Meat

[FireAngel73]

I also wanted to say that cats are natural meat eaters so I find it okay that they eat meat, although I wish it wasn't that way. Humans have a choice, and cats don't.

Yes, humans have the choice between eating what we were naturally created/evolved/born to eat, or eating only plants and taking additional supplements, often in pill form...or, as one advice column said, "make sure to get [b12] by consuming fortified foods such as nutritional yeast (delicious sprinkled on popcorn)" ...Yummy.

 

Humans are natural meat eaters, too. We just also need plants.

 

I'm not saying people don't have the right to choose, or that it's not okay to be a vegan/vegetarian, I'm just saying that humans are meat eaters naturally.

Edited June 24, 2011 by FireAngel73

[hazeh]

In better terms, we are omnivores, and cats are carnivores.

I think it's best to keep with what we were meant to eat, although I wish the process of getting such foods was overall healthier and more humane :/

[Nine]

That could be true, but cats are natural hunters, if people just let their cats outside to hunt and eat they would be most likely be fine, and they wouldn't need any factory made pet food.

I respect veggies and vegans who know what they're getting into, but allowing domestic cats to roam free would be killing more animals than any diet change could be saving =P Birds, reptiles, amphibians, small mammals, even certain insects would be pushed into extinction if cats had their way with wildlife. Felines are little sociopaths at heart, I'm tellin' ya.

 

Speaking of, I find it sad that some of the world's last known cultural cannibals are being converted into extinction. I guess that means Kuru disease will be a thing of the past too, what a shame-- I find it fascinating =(

[Lila]

That could be true, but cats are natural hunters, if people just let their cats outside to hunt and eat they would be most likely be fine, and they wouldn't need any factory made pet food.

1) Domesticated cats have little need for hunting, therefore their skill is much deteriorated, and they would not get much food. 2) Due to the fact cats are domesticated, they are susceptible to many diseases wild animals fight off easily, therefore, 3) if a cat does happen to catch something, it may be diseased and showing no signs, but a cat may catch a parasite/virus by consuming the animal.

 

So yes, maybe cats are natural hunters but they aren't going to survive like, say, tigers, will survive.

[rebelgoddess19]

I am a meat eater - always have and always will be, I do eat other fruit and all that but I LOVE bacon and I won't ever give that up.

 

However - I can understand where vegetarians are coming from. I love animals - and when I was living with my aunt, uncle and cousin they were doing the "fair farm raising" thing and I was basically the person who raised the pig. I fed it, washed it, gave it fresh mud all that. I was ... devestated when I found out that they weren't going to keep him but sell him for slaughter. And then get some of the meat from him.

 

 

[umyeawright]

While I dont see the need for animals to suffer needlessly, I agree that we have a digestive system that is both omnivorous and carnivorous for a reason. Meat is a great source of protiens, fats that our bodies need, and nutrients. It's a quick way for our bodies to get much of what it needs out side of various plants and vegetables. I wish their was a way to know when we kill enough so that so many animals wouldn't be wasted, but we can't have everything I guess. Overall, not eating meat isn't the answer, I think its about maybe being conservative?

[Disturbedchic]

That could be true, but cats are natural hunters, if people just let their cats outside to hunt and eat they would be most likely be fine, and they wouldn't need any factory made pet food.

This is not at all viable for people who live in urbanized areas where cats are easily hit by cars, caught in fights with other cats who may carry disease, eat poisons left out for other pests or for cats themselves by sick individuals, killed by cat hating neighbors, killed by other wildlife, or worse. I remember seeing a video once that scared me for life of a group of kids trapping a friendly cat in a birdcage, soaking in gas and setting it on fire.

 

The average lifespan of a cat allowed outdoors is less than 5 years while indoor cats live 12+.

 

As for wildlife, even though I live in a major city we still have a healthy population of urban coyotes, foxes, and birds of prey....mountain lion too once.

 

Not only that but feral cat populations alone are responsible for wholesale slaughter of resident songbird populations. Its so bad in some areas that people have put forward bills to be allowed to shoot cats legally.

 

Because we keep cats as our pets they are not subjected to the same laws of nature and in turn there are far too many for natural areas to support feasibly. Also cats dont discriminate between endangered species and common species and prey on both as opportunities arrive which puts many endangered birds at risk, especially ground nesters. Remember cats aren't a native species, they're considered invasive and as such can cause havoc to the natural environment. There's some island ecosystems where cats have even been blamed for species extinction. Cats can also introduce new diseases to the environment that resident fauna may never have been exposed to before and hence have no natural resistances to as well.

