Rationale: Meat-Eating, Barack Obama, and Abortion (My Rant)

Title says it.

I just finished watching a video on the internet which showed extensive footage of cows being slaughtered. I watched the cows dispelled from these machines and shot out into a small boxed-in area whilst they slipped and slided on the blood of the previous cows. Then they had their throats cut. Obviously, this is terrible. And in the most literal sense of the word, this is inhumane as well. Yet, I still love meat. I will not stop eating meat. Why? Well, BECAUSE I love meat. I love the way it tastes. So what does this say about me? I don't know. That's probably not up to me to say, since people are going to make their own judgments anyway. But I do know this: I'm going to continue eating meat because I want to. Nietzsche once said that "good is what you like and bad is what you don't like." I don't like that quote. But I will say that I understand it.

This is my thinking: Everything that we like, we want to defend because we think it is good. And everything, every belief that is, starts with an assumption. In this case: I love meat. Meat is good. Even though animals are slaughtered in order for me to enjoy a piece of meat, I still condone the killing of animals FOR meat. How? Because I have built upon my assumption, and rationalized my feelings. (Which isn't to say that I'm not wrong.) I have used a neo-Darwinian theory as what some would call a "cop-out": We're just simply higher on the food chain than cows and pigs and chickens. Of course animal cruelty is wrong, but I believe that there are certain animal's whose species' job is to provide food for other species (like domestic cows to humans). Or at least until they get out of that "food chain gutter groove". It's cruel, and it's a "might is right" philosophy, but that's the way nature is.

So then I started thinking about another gruesome video I had seen on the internet recently: a video on abortion. And i started thinking: Isn't it fucked up that some people are all for animals' rights, and yet they can endure scooping the brains out of a fetus? Well, obviously, pro-choicers [should] recognize, as the insidious Barack Obama points out, that abortion is ALWAYS a moral decision. Obama claims that he does not know anyone that is "pro-abortion," only that he doesn't presume to be more in-the-know about an abortion situation than the mother/vessel of the child in the womb. I agree: I don't think he is "in-the-know" about that kind of thing, either. But I know that he is faced with the shocking evidence: the gruesome bloodied pictures of tiny, tiny fetuses with their brains dashed out; only inches long, they lay sprawled across the gloves of abortionist surgeons, headless, feet not moving, hands not clenching. They are lifeless, fleshy bundles of dead potential. I know that even if Mr. Obama isn't aware of these things, that he at least knows that they exist. But he has chosen to ignore these things---at least insofar as he can rationalize his original abortion stance/perspective. That's what we all do in life, isn't it? We back up evolution over Creationism or vice-versa, and BOTH sides absolutely have the "facts". Or at least they are quick to point out that the other side does not. We are quick to defend Democratic candidates as the "best one," yet (even if we claim to be open-minded) we are seldom swayed by the opposition. I'm okay with that kind of ignorance, though. I know that's how the world works. And if we DIDN'T have that kind of ignorance, if we had TOO much of an open mind, we'd be just as wishy-washy as that guy John Kerry. So, we need to have a stance. And Barack Obama and his robots and all the pro-choicers (I call that way of thinking "pro-death") all have their stance. And they are, except for a select few, not changing their ways.

BUT WHY? What is THEIR rationalization?

I think the answer to this question can be related to my perspective on why I'm still going to eat meat after seeing all that footage: Just as I justified my meat-eating and thus the slaughtering of animals for consumption on the basis that they are inferior to me, so do the women that abort their babies justify the senseless killing of their unborn children by assuming that they are inferior to them. It is this kind of thinking that spawns malevolent dictatorships for ALL people.

The alternative to this is that the women do NOT assume that their unborn children are inferior to them. Okay. Then they'd be EQUAL to them. And if the fetus is equal, wouldn't its say in the matter also be equal? Instead, it is silenced before it can say anything. Does anyone honestly think that an unborn child, given the chance, would sincerely opt not to at least EXPERIENCE life and decide for itself if it wanted to live or not? But since the child is unborn, and has not experienced life, hypothetically it would not know the possible tragedy that lay ahead of them, even if it was explained to the child that they were a child of rape or incest. So this is the kind of rationlization America has resorted to, and, say what you want about my meat-eating policies, but at least I have a high regard for HUMAN life (and all other life for that matter).


That's it.