I can see no reason why eating meat is, in itself, unethical. I can understand why killing an animal would be unethical because it is considered cruel. I understand why buying meat is unethical because it makes you economically complicit in a cruel industry. I understand that accepting meat from someone else who bought It is unethical because it creates demand for cruelty. The same can be said of stealing. But if you happened upon some meat that you had not killed, paid for or otherwise created demand for, the decision not to eat it is no longer an ethical one, it is a matter of personal squeamishness, no?
if i just happened upon some random meat, i would not eat it, and that decision would have nothing to do with vegetarianism.
Well, yeah, I know. But say for example you were a freegan and had an arrangement to eat food from a local supermarket that would be otherwise thrown away but is in fact perfectly fine to eat and even within its sell-by-date. Eating meat in these circumstances is ethically neutral, isn't it? You've not supported an industry of cruelty or created a demand for cruelty to happen, you've eaten something that is surplus to that demand.
that would arguably be better than neutral, since you're ensuring that the animal didn't die for no reason. but i suppose you could also say that you've supported the industry, not monetarily but in spirit. kind of in the same way that you could say voting for a third party presidential candidate supports the current electoral system more than not voting at all.
The problem would be that if you cook meat in your home, it leaves a faint but lasting smell, that can be detected by dogs, cats, and even people with clear sinuses who're unaccustomed to eating meat. If such people detect the smell of cooked meat in your home you face the risk of a greater cruelty than has ever befallen an animal, pressure to explain why you are still worthy of your peers' esteem.
I don't know If i could see it as supporting the industry, the industry is kind of a closed loop of suppliers and consumers, by eating something that would otherwise be a waste product of that industry, your performing a purely parasitic function, with no impact on the process at all.
It applies to that too. What made me think of it though was more the freegan movement. They live as they do as a means of ethically not participating in a capitalist economy etc, which makes sense, but a lot of them are also vegan/vegetarian on top of that and claim that that is an ethical choice, I don't see that that is the case.
And how many in the freegan movement were corporate slaves, did the sea change thing, know they have a certain amount left in the bank and their super but never admit that to anyone. And are really doing it because they've realised those investments will earn 10% a year and if they dramatically cut spending they come out ahead. You cant really do the freegan thing in a capitalist country, they are still dependant on the infrastructure, any major health concerns theyll still run to services funded by every other taxpayer
You can only do the freegan thing in a capitalist country, no? my understanding was that it is essentially a parasitic state which benefits from capitalist consumption cycles without participation. A lot of them are growers too, of course.