 

All that being said, my cats only go outdoors under direct supervision or on a harass.

[sweet_smurfette]

I say, eat meat, but not all the time. Try to eat as many vegetables (or fruit, or grains) as you eat meat, to balance it out. I subsist mainly on Cheerios.

[TikindiDragon]

The average lifespan of a cat allowed outdoors is less than 5 years while indoor cats live 12+.

Scource please? I've kept outdoor cats my entire life and the majority of them have been well over 11 when they've died.

 

Edited to add: Given that the cat arrived in the Americas with the first white settlers it's arguable that the cat is now every bit as 'native' as white Americans are. It's certainly been in the country every bit as long as the horse has, and I notice no one accusing wild mustangs of being an 'invasive foreign species'.

Edited June 26, 2011 by TikindiDragon

[Kestra15]

The average lifespan of a cat allowed outdoors is less than 5 years while indoor cats live 12+.

Rubbish. Sorry, absolute balderdash. I know more than a few cats who have survived longer than that.

 

I morally do not believe cats are 'indoors' for the most parts. They are *built* for outdoors, and all bar one cat I've ever known/owned has been outdoors and lived full lives.

 

Cases in point:

 

- My g/f's cat was 13.5yrs when he was run over, and more often out than in.

 

-My father's most recent cats lasted longer still, as did the ones he owned when working on the farm.

 

- Shanti's parents were over ten at the time Shanti was born; both are still alive and Shanti is now himself 5yrs. And they live in the Italian mountains - somewhat more dangerous than a UK street I'd warrant.

 

True feral cats don't live long, yes. Domestic cats who are indoors and outdoors are on average 12-15yrs. Yes, an indoors cat can live to 20yrs - but I personally think that, with exceptions for those poor breeds we made to be true indoors or the poor mites who end up a little ill with FIV or otherwise, those who keep cats indoors are just fools.

 

Like my ex-housemate.

[hazeh]

I would never let my cat be outside. I will not risk my pet's life like that. The cats I own are perfectly happy to be indoors; I even take them out on leashes every once in a while when they want. It is not foolish to want to protect your animal, who would otherwise be prone to disease, other animal attacks, cars, cruel people, and the like. Plus, with outdoor cats, they have to be vaccinated. And after loosing a cat to cancer, I will not increase the likelihood of my other cats falling to the same death.

[Lila]

I would never let my cat be outside. I will not risk my pet's life like that. The cats I own are perfectly happy to be indoors; I even take them out on leashes every once in a while when they want. It is not foolish to want to protect your animal, who would otherwise be prone to disease, other animal attacks, cars, cruel people, and the like. Plus, with outdoor cats, they have to be vaccinated. And after loosing a cat to cancer, I will not increase the likelihood of my other cats falling to the same death.

Exactly.

[Kestra15]

I would never let my ??? be outside. I will not risk my pet's life like that. The ??? I own are perfectly happy to be indoors; I even take them out on leashes every once in a while when they want. It is not foolish to want to protect your animal, who would otherwise be prone to disease, other animal attacks, cars, cruel people, and the like. Plus, with outdoor ???, they have to be vaccinated.

Replace with any animal, vegetable or mineral of your choice, including children.

 

And anything can develop cancer, indoors or out. It's not contagious after all. Even if it is indoors, you should vaccinate anyway - you never know if you forget to leave a door or window open, and you can still catch quite a bit indoors. And if your cat is going outside anyway on a lead it should still have the same vaccinations - still outside, after all. Yes, it's not as likely to make a runner, but it's still out there.

[zapxxx_]

I became vegetarian simply because, being an animal lover, I felt hypocritical. Animals are my life, I can connect with them in a way that I can't with people. And so, because it felt wrong, I simply stopped eating meat.

 

I actually lost a lot of weight going vegetarian, 20 pounds (yes really). I also cut out refined sugars and soda. I'm very happy I did.

[Kestra15]

I became vegetarian simply because, being an animal lover, I felt hypocritical. Animals are my life, I can connect with them in a way that I can't with people. And so, because it felt wrong, I simply stopped eating meat.

 

I actually lost a lot of weight going vegetarian, 20 pounds (yes really). I also cut out refined sugars and soda. I'm very happy I did.

Do you have milk or cheese or eggs?

[hazeh]

Replace with any animal, vegetable or mineral of your choice, including children.

