can). It is a compassionate choice to make.

However, I don't consider eating animals or their product inherently immoral. I do think that the way in which most people consume animal protein is inconsiderate at the very least. I.e. factory farming, lack of humane treatment, no relationship with the animals or thought about their source or existence.

Considering I live in an urban area, I do the best that I can. I don't eat alot of meat and very very little dairy. I buy organic, free-range, humanely treated meat and dairy. I would like to be able to have my own chickens and buy organic meat locally if I move to a rural area later in life. That would be my ideal setup.

 

[fairnymph]

Btw, I think it's fundamentally wrong (and arbitrary) to assign human life more value than animal life, and animal life more valuable than plant life. Certainly, as humans, we care most about human life. That's understandable, but it does not follow that other organisms have less of a right, ethically, to live.

Because we are in a position of power, of course we CAN do what we like, but does that mean that we should?

Personally, I value plants and animals over humans, simply because humans are so ugly and destructive. This planet would be better off without us, IMO.

I have no desire to die, however, so I simply wish that humans would treat the planet with respect and actual thought.

 

[turnandburn]

^ So you don't think your life is worth more than that steak you had for dinner? Or what if you had a child? You don't think that child's life is worth more than your pet dog?

 

[fairnymph]

Nope.