The main reason I'm a vegetarian is that if I wasn't, I'd be quite a bit of a hypocrite. This is why: I know that I could not kill an animal and prepare it for eating myself. (Or at least, I wouldn't choose to; if I had to when I was lost in the wild or something, that would be a different story, but the idea bothers me.) Also, if I eat meat, it means I can love a dog or a cat, but not give two craps if a pig dies. Dogs and cats are companions, but pigs are food? Pigs are smarter than dogs or cats and can have a hell of a lot more personality, in most cases. Maybe you would think this would encourage me to just not eat pork, but the story goes on.

Have you ever seen the lobsters that have their claws bound until they get boiled alive? I think that's awful. Lobsters are pretty gross-looking creatures, and they probably don't have much in the way of personality (not that I ever met one), but after seeing some crawl around in a tank at a seafood joint on my twentieth birthday, I decided that didn't really matter to me. I decided to become vegetarian that day, and I have been ever since. I don't feel that I could, in good conscience, eat anything that ever moved of its own accord or ran from pain. (That's why I won't buy it, prepare it, or eat it even if it's given to me; it's the same to me as not wanting to wear jewelry that someone else stole, because I don't feel it's something that's mine to take.) I'm not an animal lover but I can't see killing them for food if there are alternatives I'm willing to endure.

Most people aren't willing to endure those alternatives, and that's fine with me, but I've made my choice. I find vegetarian alternatives to be very tasty and satisfying, and I can completely accept it if someone else does not agree and isn't willing to give it up. I've taken a nutrition class and I have found that unless you're a vegan (you don't eat animals OR animal products), you really don't have to pay too much attention as long as you do get those proteins somehow. Vegans have to take more care to get all their nutrition, but it's very easy for a vegetarian.

To answer some questions I've been asked: Yes, I drink milk, eat cheese, and eat eggs. And no, I don't eat fish or chicken. I buy free-range, vegetarian eggs (the chickens aren't fed meat), and I generally consume cheese and milk if it is in other things like pizza or baked goods that use milk, and when I buy cheese I look for the kinds without animal rennet. (In cereal and for drinking, I use soy or almond milk.)

I'll also have you know that I am not one of those vegetarians who goes around telling other people that they need to stop eating meat too. I'm supportive of "animal rights" but not to the extent that I'm going to pester other people with my beliefs. The switch to vegetarianism, if it is to be made, has to be made of one's own accord, not through pressure from other people. Just like religion: If you're not willing to accept the sacrifices, you're not going to enjoy the benefits. And I know a lot of people find meat too tasty or too convenient to give up. (Being a person who has been pestered one too many times about religion, I understand that having someone force their beliefs or practices on you is no picnic.) So no, if you are one of my friends I'm not going to try to "convert" you, or be prissy about it, or make snide comments or get grossed out if you eat meat around me. I ate it for most of my life and I'm not going to look down on you for doing the same.

One last thing: I didn't switch to vegetarianism for the health benefits, as I said, but it sure is nice to have them. :) I've been feeling better since I switched to a no meat diet, though I don't know if it's a psychological phenomenon or if it's a physical thing. I used to get colds and minor sicknesses when they were going around, but now I think I have the immune system of the gods or something, because I have literally had two colds in ten years and have caught no other communicable diseases.

If you would like to check out some of my vegetarian recipes, go ahead. (Just be warned, they're nothing particularly special.)

Well, hope this answers your questions (if you had any) or at least provided some entertaining reading material for you. Any more questions or comments can be e-mailed to me.

My husband is vegetarian and I've had to learn to check the ingrediants of everything I pick up. I personally couldn't go the same way as he is so limited to what he can eat outside of our own home.

Nox: I commend you for not being a hypocrite! I get so angry that people are willing to eat a hamburger, yet get angry at the thought that I might go hunting and then eat what I kill. I see a huge difference between CAFOS (confinement operations) where the animals are crammed in and treated horribly, and killing an animal in the wild, where it has hopefully had a more fulfilling life than it otherwise would have. I'm taking up hunting to know if I can do it, because if I can't, it'll be back to being vegetarian for me as well! I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who thinks like this!
mp,
Nox

Rubber Ducky: Utmost respect intended - I've always been confused by one aspect of vegetarianism. I just don't understand how eating a steak at a restauraunt makes you an animal murderer, as if you eating the meat will kill a cow. The animal is already dead and has likely been dead for days.

