Question Might Become Vegan

[Jamie in Chile]

I am an omnivore but always had some doubts at the back of my mind from a young age. I have refused to go to zoos since a visit to Toronto zoo in 2001; similar for circus with animals. I refused to castrate our dog when recommend to control his behavior. But I still eat meat.

Over the last 3-5 years I would sometimes order the vegetarian option at a restaurant and I think the nagging ethical doubts were a factor here. I have also tried to increase the fruit and veg recently to try and lose weight without being hungry. But health/weight/fitness are a secondary factor in my diet choices (after ethics).

It has occurred to me that if I had to kill my own meat, I might be a vegetarian. In fact, in 2014 I went to the Pantanal wetlands in Brazil and we went Piranha fishing. I did not fish (I have never believed in fishing for pleasure; I recall distate at this activity on holiday with family when I was about 10 years old) but sat in the boat while my friends did. The guide had one fish someone caught which he gave to me at one point with a knife and asked me to kill. I wouldn't do it. But, later, I did eat the fish.

I have often thought about how many educated, intelligent people in the past laughed at the thought the world might be round, or that women should have the vote, or that blacks could be more than slaves. I have often wondered what people in the future will laugh at our generation for (or be horrified by). I think animal rights and speciesism could be the answer. Reading a number of books in the last 2 months has been a big help to me in developing such an opinion.

While reading the books in November, December I have already reduced my meat consumption by around 50-75%, but not yet 90-100%. First, I want to finish my research into the ethical arguments, learn more about health issues (e.g. B12) and get a health checkup so I can compare my health before and after.

Provisionally I see a very strong argument against factory farmed meat based on animal rights, cruelty and suffering. With some supporting environment/health arguments. But was as to whether I will go vegan, vegetarian, or just reduce my meat consumption or only certain types of meat (e.g. organic, free range) I haven't decided yet.

At this stage I wanted to get your thoughts on a few of the potentially better pro-meat arguments.

After that, I would like to get vegans to answer some questions, if possible. I want to understand how vegans think. I hope you don't mind some hypothetical "would you" type questions.

After that, I am interested to learn more about B12 and other aspects of how to ensure a vegan diet is healthy and balanced.

And eventually, I might be interested in some other topics such as discussing with friends and family (should we try to convert them to whatever our views are), whether to make my own children vegan/veggy, whether it makes sense to be active in support of animal rights (and how best to go about it). I am focused on food choices at the moment. For stuff like clothes and toiletries, I might want to learn more about that later but not now, it's too much all at once.

So, anyone want to share some thoughts on some pro-meat arguments to start with?

 

[ledboots]

Hi and welcome!

Here are three good links.

go How to Win An Argument With a Meat-Eater - Vegsource.com

Responses to Common Questions about and Challenges to Veganism

Eating Animals: Addressing Our Most Common Justifications

 

[Blobbenstein]

So, anyone want to share some thoughts on some pro-meat arguments to start with?

have you got any examples of some pro-meat arguments?

There is the 'but lions!' argument, but for example, male lions taking over a pride from another male lion, will kill all the offspring from the previous male lion, so are lions really any kind of role models for how human society should operate?

 

[Andy_T]

Hello, Jamie in Chile!

Good to have you here, and good to hear that you want to move to a compassionate way of life!

Maybe you would like to hear how I personally went vegetarian, some 25 years ago ... after seeing a documentary about the eating habits in my country (showing the way from the cow to the steak and from the pig to the cutlet ), I wanted to find out how long I, personally, could do without meat. Just out of curiosity. I did not plan to go vegetarian.

However, after not eating meat for one month, I found that I was no longer missing it . It simply did not appeal to me any more, so I stopped eating it. My impression is that for me personally, there was some kind of "addiction" to meat, that I somehow broke without realizing it. So I would advise against trying to go vegan or vegetarian with "cheat days" where you eat meat once a week, as I think that this might draw out the process. At least that is how it would likely have been in my, very personal, case.

