Okay, so I really hope no one takes any offense to this question - I've been vegetarian for quite a few years, but I've always wondered how other vegetarians and vegans feel about free range meat products? I ask not because I miss meat or would like to go back to eating it again (EW!), but simply out of curiosity.

I sometimes feel like maybe I'm vegetarian for very different reasons than most others. I feel very strongly that humans were created to eat both vegetables and meat, but that we have crossed that line horrible - we were never meant to take animals hostage and cage and torture them and breed them for death.

But my somewhat-newbie logic leads me to believe that there may not be that much wrong with free range products? I really just wanted to see how others out there feel about it. I live in south Georgia so I'm really the only of my "kind" here... there's really no one else here to ask about this unless I want an ear-full of "Eat meat, you crazy hippie!" It'd be great to hear what you have to say about this! Thanks!!

Check out this post. This may help clear up what free range really is.
http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showpost.php?p=1190550&postcount=1

The animals in the photos have barely enough room to move about freely. Free range is just an elaborate marketing ploy.

I don't think we were created or meant to eat meat or anything else, and I think free range meat is unethical because killing is wrong.

I don't think we were created or meant to eat meat or anything else, and I think free range meat is unethical because killing is wrong.


I don't know much at all about free range meat, except that it seems like a good idea if it's actually done the way it's marketed. But (and, okay, ignorant question, I know...) why are humans not meant to eat meat? I personally don't like the way it's done, and so I choose not to support it by eating meat, but what about human beings makes us not created to eat meat? I'm just wondering because I've been in countless debates with meat eaters about this and I have nothing good to say when they ask this question, except to claim the way it's done is wrong.

Ultimately, though, it

I don't know much at all about free range meat, except that it seems like a good idea if it's actually done the way it's marketed. But (and, okay, ignorant question, I know...) why are humans not meant to eat meat?
Well if you believe in God, there's some debate about us being created to eat meat, with Eden being vegan and all that.

And if you're an atheist/agnostic, then there is nothing that could "mean" us to do anything. Nature and evolution has no meaning, it's just a process. You can say that our bodies are suitable for consuming meat, but that doesn't mean that it is some kind of destiny for us to do so.

Not sure why my msg got cut off...let me try again...

Ultimately, though, it

I don't think there's any sense in debating meat eaters along the lines of humans were "meant" to do such and such. Simply choosing not to eat meat because you don't want animals to suffer and die is a good enough reason, and there's plenty to debate about on that front.

I don't think there's any sense in debating meat eaters along the lines of humans were "meant" to do such and such. Simply choosing not to eat meat because you don't want animals to suffer and die is a good enough reason, and there's plenty to debate about on that front.I would argue, though, that ideas of both "natural" and "meant to", are a very central reason why people eat meat.

I would argue, though, that ideas of both "natural" and "meant to", are a very central reason why people eat meat.


I don't think so, I think they do it because they like to eat it, and justify their desires by claiming they were "meant to."

Free-range/organic meat done in a sustainable way is leaps and bounds better than the typical meat found. Especially nutritionally-speaking, such meats contain good amounts of omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids. This in no way compares to the high numbers of Omega fatty acids found in wild game. I think it's what gives wild game meat the "gamey" taste, though I never tried it before. Some believe it's because of eating this meat that brought along the oppurtunity for our ancestors to grow bigger brains. Speaking of brains, our ancestors probably ate the animal brains which have a 1 to 1 ratio of omega6 to 3. This balance is important in our diet. I personally believe humans are best adapted to eating animals and plants, but with our knowledge now we can change to just plant-based diet for optimal health. I don't think the B-12 issue is why humans have been eating meat in the past.

I don't think so, I think they do it because they like to eat it, and justify their desires by claiming they were "meant to."It's true that they like to eat it, but I think they allow their desire for the taste of meat to override animal welfare because of their ideas about a "natural order of things". But this is just my speculation of course :)

It's true that they like to eat it, but I think they allow their desire for the taste of meat to override animal welfare because of their ideas about a "natural order of things". But this is just my speculation of course :)


It's possible. :)

Thanks Zasko; that's definitely the information I was looking for. I'll definitely look further into what free range really is though, since many believe it's not the humane process it markets itself as.


Well if you believe in God, there's some debate about us being created to eat meat, with Eden being vegan and all that.

And if you're an atheist/agnostic, then there is nothing that could "mean" us to do anything. Nature and evolution has no meaning, it's just a process. You can say that our bodies are suitable for consuming meat, but that doesn't mean that it is some kind of destiny for us to do so.

I am actually atheist, but I look at nature in the same way most people view religion. That's why it seems to me that nature did create us as both meat and plant eaters. I do think nature "means" for us to do certain things in life (at least if we want to keep ourselves in balance with nature and other natural beings). I would hate to see vegetarians and vegans use a religious arguement for their diet; there's so much more to it than that.

I have trouble with the whole "natural" thing. And the idea of "in balance withnature" it seems to me, there's no way to operate outside of nature's laws, just that one's actions will have an effect that can be predicted (raise sickly animals in confinement, eat them, and get sick yourself, etc). To me, human actions are "natural" but not always "a good idea." For many reasons, factory animal raising is not a good idea, apart from animal welfare issues.

If nature created us with brains and hands which can figure out alternate ways of getting adequate nutrition without eating meat, why would you argue that nature "meant" for us to eat meat?

