I was discussing the topic of animal rights with my father today; naturally, my father and I share particularly different views upon the subject of animal rights. The debate got pretty intense due to the fact that we both had very valid points concerning the viewpoints we felt most strongly about.To ignite the debate, I ventured to bring up how in animal slaughter, the animals are often very ill and covered in sores. The contaminated, sick animal is swiftly chopped up for consumption. I asked my father if this bothered him, knowing that he was consuming sick animals and potentially contaminated meat. I further asked him to consider that IF MUST die due to the ignorance and sheer laziness of the majority of the human race, should these innocent creatures not die in a more sophisticated and cleanly manner? Why go through the motions of slaughtering an animal for consumption, if the meat harvested from that particular animal has the potential to impose harm upon the human population?

To counter-argue, my father reposed, “well… that’s why we cook meat.” Sure, meat must be cooked I suppose.

“But does that make the torture that these animals endure necessary?”

“Well no, but that’s life, it’s the natural order of things; organisms must die so that the higher level consumers can survive.”

The circle of life is a chain, if you will. This is the natural order of things. One organism must die in order for another to prosper. I proceeded to induce upon a partialagreement with my father pertaining to his valid statement, while my father proceeded to smile, under the impression he had won the debate. His victory was short lived.

I counter argued with him, “So, the natural order of things… your pertaining to the laws of nature, correct?”,

“Well I suppose so”, my father replied, he continued to provide for me an example.

“Say a lion is out hunting a zebra. The zebra notes the present danger, commences to make an escape, fails, and is killed. That is the natural order of things. The zebra had to die so that the lion could survive, and you vegetarians can’t disagree with nature. If you take meat away what’s the lion going to eat? If youre fighting for animal rights, then why take meat away if half of your animals eat meat?”

my father is a wise man.

I began to state, “Noone is looking to take food away from the animals, father. People consider being a vegetarian because of the sheer, unnatural horror that the animals in which our meat comes from, go through. They experience a truly horrifying death filled with confusion and fear. They are pumped full of growth hormones and fed unnatural grain to ensure plumpness before slaughter. They are kept in small enclosures, in dark rooms, and damp corridors, just waiting to die. Animals are electrocuted to ensure paralyzation; their throats are ripped open by a rusty blade while hanging upside down by chains. They are skinned, boiled alive, butchered alive and more. Nothing about the process is normal or in any way natural. Also, to counter-argue the lion scenario, the zebra saw the present danger while grazing on natural grains in an open savannah prairie. The Zebra had the chance to get away, escape, run, and, in the end, failed. The lion earned his meal because he put in the work and effort required to obtain the meat.”

My father was silent for a few moments, as the sheer brutality of the truth began to sink in.

“Furthermore, do you really think that going out to the grocery store and picking up frozen chicken wings amounts to any of the effort the lion went through to obtain his meal? Animals are slaughtered by the thousands out of sheer ignorance and laziness that the human race exhibits in present day. Also, considering my present country, America, and its shameful obesity crisis, do you not think that integration of these “old school” hunting methods would be beneficial to the betterment of current day health conditions? We could earn the meat, fair and square, instead of being worthless and taking our pick from Wallmart’s endless produce section.”

I had won the debate.