This must be something that the whole world agrees on, therfore it must be something basic.
No killing
No stealing
No rape
No slavery
No kidnapping
No assault
anything I'm missing? anything needs clarification?
If you agree please post that you agree.
No killing
No stealing
No rape
No slavery
No kidnapping
No assault
anything I'm missing? anything needs clarification?
If you agree please post that you agree.
posted by:
|
Canada
|
-
Re: Global Constitution
02/13We are all one, I is us. I am the raven that flies through the sky, I am the oak that stands strong through time, I am the volcano, erupting into the night. therefore, the mandade of no killing, raping or stealing is not restricted to humans. in this way, our constitution as basic as it is, extends to ALL Gaia, thus implying that environmental protection IS the fundamental mandate of the Global Government.
the issue: I like eating Chicken. this is killing, yet the chicken would die anyway, and I am the one who protects the chicken and feeds it, so its life is forfeit to me, but then essentialy I kidnapped the Chiken from the earth a LONG time ago, so I am at fault. BUT NO wildebeast has ever died of old age, when weak they are eaten by predators who are ever present, so then the predators must be jailed, but if we don't feed them meat they die, if we do fead them meat we are killers and should bve locked up with them.
Indeed, I have canine teeth and I evolved as an omnivore. we must find the ballance.
so then do we draw a line between what animals it is and isn't alright to kill?
personal, I feel that if all animals roamed free, and I had to hunt for my food, then I don't have an issue with eating meat, as whilst in the wilderness I am also prey to other beasts.
however, our poulation has grown too big for us to be sustained by hunting wild game, we NEED herding and farming to support our numbers and our civilizations.
on what moral, ethical and rational basis CAN we make this decision? -
-
Re: Global Constitution
02/13I see the ethics of eating and killing as such:
Personally, I strongly feel that animal foods provide us with nutritional components simply not avaliable in plants. This includes natural, correct form vitamin D, vitamin A (Retinol, NOT beta carotene) saturated fat (yes, we do need this) and a wide array of trace elements that are more sparce in plants.
Evidence shows us that the body's ability to convert plant based sources of vitamin D, and beta carotene -> retinol, only occurs on a reasonable level in IDEAL health. I think it is very safe to say, with the level of toxins in our environment, virtually none of us are in ideal health. Even then, the levels that are converted simply do not reach adequate amounts, that correlate to the levels found in isolated primitive peoples, who are free from degenerative disease, and also commonly live to 100 plus years of age, have 0 birth defects, and incredible stamina and abiltiy to withstand the elements.
Knowing this, we can now look at ethics of killing.
I picture a cow to be it's happiest and healthiest eating grass in a meadow, surrounded by the love of nature.
I want to give this cow this experience, because my intuitions tell me its important to embrace all life.
Now, I need to apply this to myself to, otherwise I am a blatant hypocrit.
So can I then, with the information above, choose not to kill the cow, removing my ability to obtain the greatest degree of health?
If I give this aspect to the cow, and not myself, it is not logical.
I love the cow, I bless the soul that resided with it when I eat it.
So I see no problem with killing it, provided that cow was raised in what I would concider a happy healthy environment.
This logic came to me after reading an article about the ethics of eating meat, at the Weston Price foundation.
Its views clicked with me and have enriched the way I consume. I choose meats and animal products from ethical farms, that cherish life.
I believe it may help you find the answers you asked for in the above post.
www.westonaprice.org/healthi...eat.html
Farming animals has distinct advantages over wild, PROVIDED we pay attention to their needs.
These animals have been selectively chosen to offer higher amounts of healthy fats, and better quality nutrient levels.
If someone has to argue that higher fat is bad for you, I suggest you read an article reviewing results of a brand new, large scale study.
www.theomnivore.com/WHI_Feb_2006.html
-