The only thing bothering me today is that it took me 20 more years to go vegan, after realizing that the dairy and egg industry are not any better than the meat industry . So I would suggest to also cut out eggs and dairy.

After that, I would like to get vegans to answer some questions, if possible. I want to understand how vegans think. I hope you don't mind some hypothetical "would you" type questions.

For me, it is not very difficult. Yes, I did like to eat meat, fish, cheese, eggs, honey, all of those. However, I can also happily live on a diet of vegetables. And as I do have those two choices, why not choose the one for which it is not necessary to raise and slaughter animals? Also, to me it was much more pleasant to prepare food from plants (e.g. cutting vegetables and boiling pasta) than to handle parts of a dead animal...

After that, I am interested to learn more about B12 and other aspects of how to ensure a vegan diet is healthy and balanced.

There is a very good book called "Becoming Vegan" that deals with all the nutrients that vegans (and omnivores) need.

B12 is actually quite simple. Your body needs it. There are two ways to get it:

1) The "natural" way:
- A chemical factory products Vitamin B12 from bacteria.
- The B12 is added to animal feed and consumed by farm animals.
- The animals are killed for meat, milked for milk, or eggs are taken from them.
- The omnivore consumes the B12 in meat, eggs or dairy.

2) The "unnatural vegan" way
- A chemical factory products Vitamin B12 from bacteria.
- the B12 is pressed into vitamin tablets.
- The vegan consumes the vitamin tablets.

Another word of advice ... don't mention it too much to your meat-eating friends. Don't try to explain it to them too much unless you are settled in your vegan/vegetarian ways. Discussions with meat-eaters are very hard to win even for experienced vegans, and they very rarely amount to anything more than an exchange of standpoints, if the other person is not interested themselves to try it out.

Consider viewing a documentary like "Earthlings" and "Cowspiracy" to support you in your resolve....

Best regards,
Andy

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Hi and welcome!

Here are three good links.

go How to Win An Argument With a Meat-Eater - Vegsource.com

Responses to Common Questions about and Challenges to Veganism

Eating Animals: Addressing Our Most Common Justifications

Thank you, have just been reading all of these. Some interesting arguments although a lot I've already come across as I've read a number of books and articles already.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Hi Andy T, thanks for your thoughts. I have got the idea to watch some videos such as Earthlings on my list of things to do at some point.

You are probably right about dairy. I think I will likely cut it out or substantially reduce it. I really doubt I will ever get to the point where I, say, refuse to eat a cake because it might have been made with an egg, but I have actually already reduced my egg consumption by quite a lot in the last couple of years.

I see you live in KL. I am guessing going Vegan in KL is pretty easy? What about if it were rural Malaysia or a small town in Malaysia?

 

[Jamie in Chile]

have you got any examples of some pro-meat arguments?

There is the 'but lions!' argument, but for example, male lions taking over a pride from another male lion, will kill all the offspring from the previous male lion, so are lions really any kind of role models for how human society should operate?

I have been actively searching for pro-meat arguments online because the books I found and read tended to be pro-vegan (where is the good pro meat book??) and I wanted to balance the argument. However, I was not particularly impressed with many of these online arguments, e.g. leaning on tradition or pleasure of eating meat. However, there are some with some substance to them. I would be curious if anyone has any comment on any of these.

1. The argument that going vegan requires taking B12 and taking more care of your diet in general. Whereas as a meat eater I just eat a bit of everything. I don't think is an argument strong enough to counter some of the pro-vegan arguments on animal welfare and animal rights, but I think it is a pro meat argument that at least scores a small point.

2. The interesting argument that eating meat may have led to intellectual development and human evolution. Seems to rest on that that humans would have had more time free due to less time on eating, meaning meat delivered calories more efficiently per hour of foraging or hunting, rather than because meat has different qualities or nutrients. Whether this theory is true or not I don't think anyone can say for sure at this point. Even if it is it's very debatable whether it is relevant to the present day choices, and can be argued to be less important that animal rights and welfare. However, again, I'm not sure it's a completely dismissable argument, perhaps another point scored.

