The wonderful final argument for the sloppy people choosing to be vegetarian in order to avoid the killing of “sentient” animals…
The ethics of eating red meat have been grilled recently by critics who question its consequences for environmental health and animal welfare. But if you want to minimize animal suffering and promote more sustainable agriculture, adopting a vegetarian diet might be the worst possible thing you could do.
Renowned ethicist Peter Singer says if there is a range of ways of feeding ourselves, we should choose the way that causes the least unnecessary harm to animals. Most animal rights advocates say this means we should eat plants rather than animals.
It takes somewhere between two to ten kilos of plants, depending on the type of plants involved, to produce one kilo of animal. Given the limited amount of productive land in the world, it would seem to some to make more sense to focus our culinary attentions on plants, because we would arguably get more energy per hectare for human consumption. Theoretically this should also mean fewer sentient animals would be killed to feed the ravenous appetites of ever more humans.
(Please note: the author of this article is Australian, and much of the information in the following article applies specifically to that area of the world. Farming practices differ around the globe.)
Dangers posed by toilet paper exposed
RAEL’S COMMENT: And 8 billion people use it every morning…and flush it!