The Morality of Eating Meat

As I mentioned (but did not elaborate on) in my earlier post on avian flu and our eating habits, there's a moral dimension to the way we handle animals we raise for food these days. I know for many who embrace vegetarianism, they do so because they feel that eating meat is immoral, or if not immoral per se, then perhaps "less" moral than endeavoring to avoid it. But in my experience, this moral proscription that many vegetarians impose upon themselves is not based upon Judeo-Christian religious beliefs and teachings. In fact, many Christians believe that God has given them the right to use the world as they see fit, including the eating of animals, and are untroubled by doing so. But in Newsweek, Rabbi Marc Gellman makes that case that although God has permitted man to eat meat, He would prefer that we do so only when we must:

As Rav Kook, the first chief rabbi of the State of Israel taught, in Genesis 1:29 God clearly limits the diet of the first people to fruits and vegetables. Only after ten generations of corruption from Adam to Noah, at the end of the flood God offers a low Torah carnivorous concession to Noah and his descendants, “Every living thing that moves shall now also be yours for food.” (Genesis 9:3) However, God quickly adds the limitation of not eating meat with its blood in it (v.4) and the caution that there will be a reckoning for all blood we shed (v.5). The end result is a clear though subtle spiritual message that we can eat meat if we must, but we should work toward the high Torah goal of not wanting to.

As I stated above, many Christians believe that God permits them to eat animals as they please. But significantly, not all Christians feel this way:

One reason some vegetarians have chosen to not eat meat, is because the exploitation of animals is very troublesome to them. Is the exploitation of animals in the manner just mentioned displeasing to God? Of course! God loves His creation and even cares about what happens to sparrows! If your conscience bothers you about eating some of the commercially-raised meat, don't eat it. However, if it doesn't bother you (or you don't know where the meat came from), eat it as you feel led. This is scriptural, as stated in Romans 14:2-3, "One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The mans who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him."

In short, while it is not explicitly a sin to eat meat, even meat that is a product of animals raised in factory farms, it is displeasing to God, and each man's conscience should be his guide in this regard.

I am not a Christian, and so the commandments of the bible do not dictate my behavior. But of course many of my moral beliefs are shared by Christians, and vice versa, and as the Christians above find that the exploitation of animals mentioned above is displeasing to God, so too do I find it offensive.

It's inarguable that for much of our history, we have relied upon animals as food simply because we had to do so to survive. In many places in the world, this is still true. Where people are poor, or have no other choice, they must eat meat even if that meat is the product of factory farms in which animals are treated horrendously before they die, even if they happen to believe that it's wrong. And yet here in our country, and in other more prosperous parts of the world, it has become possible for many people to live without eating meat at all, and live comfortably.

But like the christians I cite above, I do not believe that it is "sinful" for people to eat meat, even when they do not need to. Instead-as they say-we must each be guided by our conscience. My conscience allows me to make a rough distinction between animals that are raised in factory farms and killed for food, and animals that are raised on more "traditional" farms and ranches and killed for food. Though in the end a cow may be killed for it's meat, to me there is a critical moral distinction between an animal that is raised in a pen, dosed with anti-biotics, growth hormones and other drugs, and killed on an assembly line that too often results in anything but a quick and painless death, and an animal that is raised in the open, in a more "natural" habitat, healthy and free of drugs that force it to grow artificially, that is in fact killed quickly and as painlessly as possible before it is cut up for consumption.

Thus I believe that to the greatest extent possible, people should avoid eating meat or other animal products that comes from animals raised in factory farms in squalid conditions that strip them of their dignity as animals.

As I mentioned at the top of my post, many vegetarians believe that it is always wrong to eat meat, and so they would refuse meat from animals raised in even the most pleasant of conditions. But as the christians I cite above state, it is a matter of faith as to who chooses what. I could not in good faith look down upon someone who believes-also in good faith-that it is okay to eat meat. Nor should a vegetarian in good faith look down upon me for making a distinction based upon how animals are raised. But I also believe there are important limits to this test. I do not believe it shows good faith to dismiss the sufferings of animals raised as food simply because that gets in the way of a cheap, tasty hamburger. Nor is it good faith to dismiss the sufferings of animals simply because they are "animals", and not worthy of such concern.

In our society, with it's focus on products and services being cheap and convenient, we've reduced animals to a commodity whose suffering is irrelevant as to what and how we decide to eat. But this is a matter of convenience, and not survival, at least for us here in the richest country in the world. I think that slowly, we are beginning to realize there is another, more "moral" approach to animals and our consumption of them, beyond "mere" practical concerns.