3. The Steve Davis argument is troubling, to think of so many animals killed by plants. I'm not sure whether this argument should be included in the pro-meat column at all, however. The rebuttal from Gaverick Matheny seems to be a better argument. But I'll include it to see if anyone has any view.

4. Three related arguments about ecosystems and diversity. 4a The fact that in some countries people could not live without meat. Desert/polar and maybe some other African environments. Do you think these people should be vegans? Yes, I get the argument that it doesn't affect my choices, but I am still curious about what vegans think about the morality of eating meat in such regions. 4b The TED talk by Allan Savory that suggested that livestock leads to the better developments of grasslands that would otherwise turn to desert, mitigating climate change (he didn't in his talk evaluate whether the cattle methane added to the atmosphere would be less than the CO2 hoarded by the new plants and grass). It could also be argued that the return of the grasslands produced by livestock would lead to more animal life in the grasslands and created habitats, justifying some utilization of cattle as food and even some cruelty and suffering, at least under a utilitarian/ least harm type framework. I know there are some rebuttals to Savory's idea and the questions are in dispute, it seems to be another complex question but it is another pro-meat argument that is hard to completely dismiss. 4c One troubling thought: what if we eliminate pigs, chickens, cattle from the planet, leaving only wild animals. And then there was some terrible disease or climate change that starting wiping out plants and crops on a massive, global scale. The decision to eliminate the livestock wouldn't look great at this point. I admit it's very far fetched, but even it it has a one in a thousand chance of happening, it might be worth noting because the effects would be so devastating.

 

[AeryFairy]

Hey! Welcome, always good to see someone considering veg*nism. Thought I'd tackle the arguments above.

1. The argument that going vegan requires taking B12 and taking more care of your diet in general. Whereas as a meat eater I just eat a bit of everything. I don't think is an argument strong enough to counter some of the pro-vegan arguments on animal welfare and animal rights, but I think it is a pro meat argument that at least scores a small point.

I don't understand why people think veg*ns have to be so much more careful with what we eat than anyone else. Yes, B12 can be an issue if you don't include sources of it in your diet or substitute with a supplement. But there are plenty of meat-eaters out there who barely touch their veggies, yet hardly anyone seems concerned about their lack of vitamin K. You can still eat a little bit of everything (in fact, this is a generally pretty good way to ensure a balanced diet), just make sure you substitute the animal-product-part of 'everything' with suitable alternatives.

2. The interesting argument that eating meat may have led to intellectual development and human evolution. Seems to rest on that that humans would have had more time free due to less time on eating, meaning meat delivered calories more efficiently per hour of foraging or hunting, rather than because meat has different qualities or nutrients. Whether this theory is true or not I don't think anyone can say for sure at this point. Even if it is it's very debatable whether it is relevant to the present day choices, and can be argued to be less important that animal rights and welfare. However, again, I'm not sure it's a completely dismissable argument, perhaps another point scored.

This one just doesn't wash with me. Aside from the theory which suggests that hunter-gatherer societies did far more 'gathering' than 'hunting' (I'll try and seek out the source for this in a bit, looked into it for an essay as part of my MA), it's completely irrelevant to today. We have more than enough food to go around, and it doesn't take any longer to get the necessary calories. Unless you're a panda, and that's just because the picky things will only eat bamboo which is nutritionally useless.

3. The Steve Davis argument is troubling, to think of so many animals killed by plants. I'm not sure whether this argument should be included in the pro-meat column at all, however. The rebuttal from Gaverick Matheny seems to be a better argument. But I'll include it to see if anyone has any view.

I am unfamiliar with this argument.

4a The fact that in some countries people could not live without meat. Desert/polar and maybe some other African environments. Do you think these people should be vegans? Yes, I get the argument that it doesn't affect my choices, but I am still curious about what vegans think about the morality of eating meat in such regions.

