Return to CreateDebate.comphilosophy • Join this debate community

Philosophy


Ta9798's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Ta9798's arguments, looking across every debate.
3 points

I wouldn't phrase it that way because it is too general but i agree with the idea. I think the way animals are bred, raised, and killed is morally wrong. Anything that eats meat could be considered a murder and people can eat meat but that doesn't mean people need to eat meat.

The fact that humans don't need to eat meat yet advocate and support the mass production and killing of various animals is cruel and obsessive.

Real carnivores and omnivores can eat meat raw without getting sick. They also enjoy eating raw meat. They are not repulsed by the idea of eating a dead animal if they pass it.

The human anatomy is not specialized for eating meat it is just able to cope with it. That doesn't mean it is natural for a human to eat meat such as a hamburger or grilled chicken. http://www.earthsave.ca/articles/health/ comparative.html has further explanations about the human anatomy's lack of optimization for eating meat.

Humans are willing to eat meat because once it's cooked it tastes good. Also humans generally don't catch their own pray and gut it and prepare to eat. They don't see the slaughterhouses. Infact humans are so far removed from the meat making process that they can't truly know how much of what they are eating is any certain type of meat or additional organic materials. They don't see the mass blood, sickness, weakness, or pain that is associated with slaughterhouses.

Killing any living thing without need is wrong and to induce suffering while killing that being is even worse. So yes meat is murder, because humans can easily survive without meat and are actually healthier when they do.

2 points

I agree with all the above. Abortion is a personal issue and i'm certain women don't choose it lightly for a multitude of reasons. But it remains a personal issue, that only the woman and her doctor can truly understand. Since almost every circumstance is unique no specific rule can be fairly applied that would limit against abortion. The forces that are against abortion do not speak for all of society nor does all of society believe or follow the full teachings of those forces and thus society shouldn't be constrained by rules and regulations that only that select force supports. A woman should not be forced to risk a great deterioration of her health, living standard, or life because some group of people believe that abortions are morally wrong. If she is forced to be obligated by this select group then how is she a free person?



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]