Argument Synthesizing Multiple Texts: Vegetarian Behavior
In the course of life, people hold to certain convictions thatdetermine their behavior patterns. The people holding a commongeneral ideology could manifest the kind of life that could besimilar, but that could have a different explanation for the way oflife. Those living a kind of life have varying reasons for theirchoices, and that informs their readiness to live according to theideals for it. In the course of life, the vegetarians are a group ofpeople that has the characteristic of avoiding animal food andespecially meat. Some people think that eating animal flesh is wrongbecause it leads to violations the rights to life for the animals.Some others hold their positions in the belief in vegetarianismbecause they have seen it as a way of inflicting pain on animals andas inhumane dealing. The choice of being a vegetarian is a complexdecision by the people as they have different reasons for undertakingthe belief. While some of the reasons to support the affiliation tothe belief could be strong and good, some others are basic and mightbe unconvincing. The assessment of the reasons behind the choice ofbecoming vegetarian shows that it is more consequential that it is achoice.
Animal rights have been the main reasons why people have wanted toavoid eating meat in the course of life. In the convictions, manypeople have embarked on avoiding eating animal flesh because theyhave argued that they need to protect the right to life for animals.According to Singer (1-2), animals have their rights to propertreatment. In treating animals, it is necessary that people shouldavoid any dealing that might lead to unnecessary torture of animalswhen they kill them for food. In many aspects of human life, peoplethink that eating food from animals lead to loss of life and it maycause a form of discomfort in the event that the animal has to giveup some of or all of their products to people for consumption. Whilethe idea is important in explaining why people ought to adopt thevegetarian lifestyle, it has failed to determine the clarity of waysto advocates for animal rights determine the existence of the feelingof the animals. The ideology of torture of animals seeks to emphasizethe reasons why people ought not to commercialize the animalagriculture.
Animal rights seek to achieve the humane treatment of animals inevery aspect of dealing with them. The treatment of animals that leadthem to suffer violates their rights and ought not to be part oflife. According to Reagan (1-2), use of animals to conduct thescientific study is wrong as it causes some of the animals todeteriorate in their health or even die. The animals used to conducttests for some biological conditions and medicine has been some waysthat people have violated the right to life for animals. Reagan hasidentified that traditional agriculture in which people rare animalsin confined places could be good but when it comes to violation oftheir rights through use in medical sciences, it is bad. Walker (139)argued that human beings were subjecting animals to unnecessarypainful situations that could lead them to unnecessary suffering. Theunderstanding has been the reason behind the choice of some thevegetarians to avoid eating animal flesh. According to advocates ofanimal rights, the general idea that animals should not be part ofthe commercial endeavors that people undertake is a manifestation ofrespect for their rights.
The vegetarians that are passionate about their following of theirideology of avoiding animal flesh in their food have adopted itbecause of their health issues. In many instances, animal flesh hasbeen the main source excessive cholesterol that has led to unhealthylives of some people. Avoiding animal products has proven one of theways that people have adopted in ensuring that they can sustain lowquantities of cholesterol in the body. Some people find avoidinganimal flesh as the only alternative when the medical experts advisethem on the reduction of cholesterol. While the people could havecontinued to use the animal protein if the doctors failed to warnthem of their usage, they have adopted a negative attitude againstthe people who use them. The vegetarians discourage the consumptionof animal flesh because of the biased perception they have abouttheir consumption (Fraser, 1-3). Some ardent vegetarians started byexperiencing the health complications before they could advocate forthe animal rights to adopt their status.
Some ardent followers of vegetarian lifestyle have abandoned thehabit after holding it for some time. Some vegetarians have arguedthat they adopted the way of life to conform to the situation thatwas in their environments. According to Foer (2-3), his decision tobe a vegetarian was because of his personal sense of life rather thanthe acknowledgment of animal rights. Foer realized that he had a formof morality that made him protect the lives of animals. He identifiedthat he became a vegetarian because he did not want the situation inwhich an animal has to lose its life for him to eat. The confessionof Foer is an indication of the diversity of the reasons thatunderlie the choice of people to opt to be on not to be vegetarians.The argument on the animal rights was an important thing thatinformed the choice to be a vegetarian for some people.
Vegetarians have had their reasons for the choice of their way oflife informed by their willingness to conform to a subculture of agroup. Fraser (2) identified that vegetarian eating habit was aprofound attitude of the people who were lesbians. Narrating herstory, Fraser (1) chose to conform to vegetarian attitude because shewanted to affirm her position in the society. Fraser said that shewanted to prove her importance as a minority among a majority societyby becoming a lesbian. The habit of many of the lesbians was to adoptthe vegetarian behavior although not all of them did that. However,the many people who were in lesbianism identified themselves byavoiding eating animal flesh. Fraser became a vegetarian to fit inthe minority community of the lesbians in the society. Apart frombeing one of the ways to identify the lesbians in the midst of amajority group, lesbians did not identify the problem of engaging ineating animal flesh.
Many people who have adopted the consumption of nonanimal food havetheir argument on the protection of animal rights. According toSinger (1-3), people need to indicate a form of fairness when dealingwith animals. The idea has garnered the support of some people likeWalker, who argued that people are violent on animals and ought tostop the undertaking (Walker 139-140). In many ways, although theidea seems to be very good for people in the society, it has beendifficult to justify the animal right philosophy among people becausesome of the vegetarians who have different convictions as to why thechoice of their eating behavior is suitable. Using animals as food,according to some people, need to undergo some scrutiny so that theexercise does not violate the animal rights. The arguments of Reagan,Walker, and Singer have shown that animals experience some form ofinhumane treatment from humans.
While it is good to argue against the idea of using animals as foodand adopting the vegetarian lifestyle, much remain unanswered becausethe reasons for adoption of the behavior are vague. Some people whohad adopted the vegetarian lifestyle identified personal reasons, andthat might not show that they are in support of the animal rightphilosophy. Although the adoption of the vegetarian attitude has beenat the center of any argument in support of the vegetarians` way oflife, it has failed to offer the conviction about the relationshipthat ought to exist among people. The idea that some of the peoplewho had adopted the vegetarian attitude have abandoned it is anindication that although it could be popular, it is not a goodstrategy of life. In some instances, the health conditions and thepersonal ideologies have preceded the decision to hold or to neglectvegetarianism. It remains, therefore, that vegetarianism is a habitmore consequential than it is a choice.
Foer,Jonathan Safran. Youare What You Eat.(n.d). Print
Fraser, Laura. Why I Stopped Being aVegetarian: It`s anti-social, not necessarily healthful—andbesides, meat tastes good! (n.d).Print.
Reagan,Tom. The Case forAnimal Rights. (n.d)Print.
Singer,Peter. A VegetarianPhilosophy. (n.d).Print.
Walker,Alice. Am I blue?(n.d). Print.