Others may disagree with me here, but I don't think that it's currently possible for everyone to be vegan. Food deserts are a thing. Extreme poverty is a thing. Medical issues which make being veg*n very difficult exist. Often, these things and other factors exist together, and I'm not going to judge anyone for prioritising themselves, their health, and their survival. That being said, people who say "you know, not everyone can be vegan!" tend to be people who don't want to examine the way their tastebud-related choices affect animals and the environment. And I just wish that they'd at least be a bit more honest about it.

4b The TED talk by Allan Savory that suggested that livestock leads to the better developments of grasslands that would otherwise turn to desert, mitigating climate change (he didn't in his talk evaluate whether the cattle methane added to the atmosphere would be less than the CO2 hoarded by the new plants and grass). It could also be argued that the return of the grasslands produced by livestock would lead to more animal life in the grasslands and created habitats, justifying some utilization of cattle as food and even some cruelty and suffering, at least under a utilitarian/ least harm type framework. I know there are some rebuttals to Savory's idea and the questions are in dispute, it seems to be another complex question but it is another pro-meat argument that is hard to completely dismiss.

The farming of animals is one of the leading causes of climate change. This argument seems entirely ridiculous to me - the development of grasslands could still be carried out, regardless of if cattle and other animals were being farmed on them. Also, if we stopped farming cattle we wouldn't need to cut down masses of rainforest. That ought to do some good for the environment.

4c One troubling thought: what if we eliminate pigs, chickens, cattle from the planet, leaving only wild animals. And then there was some terrible disease or climate change that starting wiping out plants and crops on a massive, global scale. The decision to eliminate the livestock wouldn't look great at this point. I admit it's very far fetched, but even it it has a one in a thousand chance of happening, it might be worth noting because the effects would be so devastating.

If that happens, meat or no meat, we're pretty screwed anyway.

 

[Andy_T]

I see you live in KL. I am guessing going Vegan in KL is pretty easy? What about if it were rural Malaysia or a small town in Malaysia?

Oh my, yeah, that would likely be more of a challenge

But mainly for communication reasons. In KL nearly everybody speaks very good English, and it is easy to explain to a cook at a restaurant that I want simple fried noodles, no meat, no fish, no egg, no gravy etc. More difficult in rural Malaysia as I do not speak Bahasa Malaysia, the local language. So I typically stick with Chinese restaurants there where I can explain what I want using my sparse knowledge of Chinese.

Good thing is that in Malaysia there are lots of vegetarians, so people in restaurants understand about vegetarian food.

1. The argument that going vegan requires taking B12 and taking more care of your diet in general. Whereas as a meat eater I just eat a bit of everything. I don't think is an argument strong enough to counter some of the pro-vegan arguments on animal welfare and animal rights, but I think it is a pro meat argument that at least scores a small point.

Jaime, as I tried to explain earlier, the reason that meat eaters get their Vitamin B12 from meat and dairy is that in modern animal agriculture, industrially produced Vitamin B12 is added to the feed the animals receive. They would not get the required amount from the food they are getting. As a vegan, you take the same vitamin B12 directly as supplement, without taking the detour via the animal.

Also, it has to be noted that the majority of cases of B12 deficiency are meat-eaters (granted, because there are many more meat eaters than vegans. As a percentage of the total population, vegans have higher rates of occurrence of B12 deficiency). However, every vegan that I know is aware of this and tries to supplement Vitamin B12 (and D). There are a lot more vitamins (e.g. C) that vegans do not have to supplement as they are included in fruits and vegetables, but that meat eaters are missing.

2. The interesting argument that eating meat may have led to intellectual development and human evolution. Seems to rest on that that humans would have had more time free due to less time on eating, meaning meat delivered calories more efficiently per hour of foraging or hunting, rather than because meat has different qualities or nutrients.

