h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

You could argue that it's immoral to prolong the life of someone who is dying of some painful condition. Also, in Britain and other western countries (with more money than sense?) people are sometimes kept alive by life support machines when it is widely agreed by their doctors that they have no hope of recovery. There are times when humans are kept alive or not assisted with a quick and painless death, under circumstances when anyone with any compassion would shoot a horse, cow or dog.

I think you've missed my point Xanatic. I'm not saying lions eating zebras is a moral or immoral act, it's ammoral. I think animals protecting children or members of their flock isn't a moral or immoral act either, it's what they do to protect their genes.

Morals can seem like a complicated thing, and most people think that they are some sort of superior attribute, available only to superior intelligences like human beings. But, really, morals are a very basic means to an end. The idea of having certain rules for society is a natural symptom of any regular group of social animals. Morals are actually the unwritten rules of a society, and they evolve out of a desire to have at least some form of stability and safety. For example, you learn not to covet your neighbor's wife (or husband, for that matter), not because its some kind of lofty ideal, but because it make your neighbor mad, which can easily lead to all kinds of bad stuff happening to you. That's not to say that people (and chimps, birds, sea lions, etc.) don't try to make it with other folk's mates. It just means that the society has declared it a bad idea, and will likely have some sort of consequences.

If you take a look at any group of social creatures, you'll begin to see all sorts of unwritten rules. Birds know that they aren't supposed to steal other birds nests. Pack dogs know that the older, stronger members get to eat first. Humans know that screaming in a library is a big faux pas.

Humans certainly haven't cornered the market on social rules. In fact, I'd say we have a less stringent set of morals than most other social creatures.

As for eating meat being moral? I can't imagine that there is any group of any animals out there, where killing for sustinance is immoral, or against the rules of that society. But there is a signifigant difference between killing for fun or for gluttony. So I guess it boils down to justifying the need to kill for food.

The whole point about morals are that they are ever changing. They are set by society and different groups will have differing view on what is right or wrong. At different times we have different morals and judging people (or animals) who live by one set of morals by a different set is unfair. This would be particularly true of the "Judgement Day" outlook.

"I think animals protecting children or members of their flock isn't a moral or immoral act either, it's what they do to protect their genes."

Well, why do you think we have morals?

We don't have morals to protect our genes, we have morals to protect our society and way of thinking.

Because we can´t really live without a society. We are one of those social animals that would die in a cage.

Not if there is food and drink and some other sort of stimulus, I believe humans would have enough imagination to keep going even if stuck in a cage. It is possible to live outside society provided you have the means to survive (ie five basic needs: air; water; food; warmth; shelter) otherwise there would be no hermits, no stories of Robinson Crusoe, solo trekking across antarctica would be impossible because people would just die from the loneliness. Society is useful but it is not necessary, morals are useful but they are not necessary, just like eating animals is useful but is not necessary

Anyway this is topic drift and I still want to hear what vegetarian pet owners have to say...

Hi, good point about keeping animals. I have three rescue cats and feel that i co-habit with them so although i do not like to see other animals suffer, i can not stop them hunting the odd frog.
I do not see them hunting to eat as they are domesticated and only hunt for fun. As for the frogs i have to limit the time they spend outside in the breeding circle and get up to rescue frogs from the kids bedroom at all hours of the night. I think the frogs need to be protected too.
Food they currently eat meat products but you can get vegan pet food for them something i'm looking in to.
My cats are sterlised because of the amount of unwanted cats/dogs is outrageous and i do not want to add to the figures. This was a difficult decision as it is us that caused the problem in the first place by domesticating them.
I personally feel we have a responsibly to prevent possiable cruelty.

Sheesh, you even want other animals to be vegan? That is just too far out. As Cartman called it, "Tree-hugging hippie crap".

And the cats doesn´t hunt for fun. They hunt to practice and sustain their hunting skills. Like footballers.

I don't have any cats (I'm a canary, that would be suicidal ) but I can see why a person who did have cats - particularly rescued cats (possibly indicating a thinking/caring person) would stop them hunting. It's a damn shame for the cats. It's a big part of their nature but they're not indigenous to this country (GB) and left to their own devices, they could wipe out some of our native species, as I believe they are doing with flightless birds etc in countries like New Zealand. They're wonderfully efficient killers and survivalists, and in their country of origin where other species have evolved to survive with them, that's just fine but in the countries where they've been introduced (mainly as mousers) they're an environmental disaster if allowed to follow their nature.

Doubt you could make a cat a vegan though.

Are they not indiginous to the UK? Don't we have wild cats here anyway? Where did they come from?
Also, don't most carnivores have a population level that is appropriate to the amount of prey they have, ie too many predators means a disastrous drop in the population of their prey, hence they mostly starve and their prey's population recovers.
Cats and dogs populations are artificially high because we feed them, if that stopped, most would probably die I would guess.
Making cats and dogs vegan has to be one of the more ridiculous things I have heard.

Our domesticated cats are natives of somewhere in Asia or North Africa as far as I remember.