But I am not a heartless animal killer. My family has 5 cats, 1 dog, and 3 birds. My father and brother go hunting but I don't because I wouldn't want to kill an animal.

Could a vegetarian explain this to me, please?

Veggy: Now, by not taking an active role in animal rights (which are vastly superior in everything to human rights around the world for some reason), and being a vegetarian just 'because I can't stand it' is like seeing a steel beam falling on someone and closing your eyes to not look at it.

In short, it looks like you're a vegetarian because of no real reason or conviction of any cause, and it sounds like simply a waste of food and effort spent in writing this whole essay.

Now, as for me, I'm not taking either extremes; I'm not refraining from eating meat, nor am I indulging myself in every newborn calf while bathing in its blood. You might think you're taking a moderate stance, but it's no big difference in the end from what Eragon does.

Both may have convictions, but it is pale to the actions, and both result in looking shallow.

swankivy: The above poster's e-mail address did not work and my response bounced. You know what that means: I reply publicly! Here is what I wrote to this commenter:

Now, by not taking an active role in animal rights (which are vastly superior in everything to human rights around the world for some reason), and being a vegetarian just 'because I can't stand it' is like seeing a steel beam falling on someone and closing your eyes to not look at it.

Wrong. I didn't say I "don't take an active role in animal rights," incidentally--and I am a monetary contributor to the Humane Society. But more importantly, by not supporting the meat industries with my purchases, I am also putting my money where my mouth is. Since it is not within my power to shut down the industries I don't approve of by waving a wand, I'm limited to just supporting the alternatives. Is there something you think I've failed to do that's within my power on this subject?

In short, it looks like you're a vegetarian because of no real reason or conviction of any cause, and it sounds like simply a waste of food and effort spent in writing this whole essay.

Awfully big stretch there. "Hmm, I just read your essay about your reasoning, but guess what, you don't HAVE a reason! What a waste of time!" Assumptions have led you to misinterpret my essay, apparently. I'll try to show you why you've misunderstood. In the essay, I expressed that I don't have a problem with people eating meat, so I have no reason to make vegetarianism a cause I have to spread to others. That's not the same as looking the other way when a crime is committed, because I don't feel that eating meat is a crime. I do think industries that treat their animals badly should not be supported, so I don't support them. I also expressed that I don't want to be the one to kill or prepare an animal, so I won't pay someone to do it for me. I'd rather accept the alternatives. It's more of a preference than anything to do with morals. I'm not against hunters or beef farmers. I just don't want to hunt or farm beef, and if I know a hunter or farmer who inflicts unnecessary suffering to animals while they are alive, I will denounce their behavior (which, in my case, includes supporting an organization that works against poor treatment of animals). That's about all I can do, right? Do you see a contradiction or a lack of reasoning there?

I'm lost on what you mean by "waste of food," though.

Now, as for me, I'm not taking either extremes; I'm not refraining from eating meat, nor am I indulging myself in every newborn calf while bathing in its blood. You might think you're taking a moderate stance, but it's no big difference in the end from what Eragon does.

I'm not sure what you think my "stance" is, based on this. You seem pretty confused about what my take on vegetarianism actually *is*, but more than that, your comment seems deliberately incendiary--like you're TRYING to start a fight over this. If you really do have a point you'd like to argue, it's not necessary to march in and throw off wild accusations of hypocrisy and pointlessness. If you want to have this conversation, be clear and state your position.

Both may have convictions, but it is pale to the actions, and both result in looking shallow.

Too vague for me to really say anything to. If you disagree with something I've said, use *what I said* and respond to it, please. I see no mention of convictions that my actions are contradicting in my essay.

Toni: "I don't know if it's a psychological phenomenon or if it's a physical thing."

I think it's a physical thing, humans aren't made to eat meat.

Sean Whitman: I'd like to preface this comment first by saying that I don't wish to thrust my beliefs upon you or anyone who abstains from eating meat or animal products. Your body is your temple and it isn't anyone's position to dictate what you choose to put into it.

