Jesse Tiffen
I once believed so strongly in the tenets of vegetarianism, I continued to recommend that others become vegetarian years after I became a vegan. Over time I learned that the ethical implications of a vegetarian diet are essentially the same as an omnivorous diet. Vegetarians still consume dairy and eggs and therefore the environmental costs of raising animals are not assuaged. Vegetarianism often does not necessarily result in any serious changes in one’s health, and the treatment of animals in egg-producing chicken farms and dairy farms are still unethical. Personally, I do not identify with the rhetoric of animal rights sympathizers; however, if you are a vegetarian that claims to adhere to the tenets of vegetarianism, you must realize the lack of moral distinction between an omnivorous and vegetarian diet.
As pointed out in the film “Vegucated,” a typical dairy cow is forced to produce 340 percent more milk today than she would had to produce in 1950. Like any other mammal, a cow will not produce milk unless she is, or recently had been, pregnant. To ensure constant milk production, cows are constantly impregnated and therefore constantly giving birth. If the baby is male, he is sent to a veal slaughterhouse. The mother cow will then be impregnated continually until she is too old and is sold for low-grade hamburger meat. The beef and dairy industry are inseparable and you cannot support one without supporting the other.
Vegetarians who consume eggs still indirectly contribute to the death of 200 million male chicks each year. Understandably, male chicks are considered useless because they won’t lay eggs and do not produce enough meat, and therefore are sorted out from the female chicks and killed immediately. They are either ground alive for fertilizer or used as feed for other chickens. However, hatcheries often simply dispose of live male chicks in garbage bags and dumpsters. This is obviously unethical and wasteful, but even more importantly contradicts the tenets of vegetarianism.
Producers bank on the fact that many consumers never actually question and personally examine their practices. The labels “free range,” “organic” and “humane” often carry much less meaning than consumers attribute to them. Farms that are labeled as organic or humane and local do not ensure anything about their environmental impact, the treatment of animals or the health of the products. There are no national standards for how these “humanely raised animals” are to be transported; therefore, producers will use eye-catching labels and trendy phrases whenever they want, regardless of actual conditions. Farm animals are not covered under the Animal Welfare Act. Therefore, regardless of whatever “humane labels” producers claim to adhere to, animals are still treated the same way.
Don’t believe me? Call your local free range or cruelty-free farmer and find out for yourself. Again, I’m not one to identify with the rhetoric of animal rights activists, but it is simply incorrect to imply exploitation exists only on some levels of factory farms or only particular types of farms.
It’s pretty simple: if you’re not okay with animals being killed on your behalf, want to enjoy the benefits of a meat-free diet or limit your carbon footprint through your diet, then veganism is the only ethically consistent choice.
I truly am not trying to browbeat here or assert that I’m the morally superior good guy and vegetarians and omnivores are the villains, but you must be careful to separate yourself from the bigger picture if you claim to adhere to the ethics.
Don’t get me wrong, vegetarianism is something I think everyone should at least try at some point in their life, as veganism for social or economic reasons is often a far too overwhelming switch, but vegetarianism should be utilized as a stepping stone to a greater understanding of a plant based diet rather than an excuse for naïve complacency in one’s diet.