World events

They do already, don't they? Doesn't bother me at all.

Horse steak is notably tougher than its beef counterpart, and requires some meticulous cooking.
I'm not a big fan.

Smoked horse meat however is quite yummie. Very game-y and I would say most reminiscent of deer (not too far a stretch to make, I guess). Quite salty and savoury.

Thye don't, actually: it's a Korean specialty.
And only dogs.
Apparently cat meat is like rubber! (Good for them )

As to the (culturally induced) morality of it, like Jon, I have no problems

As Timmer has said, as long as the animal hasn't suffered any serious pain or distress, then I don't have so much of a problem with it. But unfortunately that's not always the case, so I've been avoiding meat for quite a while for the sake of simplicity. I also figured if I couldn't kill my own cats and dogs for food in any normal circumstance -nor do I want to personally slaughter a cow or pig- then I should probably avoid eating those meats altogether. If my survival depended on it, I would kill any one of these animals. (Perhaps not my own pets though, purely for emotional reasons. I don't know.)

I have slaughtered a turkey and a chicken before, but I admit I didn't feel good about it. In an ideal circumstance, I do think it's important for meat eaters to be given the chance to slaughter their own food - or at the very least get to see first hand how animals are slaughtered. (Many, including myself, have felt very uneasy when visiting a slaughter house and tends to change one's perception of meat)

I wonder if synthesised meat was finally perfected, how many would stop eating meat from a living source?

I don't feel as empathetic towards fish though. I haven't had fish since my change of heart, but I'm still yet to decide whether I would eat fish or not? A fish is probably less capable of conscience experience as a cow or horse, so ethically it stands to reason that killing a fish is not the same as killing a horse. I do not consider myself a vegetarian, I just avoid eating things I wouldn't be able to kill myself or things that have the ability to flourish to certain degrees. Hmm...

In a heartbeat, of course.
Why would you kill if a perfect substitute is available?

is fabulous, particularly in a Jamaican curry

Well, I'm about to go out for the evening. If this thread doesn't have at least 150 new posts by the time I get back, I'll be amazed.

Hmmmmmmm! Sate kambing, a very famous Indonesian dish of skewered goat with lightly salted soy sauce... FINGERLICKIN' GOOD!

Oh well.
To each their colonies, eh?

Well no, you wouldn't! That's kind of my point.

So in your view, killing livestock for meat is acceptable as opposed to being good? 'Acceptable' meaning it's bad (or at least not good) but justified by the outcome. I'm curious as you obviously feel synthesised meat is a better alternative than livestock meat. (I suppose you could also argue that it would be cheaper and more economically viable.)

(Again, not a judgemental thing. I have no quarrel with people who eat meat. I'm merely curious.)

Really? All those third world and smallhold farmers who live in rural areas with no other forms of industry, whose livelihoods will be completely shattered by the advent of a corporate synthetic foodstuff? All those developing countries whose only major industry is agriculture and whose import-export income will be rendered obsolete?

And all you can say is "boo hoo"? I thought you cared more about the little man than that.

Can't really tell if you're serious or not, Jon.
But surely you don't advocate holding back scientific breakthroughs because someone could be put out of a job?

In that case we might all just as well sit back and forget about the whole thing and bask in the wonderful status quo.

(Aside from the fact that I think your argument might be far more valid for agrarian farmers than for cattlebreeders. Tending cattle solely for food (rather than the fringe products like hides or milk) is something that is rather uncommon in the third world.)

Very good points! For the most part, I agree with you there (and where I might disagree, I hopefully will have explained in my previous posts). I suppose what I meant by 'good' and 'acceptable' is whether you like the idea of killing animals for food (i.e., you believe it's good), or that it's merely acceptable (it's okay, but synthesised meat is a better alternative).

Obviously I knew that's how you felt, I just wanted to clear up where you stand on the matter. And you have!

I remember the discussion we had a few years ago in the food section (...or thread ).

I hope to share what I think about that subject, which is one of the topics I've been thinking since I was a teen (because I wanted to be a veterinarian but eventually didn't)

But not now, I'm not so clear-headed in early morning