I do not discount that argument (I agree it is likely true, although there are discussion what the earliest hominids ate), but I do not see it as valid for today's society. There are a lot of other things (slavery, feudalism, colonialism, wars) that helped a lot to develop our society to what it is today. But that certainly does not mean we should keep on pursuing them. Believe it or not, 300 years ago it was not possible for most people in the "civilised world" to envisage a society without slavery. It was the "natural order of things" and an important pillar of economic development. Luckily this could be overcome in most regions of the world.

It could also be argued that the return of the grasslands produced by livestock would lead to more animal life in the grasslands and created habitats, justifying some utilization of cattle as food and even some cruelty and suffering, at least under a utilitarian/ least harm type framework.

Not very likely in my opinion. In areas that are used for livestock grazing, everything that is not livestock is regarded as "vermin" and exterminated where there is a possibility it could pose a threat to livestock (e.g. rodents in the ground are gassed as their burrows could lead to cattle breaking their legs, any predators are killed off, which leads to the need to also kill off the animals those predators would normally control). Not exactly animal utopia there. Add to that water contamination and the depletion of aquifiers, not really good for the ground, either.

 

[Andy_T]

4c One troubling thought: what if we eliminate pigs, chickens, cattle from the planet, leaving only wild animals. And then there was some terrible disease or climate change that starting wiping out plants and crops on a massive, global scale.

Please remember that animals have to eat something to "produce" meat and dairy.

To be honest - if we did NOT eliminate pigs, chicken, cattle, if such a disease struck, it would be the first action to immediately eliminate all lifestock to reduce the effect of famines, simply because of the incredible inefficiency related to animal agriculture.

Look up "Mikkel Hindhede" on google. He was a Danish nutritionist during WW1. When the Allied forces blockaded the Continent in 1917 and 1918, he suggested to kill off all pigs and reduce cows by one third. That way, famines could be avoided in Denmark. In Germany, that had a larger supply of foodstocks per capita, a larger proportion was used for animals, and there were widespread famines in 1918. On top of that, the death rate in Denmark from normal diseases sank to the lowest number ever (and rose again, after the blockage was over and rationings of animal products were abolished).

 

[ledboots]

I really hate arguing with meat eaters, but I can't resist 4C. If all the animals currently being raised for slaughter suddenly disappeared, humans would have enough soy and corn (animal feed) to feed far more people than the animals' bodies would have. It is the raising of animals for humans to eat that causes poor humans to starve.

Also, if you're really here to troll, please don't. We can go pretty much anywhere else and listen to meat eaters screech about how we aren't vegan enough, like if I lived on a desert island and there was only a cow...

 

[Andy_T]

In my opinion, it all boils down to a very simple argument: Meat tastes nice.
(I was also eating meat for the first 20 years of my life, so I also know what I am talking about)

Of course, stopping to eat meat also took me some effort in the beginning. It was not that I did not like the taste of steak, burgers and fish. But, I tried to eat vegetables, and found out that they are also nice, and IMO not so much less nice than meat to justify slaughterhouses for me personally.

IMO, very many of the arguments I typically hear in favour of eating meat, are not so much arguments I consider valid in themselves, but arguments that are used to support that one argument, and to justify why a person would value the tickle of their palate more than the life of another being.

I understand that people like the taste of meat, that it is readily available, that it is not against the law to consume it, that it is cheap and that it is possibly the easiest way to get your lunch, as you don't have to take effort to search a place with vegan options in a world where there is a McDonalds on every corner, and that above all you do not have to explain your special requests to your friends.

I understand all that. Nevertheless, for me personally, I would not be able to enjoy a steak as I would see the cow, know about its pain and suffering, and that would not be worth it for me over eating a veggie burger or salad instead.

So yes, it is a very personal decision.
We can't really convince you if you do not really have at least the wish to try it out yourself.

But, we hope we could give you some food for thought

 

[Jamie in Chile]

You don’t all need to convince me to an extent, because I am already convinced. Even IF you all conceded I have a point on every one of my arguments just made, the pro-vegan arguments would still be more important than such arguments. However some of these discussions may affect just how convinced I become: in order words – will I settle for just giving up all factory farmed meat and most meat or does it have to be all meat and dairy? Will I settle for stopping eating eggs and putting slices of cheese on things, but still eat things other people prepare for me with some small cheese/milk content? The strength of the argument may impact where I draw the line.

