Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Vegetarian and Pro-Abortion. Hypocracy?

  • 18-07-2004 2:49pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,865 ✭✭✭


    I'm wonder what people think about people who are vegetarians (or vegans) and also think abortion should be legal. To me there is a tinge of hypocracy there.

    The way I see it, 'life' is not black and white. The world is not broken up into human beings with the right to life and rocks. Somethings (like animals) have the right not to treated creully and the right to a humane killing, but it's still OK to eat them for food. Likewise for foetuses. People should still be able to get abortions, but not under all circumstances, foetuses have some rights.

    So the way I see it, people who are vegeatarians think it's wrong to kill animals to eat them, but if they are pro-abortion then they think it's ok to kill a foetus.

    Does anyone else think that's a it hypocritical?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 610 ✭✭✭article6


    I don't think it's hypocritical, even though I'm neither pro-abortion nor vegetarian. There are a lot of reasons people give for subscribing to either one of those schools of thought; one may hold that sentience and the right to life begin upon brain activity, and so certain foetuses in the womb do not have the right to life, but living animals do.

    I can see how some combinations of the two could be hypocritical (though aren't we all hypocrites in some way?) but we can't just label everyone who believes in both of those opinions as contradicting themselves.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Originally posted by Syth
    So the way I see it, people who are vegeatarians think it's wrong to kill animals to eat them, but if they are pro-abortion then they think it's ok to kill a foetus.

    Does anyone else think that's a it hypocritical?
    Depends on the viewpoint doesn't it? Vegetarians eat eggs. Any debate on abortion always comes down to one thing - when/if you believe a foetus is ever a human being. By saying that you think these people are hypocritical, you have already told us that you believe that a foetus is a viable/real animal life throughout gestation, and that's it. It's hypocritical from your viewpoint, but not from other people's,.

    Put quite simply, if one doesn't believe that at the point of abortion, a foetus is a viable human/animal life, then that's not in conflict with their vegetarian belief. On top of that, plenty of people are vegetarians for religious or health reasons, not, "Killing animals is wrong."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭tribble


    I'm a vegetarian and also pro-abortion.

    But "pro-abortion" is a VERY loose term.

    I would not be in favour of Canadian style late-term abortions, but see no problem with flushing out a non-sentiant ball of stem cells.

    Do you believe mastrubations is wrong?
    I would think not.
    How about a 1 day old fertilised egg?
    There no difference in either potential or sentience between these two (IMHO).
    However a living, breathing, thinking 7 month old foetus is a completely different senario.

    I think it comes down to where you draw the line.
    And what rules you use to define it.

    tribble


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭tribble


    Depends on the viewpoint doesn't it? Vegetarians eat eggs.

    Well some (most) of us do.
    Most of **** too, I have no problem destroying haploid life at that level.

    tribble


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 610 ✭✭✭article6


    Originally posted by tribble
    I have no problem destroying haploid life at that level.

    Careful with your biology there! You're right about that being haploid, but the fertilised egg is diploid - the only parts of mammals that are haploid are the gametes, i.e. sex cells.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,478 ✭✭✭tribble


    /me goes off to check his eggs are not fertilised...

    nope...

    The eggs you buy in the shops aren't fertilised.
    http://www.waitrose.com/food_drink/wfi/cooking/festivalsandcelebration/0302046.asp

    http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/science/biological_sciences/lab14/biolab14_4.html

    :) tribble


    /EDIT - though apparently fertilised eggs are available (esp in Asia) for use "steroidal substances that enhance libido"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,105 ✭✭✭Tommy Vercetti


    Would that make it wrong for a meat-eater to be anti-bloodsports then? :)

    I'm a vegetarian and I'm against abortion personally, but I accept that it isn't my decision to make, so yeah I'm more pro-choice then....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 576 ✭✭✭chill


    There is no hypocricy....

    I am pro-choice as regards food ... I chose to be a non-vegetarian.

    I am pro choice for abortion. I chose not to use abortion but support a woman's right over her own body.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,839 ✭✭✭Hobart


    Originally posted by tribble
    I'm a vegetarian and also pro-abortion.
    However a living, breathing, thinking 7 month old foetus is a completely different senario.

    I think it comes down to where you draw the line.
    And what rules you use to define it.

    tribble
    where do you draw the line, as a matter of opion when it comes to abortion? There is a big gap between 1day and seven months. at what stage do you believe it is ok to abort a foetues?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6 daisyhead


    I'm not sure if there is any point searching for a connection between these two topics, but I don't think it is hypocritical to hold conflicting views on the two. To my mind, the only hypocrasy lies in forcing your views on others- I'm a vegetarian, and am privately (as in my uterus only) anti-abortion. But I neither leave dinner tables in disgust at the antics of my carnivore friends, nor am I one of those frankly sick individual shaking their rosary beads on Grafton street in front of hideous placards. Does this make any sense or am I babbling?! Anyway... I'll give you two veggie quotes that always amuse me:

    "Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you are a good person is like expecting a bull not to attack you because you are a vegetarian" Mark Twain

    "If you're supposed to be a vegetarian, why are animals made out of meat?!" My friend Kathryn!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,865 ✭✭✭Syth