If cats were allowed to do their own thing, they would very likely wipe out lots of our birds and small mammals. The cat population would probably dive then. But lots of our indigenous species wouldn't recover. They're already under pressure from human activity like farming, house building, road building etc. That might not matter to everybody but I'm fond of our British wildlife and don't really want an imported species to obliterate it. Maybe I'm just too sentimental, but I can't help it.

I agree with you about the artificially large populations of cats and dogs. The problem is that a lot of people who keep cats, shut them out and leave them to hunt all day whereas _responsible_ dog owners don't allow their dogs to run wild.

Personally
on the veggie keeping pets issue, fair point is to feed them by-products from us eating meat, the unfit for human consumption usually (not always) goes into pet food and animal feed - note BSE. (cats also get a feline form of BSE).
I think the keeping of pets is immoral even tho we domesticsted them first, cats are little more than vermin and after the farmers pesticides are the biggest factor effecting the decline in the song bird population and other small mammals, amphibians and reptiles!
On the other hand dogs serve a slightly different purpose, and I know many dog owners that feed there doggs on veggie stuff to no ill effect, the dogs haven't started ripping out small childrens throats yet so they must of accepted it, or more usually be be ignorant of it.
Also I'd like to point out that more money is spent on pets and pet food than is given in state or charitable aid to the developing world!
That's an argument from a veggie non-petowner for ya!
Z.

Hmm, may be a little late to add my two pence worth, but in case anyone notices:

I have been a vegetarian for just over two years now which isnt a particularly long time, but then I am only 22...

First thing I would say is that becoming vegetarian has definitely improved my health: As an omnivore (almost carnivore actually) I used to just assume that I would get all the vitamins and minerals I needed. I was aware when I became veggie (I moved in with two vegan friends) that I would have to be careful to get everything I needed, the vegans helped me, and after a bit of work, I am now certain I can maintain a balanced diet as a veggie - much more balanced now than it was before. Its just a case of knowing which plants give you which vitamins ect, and maintaining a good intake of varied proteins.
I was amazed how many cereals and vegetables there were in the world that I had never heard of. All gastranomes should be veggie for at least a year, just to give them a chance to eat loads of food stuffs they run the risk of bypassing. Hmm, is there an entry in the guide about hummus I wonder? Anyway...

I was going to mention the moral reasons about vegetarianism and veganism, but have gone on for ages, If anyone notices this, I may continue. (Thats a gauntlet to all those carnivores out there by the way)

Your attitude to moggies just goes to show that veggies are all different Zarniroop. I'm quite fond of the little maniacs myself, but they're a bit too destructive of other species (as are we, of course). I would never buy a pet but, if I was in a position to home a homeless dog, for example, I would.

I spotted you vogonpeot. Expound away, but be ready to duck

oh ok, I shall ), although I just spent a while reading more of this thread, so I now know I shall probably be repeating stuff:

Ok, first up:
Animal Rights: Not a massive issue for me when I first started being veggie, but its becoming more so - to extent that I may become vegan relatively soon (dietary adjustment does need thought). The amount of incredibly bad things going on in slaughterhouses is pretty high, and you never know where your meat comes from. As I am rich enough to have a choice, I choose not to eat meat because there is a risk that it didnt have an amazingly froody time before it arrives on my plate.

Second, more important issue, in my opinion:
Trees: Lots and lots of trees get cut down every year to make crops.
This is a bad thing for many reasons, some explained below. The reason so many crops are required, is because we have to feed all the cows we eat. Cows are incredibly inefficient at making food - someone mentioned 20 pounds of crop to make 1 pound of meat - which is roughly correct, alhtough everytime I think about it, it sounds like a huge amount.

Not just crops they waste either, they drink a lot of water too, not all of which ends up back in the natural water cycle.

OK, hows that for starters?

Next up (or should I allow some breathinh space)
Reason I may become vegan: Dairy cows make milk because they are forced to become pregnant, have baby cows, which then get taken away, and eaten. WHich is not particularöly friendly, and they eat crops. See Trees.

Trees 2:

1)Lots and lots of species live in forests, taking trees away kills them.
2)Carbon. Specifically, the carbon which is released as CO2 as a direct result of deforestation. CO2 is of course everyones favourite greenhouse gas, and the less we do to release it into the atmosphere the better.

Cats are animals that have been brought to GB, that´s true. But I think they have been there long enough to become a part of the fauna. If you let them into the wild I don´t think you would see a surge or decrease in anything. But there is one point in cats. Because of the society we have now, the animals that are most likely to survive are those that can parasite on human settlements. As for example rats and foxes. This means that we have a whole lot of rats and the number will increase greatly in the future. And they still carry diseases, they still pose a threat. So an animal that can reduce their numbers would be good. Though I must admit I don´t know if cats actually eat rats.

Having pets doesn´t seem all that nice to me either. Especially not the birds, being kept in small cages when they are made to roam several hundred kilometers. Funny how pet-owners usually refer to themselves as animal lovers.

But speaking of birds, if we will use wind power in the future we will also kill a whole lot of birds.

If everybody in this world became vegans wouldn´t we also need to destroy a lot of trees in order to sow crops? Sure we can live off acorns, but there aren´t all that many of them. And then what about the straws left behind from harvesting corn, whose going to eat that? Along with the grass.