The second thing is I am somewhat dithering about how much to try and convince others that these are worth looking into. How strong the argument is, and how much it is truly a clear moral issue, could affect whether I privately carry out a certain personal lifestyle, or whether I actively raise these issues with others. An issue for some months ahead perhaps, but I already thinking about it.

Thanks for your replies. Some good arguments made on B12 (I need to learn more about this) as well as eliminating livestock (read the Hindhede Wikipedia article). Yes I am aware that a given area provides more with plants and that x amount of meat requires >x amount of plants to produce it. This is also possibly an argument against the Steve Davis argument alsol

I’m not surprised someone has me pegged as a possible troll. I’ve seen such a pattern before so I don’t blame you ledboots. I have another argument coming up and some of those hypothetical desert-island type questions which may irk you so you’ll probably continue to suspect me as a troll for a while. I do want to get under the skin of how vegans think because I am interested in participating in such communities in the future (either on line or real). To some extent I am just somewhat curious, so you don’t have to humour me. Over a longer time (assuming I continue to post) you will come to see I am not a troll. Let me say quite clearly that I strongly suspect already that vegans have the moral high ground and I wouldn’t say that if I was a troll.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

OK so to carry on the debate (if you are still up for it) I currently think there is only one really GOOD argument pro-meat which is one I haven't mentioned so far, but thought I'd leave for later as it's deserving of more attention. This may be the last pro-meat argument I put to you.

It's the argument that without our meat eating, the animals would not exist at all. Some vegans discuss this argument rather abruptly in articles and books in even a single sentence, which surprises me. One argument is that a bad life is better than no life. But I am not so sure about that. It just seems to be a philosophical debate that is too hard to resolve.

Ultimately after quite a lot of thought, I just feel instinctively that the suffering and cruelty (and prohibitions of freedom) is wrong for us to carry out, and this might even be true even if the animals would vote to be born rather than to never exist, in such a rather bizarre and hypothetical question.

While I can't resolve this objection logically and rationally like I can with others, ultimately it comes down to a believe in speciesism. Here are my counter arguments to this point, the first two I invented myself (although likely many others will have thought of them before me), the third I saw in a book (I forget which).

1. To ask someone how they would feel if they found a factory producing meat for cannibals using genetically grown human flesh where they kill the human children at one year old following the same suffering and confinement and treatment as factory farmed pigs/chickens, and assuming due to a genetic defect in the process somehow the children's growth stops at one year old, and they could have no chance of ever becoming as intelligent as a pig, even if they were left to live. If such a factory existed, would it be morally correct to allow it to continue on the same "better than never having existed argument".

2. Imagine aliens came to earth that were far more intelligent than humans (like as pigs are to us) are started factory farming humans, using such efficient technology that they could use the earth's technology to support 100 billion factory-farmed humans in addition to the 7-8 billion wild ones. Would this be justified under the "better than never having existed argument"?

3. Imagine two couples, one that has a child but then beats and abuses the child, and one that has no children. Who is morally superior and are the parents justified in everything in the same way on the "never having existed argument".

I genuinely believe such thought experiments are the best solution to the never having existed argument, however my issue is be making such arguments, I am going to seem a wierdo (I am actually slightly worried by how you guys will even react to, never mind meat eaters, so hope to try it out on your first). Also, what if there isn't time for such arguments, where's the snappy 1-line response? I haven't found one that works.

What do you think of my thought experiments and how would you handle such an objection.

 

[AeryFairy]

You don’t all need to convince me to an extent, because I am already convinced. Even IF you all conceded I have a point on every one of my arguments just made, the pro-vegan arguments would still be more important than such arguments. However some of these discussions may affect just how convinced I become: in order words – will I settle for just giving up all factory farmed meat and most meat or does it have to be all meat and dairy? Will I settle for stopping eating eggs and putting slices of cheese on things, but still eat things other people prepare for me with some small cheese/milk content? The strength of the argument may impact where I draw the line.