Just curious about your reasons.

What kills me is when people generalize for others. I am human and I know I was not meant to eat meat.

Killing is killing no matter the state you found the animal in, free range or caged. Meat is Murder, enough said.

What kills me is when people generalize for others. I am human and I know I was not meant to eat meat.

Killing is killing no matter the state you found the animal in, free range or caged. Meat is Murder, enough said.


Well then stop mowing your lawn, don't plant anything in your yard; in fact, don't even build a house. You're murdering thousands of creatures.


I don't think cold, hard judgements like these will get anyone anywhere. We wonder why most meat-eaters think we're crazy, yet we can't come up with a better argument than "meat is murder." I think if we can come to a logical agreement that the effects of killing innocent creatures for food is detrimental to far too many natural creatures, we will have a much stronger argument.

I have trouble with the whole "natural" thing. And the idea of "in balance withnature" it seems to me, there's no way to operate outside of nature's laws, just that one's actions will have an effect that can be predicted (raise sickly animals in confinement, eat them, and get sick yourself, etc). To me, human actions are "natural" but not always "a good idea." For many reasons, factory animal raising is not a good idea, apart from animal welfare issues.

If nature created us with brains and hands which can figure out alternate ways of getting adequate nutrition without eating meat, why would you argue that nature "meant" for us to eat meat?

Just curious about your reasons.


You're absoultely right... I suppose I didn't say what I meant clearly enough. I just wanted to explain that we will work in balance with nature much better in one way as opposed to another. There is a specific way nature "wants" us to live; if we choose not to live in this way, we will simply create more problems for ourselves and everything else. And so this would mean that, considering our society and time/place and other circumstances, not eating meat is the best decision. That's mostly what I was trying to say. But I completely agree with you...

Well then stop mowing your lawn, don't plant anything in your yard; in fact, don't even build a house. You're murdering thousands of creatures.


I don't think cold, hard judgements like these will get anyone anywhere. We wonder why most meat-eaters think we're crazy, yet we can't come up with a better argument than "meat is murder." I think if we can come to a logical agreement that the effects of killing innocent creatures for food is detrimental to far too many natural creatures, we will have a much stronger argument.

Well, I can't imagine a better argument than meat is murder. I can come up with a ton of 'arguments' but meat is murder is the most expressive of why I personally don't eat meat. I was not intending to 'argue' anyway, just expressing my opinion which is the point of this board.

People don't eat meat for a number of reasons, health seems to be a big reason which is fine because the end result is the animals aren't tortured and eaten. I honestly believe that murdering an animal for their meat is wrong. It is my intention to express this point to others in hopes that they will understand that killing an animal is murder which in turn will serve as an impetus to not murder animals. You go about things your way and I'll go about my way.

For future reference, don't read my posts.

I just realized that you started this thread so I'm not going to post here anymore. For future reference, if you don't want someone's opinion don't ask for it. You asked how people feel about free range and I told you, you just didn't want to hear what I had to say.

I just realized that you started this thread so I'm not going to post here anymore. For future reference, if you don't want someone's opinion don't ask for it. You asked how people feel about free range and I told you, you just didn't want to hear what I had to say.


I appologize. I wasn't trying to be rude - only trying to bring up a point against what seems to me to be a very weak argument. I too am vegetarian, so I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong. I just wish more vegetarians and vegans could express more logical arguments - because "meat is murder" is obviously not working on the general public.

It's not that we don't want to hear what you have to say, madpoet, it's that you're not making much sense. Why is killing an animal murde, but killing a plant is not? Why do you draw the line there?

Hm... by the way, I also just realized - you said you were only giving your opinion, and that I didn't want to hear it so I shouldn't ask for it next time.... Yet everyone else was really helpful, yet all you said was, exactly:

"Killing is killing no matter the state you found the animal in, free range or caged. Meat is Murder, enough said."

Good argument.

I really want to understand more about free range and why it's bad. I don't want to hear cheesy slogans that I hear every single day by mindless vegetarians.

You still didn't have anything to say about my post: Why do you mow your lawn then? I'm serious; I wasn't just being argumentative.

using/slaughtering animals in "free-range" situations (which can mean any number of things, from factory farming scenarios to (rare) actual pasture-access) still involves the commodification of sentient-life. It still involves stealing from feeling conscious beings their only lives. Marketing the "products" as humane alternatives only serves to put a positive image on all of the inherent cruelty involved in farming animals for food.

Making people feel like they're doing animals a favor or patting them on the back in that way for consuming them (and their eggs/milk) doesn't move them farther along toward "getting it" and removing animal cruelty from their diets. If anything it only legitimates their "natural right" to take lives on behalf of their taste buds whenever they please, while going the extra step and considering it to be actively compassionate. I think the movement of promoting free-range/organic animal products as animal-friendly alternatives is counter-intuitive and runs a serious risk of increasing peoples' ability/willingness to disconnect emotionally from the would-be victims of their behaviors and lifestyle.

There is a specific way nature "wants" us to live; if we choose not to live in this way, we will simply create more problems for ourselves and everything else. And so this would mean that, considering our society and time/place and other circumstances, not eating meat is the best decision.Well you want others to come up with convincing arguments so could you, too, expound on how nature "wants" (even with the quotation marks) us to do something, and what are the problems that will be created if we don't do so?