![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moonvoiceMany characterize paganism as an umbrella term "earth-centered" religions. Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
This is, to me, such a flawed premise.
The thing is, it firstly assumes that pagans can only honour nature by 'letting it live' all the time. It completely denies the importance, and sacredness of death; and it ignorantly forgets that there is a natural life/death cycle with everything we do. I actually find it quite anti-nature, and anti-pagan, to forget that there is a natural life and death cycle that we are constantly a part of.
I mean we kill and eat plants while they're still living, even vegetarians need to own their part in killing to eat. Plants aren't exempt from being alive, sacred, or even potentially sentient just because they lack a central nervous system or can't scream in pain. We know that plants don't like being damaged and eaten, because many plants have evolved sophisticated and sometimes energy-consuming techniques to prevent it from happening.
I think that all life is equal, regardless of whether I can anthropomorphise it or not. I think that plants are equal to animals, and therefore it is hypocritical of me to value the lives of animals over the lives of plants just because we don't hear plants scream or see them struggle. I also find it kind of amusing that some vegetarians feel more superior than non-vegetarians, yet they are actually consuming a living being while it is still alive. Those fresh, raw vegetables are all living beings that still have a chance of living a full life in the ground - it is our call to strip it of its life in our digestive tract; often without thinking about it or even saying thank you for the sacrifice of the plants.
You would also hope that all vegetarians didn't ever kill any insects or trap mice or basically hurt anything that was 'animal like,' if that is their primary reason for eating vegies - 'respecting nature.' You can't logically have it both ways. If you refuse to eat meat because you see the sacredness in life, then how can you justify not being heart-broken every time you step on an ant, or inhale a dust mite?
The thing is, I feel that if people are using the 'respecting life / sacredness of life' reason as a justification for vegetarianism (as opposed to health reasons, or even just not wanting to eat battery meat / factory farmed animals (who does?)) then they are simply refusing to give the same sense of equality to all animals, let alone all living things. It's convenient, but I'm not sure if it's a really respectable way of being as a pagan.
I think there are a lot of flawed assumptions amongst those who think that eating vegetables only is more respectful than ever eating meat. Assumptions based on misunderstandings of the life/death cycle and the sacredness of death, assumptions based on the value of animals over plants, assumptions even based on cuter animals over the less cute ones (like insects or dust mites or mosquitoes)... so my answer is actually No. There is no reason that a pagan should be a vegetarian because they are pagan. There are plenty of reasons to be vegetarian, but 'respecting life,' is one of the flawed reasons, imho.
Following from that there is an idea that pagans should be dedicated to honoring all life and be caretakers of the earth. The next jump made by many is that pagans should therefore refrain from eating meat. What do you think? Do pagans have a responsibility to honor all life and thus be vegetarians?
This is, to me, such a flawed premise.
The thing is, it firstly assumes that pagans can only honour nature by 'letting it live' all the time. It completely denies the importance, and sacredness of death; and it ignorantly forgets that there is a natural life/death cycle with everything we do. I actually find it quite anti-nature, and anti-pagan, to forget that there is a natural life and death cycle that we are constantly a part of.
I mean we kill and eat plants while they're still living, even vegetarians need to own their part in killing to eat. Plants aren't exempt from being alive, sacred, or even potentially sentient just because they lack a central nervous system or can't scream in pain. We know that plants don't like being damaged and eaten, because many plants have evolved sophisticated and sometimes energy-consuming techniques to prevent it from happening.
I think that all life is equal, regardless of whether I can anthropomorphise it or not. I think that plants are equal to animals, and therefore it is hypocritical of me to value the lives of animals over the lives of plants just because we don't hear plants scream or see them struggle. I also find it kind of amusing that some vegetarians feel more superior than non-vegetarians, yet they are actually consuming a living being while it is still alive. Those fresh, raw vegetables are all living beings that still have a chance of living a full life in the ground - it is our call to strip it of its life in our digestive tract; often without thinking about it or even saying thank you for the sacrifice of the plants.
You would also hope that all vegetarians didn't ever kill any insects or trap mice or basically hurt anything that was 'animal like,' if that is their primary reason for eating vegies - 'respecting nature.' You can't logically have it both ways. If you refuse to eat meat because you see the sacredness in life, then how can you justify not being heart-broken every time you step on an ant, or inhale a dust mite?
The thing is, I feel that if people are using the 'respecting life / sacredness of life' reason as a justification for vegetarianism (as opposed to health reasons, or even just not wanting to eat battery meat / factory farmed animals (who does?)) then they are simply refusing to give the same sense of equality to all animals, let alone all living things. It's convenient, but I'm not sure if it's a really respectable way of being as a pagan.
I think there are a lot of flawed assumptions amongst those who think that eating vegetables only is more respectful than ever eating meat. Assumptions based on misunderstandings of the life/death cycle and the sacredness of death, assumptions based on the value of animals over plants, assumptions even based on cuter animals over the less cute ones (like insects or dust mites or mosquitoes)... so my answer is actually No. There is no reason that a pagan should be a vegetarian because they are pagan. There are plenty of reasons to be vegetarian, but 'respecting life,' is one of the flawed reasons, imho.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Forgive my harshness part end
Date: 2008-06-21 07:35 pm (UTC)And yeah, you said your wording was "inconsiderate, horrible, and not what you meant", but you keep using the same words. Maybe you don't realize how deep the popular culture's ideal has gotten into your mindset? (this is not meant in a mean way, just an observation)
Re: Forgive my harshness part end
Date: 2008-06-22 04:09 pm (UTC)I didn't go to the effort of trying to find a study... I couldn't figure out what kind of study to look for. Even statistics on death rates doesn't say too much... I mean, we're dying less from diseases that many obese people are supposed to have. But maybe that's more of a reflection on the medical community than on our weight. And how is a study going to distinguish overweight individuals that are most likely overweight due to medications or hereditary or glandular problems... before any health complications (heart disease, etc...) develop? And how is that study supposed to definitively say that these people came down with the disease due to their weight? I'm just not convinced it's possible to prove, without a doubt, that overweight individuals are more prone to disease just because they're overweight. I mean... you convinced me by asking me to find a study.
So, how is that person with a 1.8 or 2 ratio unhealthy if every medical indicator says shi isn't unhealthy?
That's not what I meant. You asked which obesity I meant, and I've never used the BMI calculator seriously, so pre-1998 or post, I don't enter that into the picture.
What I meant by a waist to hip ratio was to give a clearer visual as to what I personally consider obese. And even then, it's only a visual description.
I mean, if I was on the fence about obesity being unhealthy before, you and
Maybe you don't realize how deep the popular culture's ideal has gotten into your mindset?
You're probably right... although it's my own fault; I can't blame popular culture.
Here's a bit of my background:
I worry about my father... he's probably "morbidly obese" and so he finds exercising and being too active really unpleasant. And his health suffers. :( I mean, the only obese person I know (face-to-face) without a health complication is my boyfriend... even my blood pressure has started a major incline since gaining a lot of weight.
I mean, now I can apply what I've learned and observe that it's not because of the weight gain - but most of it is probably due to lack of activity (others being food choices, genetics, and whatnot).
And... you know, before I bury my head further up my ass... I'm sorry. I just... I'm not a good person to debate with, and I'm not very comfortable continuing this thread.