I think it's mostly that a lot of us don't think there are really any pro-meat arguments that hold up

That being said, I'm not gonna try and actively convince anyone to go veg*n. I'll argue specific points if they're raised. I'll explain myself and my choice if people ask questions. But the only 'convincing' I do is with my cooking (and it's pretty damned effective). People will make the change if they believe in it, not because some random vegan spouted arguments at them until they gave in. You're going to make choices based on what you want to do, not what we try and convince you to do.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

I am in a bit of a confused and messy place now, in a way. I started with the idea of doing an extensive research into vegetarianism, veganism and ethical eating with the idea that I would make some choices at the end. But, I'm now 3/4 of the way through and already feeling it's morally wrong just to carry on as before. I've cut down my meat a lot but am still eating some until I finish the research, and make a final decision, and then plan out a healthy vegan diet (looking into B12, protein issues etc) before taking the step to give up meat 100%. But this is leading to strange situations like explaining to my wife and daughter over dinner that I am refusing the meat and discussing the moral reasons, and then eating some meat the next day. Or, just now, eating meat for lunch (because it was given to me) but not sprinkling the optional extra cheese which didn't seem necessary. And yet, eating meat and refusing cheese in a way seemed a strange decision.

 

[AeryFairy]

It's understandable to be confused when you're questioning lifelong-held eating habits and beliefs, and dealing with questions from friends and family along the way.

In a way, I can't relate to that - I stopped eating meat very suddenly when I was 14 - no transition, just gave it up in a fit of stubbornness. And 14 year olds are expected to be stubborn, so although everyone thought it was a phase, nobody thought it was weird. And by the time I gave up eggs and dairy around 7 years later, I was already known to care about animals, so that didn't seem strange to anyone either.

Just be honest with people - that you're trying to make a change but you're not rushing into it because you want to make sure you do it the right way for you.

 

[Andy_T]

Jamie, I would suggest to you the book "Eating animals" by Jonathan Safran Foer. It is well written, and he is coming from a similar starting point as you - he explained that after the birth of his first kid he wanted to find out more about where food comes from and what exactly goes into meat, dairy and eggs, starting with an open mind and finding out what would be the best way to live.

He lets people who either advocate veganism, factory farming or "Compassionate meat eating" explain in their own words why they think their way makes sense.

Best regards,
Andy

 

[Jamie in Chile]

I have already read that book. He makes a strong case against factory farming. On the welfare/rights - ethical meat/no meat arguments he sits more on the fence but I think he is leading more towards no meat but won't judge those who eat ethical meat. Personally, I found the "no meat" argument better after reading this book.

Other books I've read:

Vegan: The New Ethics of Eating (Marcus)
Eat and Run: My Unlikely Journey to Ultramarathon Greatness (Jurek)
Eat Like Your Care: An Examination of the Morality of Eatinng Animals (Francione)
Animal Liberation (Singer)
Animal Rights (Stephens)

I think all the books were worth reading. The first three are basically pro-Vegan. The Francione book is suitable for someone who is already vegan and wants ammunition to defend meat eater's arguments.

The latter two are pro animal rights in general, but are convincing in that a natural concern for animal rights implies not eating them. Henry Stephens book is quite innovative and impressive in its arguments considering he wrote it in the 19th century. You can buy a hard copy on Amazon or download it for free on Forgotten Books (but you have to pay a monthly fee or have a version with pages randomly deleted to encourage you to signup for the monthly version).

I have also got the Omnivore's Dilemna (Pollan) to read soon.

 

[Andy_T]

I would suggest - to everybody here - the very good book "Mind if I order the Cheeseburger" by Sherry F. Colb.

It is comparable to "Eat like you care" by Gary F. Francione in that they are both law professors, but IMO much more accessible and compassionate.

Review of Mind If I order the Cheeseburger and Other Questions People Ask Vegans