At the same time, I find it a little difficult to understand why you consider taking the life of an animal for sustenance to be inherently wrong. I agree that slaughter is emotionally bothersome, but the hierarchy in which intelligent embodiments consume each other is a significant part of the foundation of which evolution is based upon. If you accept the concept of evolution and understand how incremental progression is based on environmental factors, you understand that very specific traits shared amongst broad populations exist because they are competitive advantages. The average hare is only capable of its speed because its ancestors had been chased and killed by predators. Genetic "deficits" (for lack of a better term) that might've produced unwieldy, slower hares, were effectively minimized in the population because those that were faster were able to survive and procreate at a far greater rate.

Dire as it may seem, it isn't to say that man has no responsibility toward our environment or what we share it with. We have the intelligence and thus a responsibility to be the animals' stewards, if not -- god forbid -- voluntarily making fewer babies and falling into an actual equilibrium with our natural surroundings (gee, WHAT A CONCEPT!). But livestock on a farm that employs HUMANE practices have far easier lives than they would in the wild. A successful farmer is an entomologist, a botanist, a veterinarian, a nutritionist; a chemist, a diesel mechanic and perhaps a jack of many other trades he utilizes regularly to ensure his lands are bountiful. A successful farmer immediately addresses any concern of health for his herd and protects them from predators. An independent farmer's herd most often grazes and roams at will. Humane slaughterhouses, which produce meat that is often sourced from less prominent suppliers, are designed in a way to prevent animals from seeing the process. They incorporate incapacitation as the first step so that the animal feels absolutely no pain when it is knocked out and finally killed. Despite the scale of food production, very little goes to waste. Everything is used, and the animal fares far better than it would in its natural surroundings.

Although I'm not a farmer, I don't believe farming or eating meat to be a wholly unkind practice. A mutual benefit indeed exists.

Again, it isn't my objective to undermine the reasons you have for choosing not to eat meat, but I wholeheartedly encourage you to weigh facts in light of ideals. I've personally chosen to eat less scavengers (pork or shellfish, for example) and red meat -- for health purposes. White meat and fish are regular staples that I'd find extraordinarily difficult to replace. Notwithstanding, specific chemicals (i.e. those found in omega-3 fatty acids) are known to protect your cells from electrochemically oxidative compounds.

Yours
Sean Whitman

swankivy: Thanks for your thoughts but what you've shared reads like you didn't read what you're responding to. You're operating upon the assumption that I believe "taking the life of an animal for sustenance is inherently wrong." I don't know why you assumed that, because I thought I was pretty clear in my essay on how I consider it a personal choice due to my own discomfort with killing animals (or letting others kill animals for me by proxy). If I thought taking the life of an animal for sustenance was inherently wrong, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to deal with the fact that most of my friends and family are not vegetarians and regularly consume dead animals in front of me.

"We became this way because of evolution and if we ALL behaved like you evolution wouldn't have been as successful" is not a viable position since I am neither advocating everyone behaving like me nor believing that everyone ever will. Same reason I don't have kids. We'd be up the creek if everyone thought the way I do about having kids. Good thing I am not trying to transform the planet's way of reproducing through the choices I make that are most comfortable for me.

I'm glad you're accepting of people being free to choose how they want to eat, and I appreciate your continued respect of my choices.

Sean Whitman: Are you expressing discomfort with killing animals in the sense that a reminder of the outcome (a wrapped cut of meat, for example) gives you a vivid mental image of the incredibly unpleasant details themselves, with less focus on conceptual significance? That would make sense. It's similar to how someone who is squeamish about witnessing blood or bodily trauma may also find the sight of perfectly clean surgical tools to be no less overwhelming.

I originally interpreted what you wrote the way I did because you seemed to express how you dislike the overall concept of killing an animal for human consumption in addition to the practice itself. The descriptive examples of how awful it is seemed intended as emphasis, but your entire message has very different undertones if you only intended to state facts plainly and literally. In that case, I simply accept that you don't eat meat, just the same as how easily others accept that I find the appearance of a completely unused bone saw (even if brand new in its packaging) so vile I squirm uncontrollably. These are only characteristics of personality well beyond our own choosing.

Warm regards,
Sean

swankivy: I find it's generally best to assume someone means literally what they said, especially if the alternative is to assume their message is internally inconsistent.