 

And anything can develop cancer, indoors or out. It's not contagious after all. Even if it is indoors, you should vaccinate anyway - you never know if you forget to leave a door or window open, and you can still catch quite a bit indoors. And if your cat is going outside anyway on a lead it should still have the same vaccinations - still outside, after all. Yes, it's not as likely to make a runner, but it's still out there.

No, because children and vegetables and minerals are different than cats. It is not the same.

 

I don't vaccinate my cats more than I have to. There's no need. They won't get a disease by roaming outside with me on the other end of a five foot leash. When your cat is not supervised and allowed to roam where ever they wish and do as they please, then dangers are introduced. I don't put sunblock on my sister when she's in the house, even though she goes outsides sometimes.

I know anything can develop cancer. But as an owner, it is my responsibility to reduce the risk as much as possible while keeping my cat happy. And my cats are perfectly happy indoors- my kitten is scared to death of it, in fact.

[Kestra15]

No, because children and vegetables and minerals are different than cats. It is not the same.

I would never let my child be outside. I will not risk my child's life like that. The child I own are perfectly happy to be indoors; I even take them out on leashes every once in a while when they want. It is not foolish to want to protect your child, who would otherwise be prone to disease, other animal attacks, cars, cruel people, and the like. Plus, with outdoor children, they have to be vaccinated.

 

Looks the same argument to me. Cotton-balling.

[hazeh]

A child is not the same as a domesticated animal. I don't expect my child to use the litterbox, the same way I don't expect my cat to use a fork with dinner.

[Princess Artemis]

Also some facts, 80% of agricultural land in america is used to feed animals used for slaughter and 50% of water in America is used to water that food that feeds the animals used for slaughter.

I don't have any handy-dandy stats, but I know a not insignificant portion of American agriculture is dedicated to growing food for cars.

 

As I am unsure why you mentioned your tidbit, that's all I'll say about that.

 

Your "save the animals" outlook seems fine...it sounds pretty much the same as "don't buy puppies from puppy mills" to me (including the counter arguments), except that the industry you are fighting against is much bigger and there is less sympathy to your cause.

 

ETA: My outdoor cat lived to 16 and hunted everything she could get her claws on.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Princess Artemis

[Alpha1]

I would never let my child be outside. I will not risk my child's life like that. The child I own are perfectly happy to be indoors; I even take them out on leashes every once in a while when they want. It is not foolish to want to protect your child, who would otherwise be prone to disease, other animal attacks, cars, cruel people, and the like. Plus, with outdoor children, they have to be vaccinated.

 

Looks the same argument to me. Cotton-balling.

This is logic?

 

Well, Shiny already came up with a good rebuttal. I have had cats solely indoors, and they're none the wiser. Outdoor cats generally have shorter life spans because of several risks that indoor cats don't have.

 

Suffice to say, I've had two cats that were let outdoors except during the winter, and they lived to be around 20.

[lanette]

Our bodies were designed to absorb the nutrients of other animals. For you religious people out there, it was the way God "created" us. It's natural to eat meat. Not doing so is going against nature. The thing you're eating would die eventually anyway. At least this way you get some nutrients and energy from it.

Speaking from a Christian viewpoint, that's not quite correct. God created a world that didn't have death, so in the beginning every animal including humans were originally created as herbivores. After death entered the world through sin, God then permitted eating meat.

 

Personally, while I love vegetables and greens, I also love meat. I'd rather eat meat often and die sooner (as some nutritionists say will happen) than be vegetarian and live to be a 100 .

[vegetariancannibal]

Do you have milk or cheese or eggs?

What's wrong with eggs?

[skinst]

Creating a world that 'didn't have death' seems ironic since you're still killing plants in order to survive, don't you think?

[vegetariancannibal]

Creating a world that 'didn't have death' seems ironic since you're still killing plants in order to survive, don't you think?

You're not necessarily killing plants - you may just need to harvest their fruits. Anyway, plants function differently to animals.

[lanette]

I agree with vegetariancannibal.

 

Genesis 1:29-30 says "Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so."

 

So it seems that when God told man what he can eat, he meant fruits & grain etc. ("with seed in it", so that the tree would have a chance to pro-create (is that the right word?). And to my knowledge, most animals when they eat of a plant or a tree, don't destroy the plant/tree, so it is not killed but can re-grow too.

 

Also, if one was to refrain from eating plants too because that's "killing" as you put it, what are we supposed to eat, since we obviously don't have the ability of self-producing out food in our body like plants do?

 

 

EDIT: Spelling

Edited June 28, 2011 by lanette