Plants create oxygen from carbon dioxide for me to breathe. They give us life, without them we would all be dead anyways. However, I find it quite funny that you find it that we should be eating only vegetables, fruits, etc.
If we all did that, there would not be enough oxygen reproduction from plants to keep us alive and breathing. Animals on the other hand produce carbon dioxide, which allows the plants to live so in return, if we kill all the animals there wouldn't be enough food source for the plants.
Equilibrium is what life is all about. If one thing is done too much, it is bad. That's why in my opinion, being an omnivore is the best way to go about your diet. You get the best of both worlds. There is also less competition as if there isn't enough plant life to eat, there will be enough animal life to eat. If there aren't enough animals to eat, plant life will be increased because it's not being eaten as much because there aren't a lot of animals to eat it; which would result in an abundance of plant life to eat.
I really think omnivores have the advantage when it comes to survival. Certain things taste good or act as a "drug" as you say because of the fact when we get certain things in our body, our body releases certain chemicals to reward us/make us feel good for doing something the body needs. Doing so tells us subconsciously that we need to keep doing it, and we seek those "pleasures".
In the term of it being morally wrong to kill and eat other creatures, I think morale is silly in the first place, and is really only something we as a civilization have created in order to maintain order in our communities. This is not a bad thing, but you have to realize that it is not morally wrong to do certain things when it comes to survival as our ancestors have clearly realized was important. This shows in quite a few of our laws when it comes to exceptions. It is wrong to kill, but this is overlooked if it was in self defense. Meaning, it was required in order to survive or live.
This may also apply to stealing. Is it really wrong to steal say a $5 meal from a store to survive because you're starving? In our society you will most likely not get into much trouble for stealing little bits of food if you're quite recognizably starving, or w/e. In fact, a lot of people would actually not think twice about helping someone in need if they really look that desperate. Now, some people have gone to jail for stealing food but does it really hurt them to go to jail? If they're homeless, they're being sent to a sheltered area and being given free food. Whether that food is good or not, it is better than nothing. In fact, if I was homeless and wasn't able to get back up on my feet I would steal to purposely get sent to jail.
I do think that hunting for "game" or sport is wrong, and that you should only kill other animals when you are going to eat it. I really like fishing, but I can't stand to eat fish. I would only keep the fish if I knew it was going to be eaten by someone else that I was with. I'm actually a person that is quite butthurt about our populations obsession of overproducing for the sake of the economy as if we only produce what we need, then some jobs will require less amount of labor resulting in less pay, resulting in a weaker buying power, etc. So we keep production up to keep jobs hours up, so people can buy the products regardless if there are leftovers afterwards. (I find this not a very stable way to do things in the long run)
There is nothing wrong with being a vegetarian or whatever, but it does not make you any better than anyone. Some people who are only carnivores may see it as you eating their oxygen production, and indirectly polluting their air by killing off plants that would clean it.
Last edited by DruggedPanda; Nov 3, 2016 at 05:49 AM.