    "If you're supposed to be a vegetarian, why are animals made out of meat?!" My friend Kathry
    A siliar one that I use : "If you're not supposed to eat animals, why are they made out of food?"
    the only hypocrasy lies in forcing your views on others
    I only think it's a hypocracy to force your beliefs on other if you also believe that others have to right to an opinion. However, there are cases where I think we should force our beliefs on others. A lof of people think it's wrong to kil other people, and they are damn well gonna make sure you sick to that!
    where do you draw the line, as a matter of opion when it comes to abortion?
    I'm not going ot draw the line on abortion, but I am remind of something I read in one of Steven Pinker's books. He said there are many situations where we don't find a line, we just draw it because it is convient to draw it there, and to not draw a line would lead to madness. The line isn't imposed by God, or the result of some superior logic, it's just out of necessity. He gives the example of adulthood. We need to draw the line somewhere. 5 year olds aren't adults, but 25 year old are thus we need a line. This is relevant to abortion because if one supports abortion, then one agrees that we need to draw the line somewhere, but that line isn't set in stone/handed down from heaven, it's the best place to put it.
    Would that make it wrong for a meat-eater to be anti-bloodsports then?
    Not wrong, hypocritical. Which I would see as a wrong/flaw/vice/sin/... But I suppose one could object to fox hunting and so forth on the grounds that animals should not be tortured, which bloodsports aren't far off from, but then you would have to ensure your meat was obtained from the animal humanely.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,105 ✭✭✭Tommy Vercetti


    Originally posted by Syth

    Not wrong, hypocritical. Which I would see as a wrong/flaw/vice/sin/... But I suppose one could object to fox hunting and so forth on the grounds that animals should not be tortured, which bloodsports aren't far off from, but then you would have to ensure your meat was obtained from the animal humanely.

    But then you'd have to contend with me disagreeing on what is humane...read the descriptions of slaughterhouses in Fast Food Nation....thousands of cows lining up to get the "humane" spike in the head. As for fox hunting, I'm happy to be a hypocrite and condone the use of extreme violence on those twats on horses who do it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭cleareyed


    Hypocrisy: the practice of professing beliefs contrary to one's actual behaviour.
    To be facetious, a vegetarian could only be accused of hypocrisy in this case if they ate the foetus. (Apologies to the sensitive among you.) I think you may have sensed an inconsistency in the position of vegetarians who suppport abortion i.e. it is wrong to kill animals for meat but it is right to kill the unborn for (insert reason of choice). Do vegetarians say it is wrong to kill living things full stop, no qualification included? I don't think they do.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    At least this guy is consistent;

    http://www.garyridgway.org/baby_photos.htm

    (WARNING - not for the squeamish)

    btw before any Mod's underwear goes into a twisty configuration;

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/02/23/online_baby_muncher/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,083 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    For many vegetarians it's not the simple fact that the animals are killed, it's the treatment of the animals from birth to death and the manner in which they are killed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 826 ✭✭✭vibrant


    Syth wrote:
    So the way I see it, people who are vegeatarians think it's wrong to kill animals to eat them, but if they are pro-abortion then they think it's ok to kill a foetus.

    Does anyone else think that's a it hypocritical?

    Well, it strikes me that people can choose to be vegetarian for a number of reasons. Perhaps they don't agree with animal cruelty, perhaps they realize that they don't need to eat meat in order to sustain themselves - perhaps they simply don't like meat. It is a personal choice.

    Similiarly, people can choose to be pro-life or pro-choice for a plethora of reasons too. Another personal choice.

    I really don't see the debate as valid. I can see the knee-jerk "You'll kill babies but not chickens!!1" nonsensical arguement, but to me, that just doesn't stand up at all. I just can't make the link between both choices, to me, they're simply not the same thing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,064 ✭✭✭Gurgle


    What if we humanly killed murderers & ran them through a grinder to be served up as a MacMurderer meal ?

    Or better, in the interests of efficiency, entertainment & non-hypocracy we could release a batch of prisoners, hunt them down, cook them & eat them, thus saving the lives of innocent foxes, cows, pigs, sheep etc.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Gurgle wrote:
    What if we humanly killed murderers & ran them through a grinder to be served up as a MacMurderer meal ?
    Mmmmm... Sociopathic...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,865 ✭✭✭Syth


    Gurgle wrote:
    What if we humanly killed murderers & ran them through a grinder to be served up as a MacMurderer meal ?
    "I'll have a McMurder meal please. ... Oh what toy could I get? ... Cool 'Battered Wife'! ... What if I SuperSize it? ... I get the kids too! Cool, KiddyNuggets!"

    :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,366 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Gurgle wrote:
    What if we humanly killed murderers & ran them through a grinder to be served up as a MacMurderer meal ?

    Or better, in the interests of efficiency, entertainment & non-hypocracy we could release a batch of prisoners, hunt them down, cook them & eat them, thus saving the lives of innocent foxes, cows, pigs, sheep etc.
    I like the idea personally. Not sure how good it'd taste but it'd be one cheap way of getting rid of the bastards.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Sleepy wrote:
    Not sure how good it'd taste
    Like chicken.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement