We should move towards a world where everybody is vegan

Counter Arguments: "I am not saying we should force anyone to be vegan, meat should not be illegal to consume." -You are right. You are not saying we should force anyone to be vegan. You used the word "should", which does not imply force, but instead implies obligation, as shown in the definition I provided. -Therefore, you are saying that everyone in the world is obligated to become a vegan. And I argued that not everyone is obligated to become vegan. "Killing animals is not a nice thing to do, and not doing it is the right moral thing to do, for our society." -Pro has not explained the morality bit of his argument. How is it immoral to provide your population with food? "People always say its natural to eat meat. True." -Pro has conceded that eating meat is natural for humans. If it is natural for us to eat meat, then why are we obligated to not eat meat. Why are we obligated to be unnatural, even when a lot of us don't want to? "Its not natural however, to eat the meat of any animal that has not been hunted fairly." -It's actually very natural. Even animals do it. Tigers have claws and sharp teeth. That's not fair for the prey they hunt. Yet they hunt and eat their prey for their own survival. "No, it's not what our ancestors did. However even if it was what we did, this fact alone would not be sufficient in proving its righteousness, as our ancestors did many things that we would not endorse now." -Actually, the fact that our ancestors did it is enough to justify it. If our ancestors did not develop tools to hunt and had a vegan diet, they would have gone extinct and we would not exist today. Our ancestors needed to hunt and kill animals for their survival back when they were hunter-gatherers. Vegetation alone is not enough and killing animals gave them more benefits than just food. If our ancestors had not hunted mammoths, they would have had no shelter and clothes, leaving them to freeze in the Ice Age. "The only reason most people don't think it's bad, is because they don't know enough, and they don't have to do the killing." -That is not true. I am positive most of our population knows that the meat they eat are dead animals. And many of them kill animals too. I've gone fishing several times and killed fish, which I ate. And I don't think it's bad at all. "Repetitive stress is 35 times higher in slaughter house workers than manufacture workers." -Pro has not provided a source to support this claim. -If everyone was vegan, those workers would be out of a job. I'm certain most slaughter house workers would much rather kill animals so that they can support their families than to lose their jobs and their right to eat meat. "Somebody once said "the true test of a man is in his treatment of his inferiors". If we believe this to be true then shouldn't we treat animals better than we do now? Or do you not agree with this statement?" -That quote can have multiple contrasting interpretations. -While the statement is claiming that a person's value is determined by his/her treatment of inferiors, it doesn't say that crushing your inferiors is bad nor does it say treating them better is good. -Thus, this quote does not support your stance. "So my first point is that it's wrong to make anyone suffer, I hope my opponent doesn't disagree with this." -I disagree with this. There are actually many instances in which making someone suffer can be justified. For example, murderers and rapiers suffer in prison. But is it wrong to put them in prison? -Furthermore, Pro has not explained why it's wrong to make anyone suffer. "My second argument is that it would be better for the environment and the environment is essential." -Not at all. Be it vegan or meat-eating people, the same greenhouse emissions are being made. The only time greenhouse emissions are being made off of meat is when you use fuel cook it. Killing an animal and gutting it does not release greenhouse gases. Furthermore, you cook vegan food too! -The only other way the production of meat releases greenhouse gases is through transporting them by planes and trucks to different parts of the world to be consumed. But we'd still have cars and planes if we were vegans and we'd still transport fruits and vegetables through cars and planes if we were vegans, so if the world was vegan, the environment would not be significantly helped. "It takes about 2,400 litres of clean water to make one pound of meat." -That is because animals drink water. Cows drink 150 litres of water a day. The average cattle cow that we eat lives 15 years. That means that one cow drinks 8,212,50 litres of water before it dies. Obviously it takes a lot of water to ready 1 pound of meat for consumption. -But here's the thing. Cows drink that much water whether we eat them or not. So the fact that it takes lots of water to make meat doesn't even matter because that much water is being used anyway whether we eat them or not. -Furthermore, water doesn't stay in cows forever. Cows urinate it out and it goes through the water cycle. By the time you eat the one pound of meat, that 2,400 litres of water is already in the oceans, clouds, and plants. Water is a renewable resource. We never run out of water. -Therefore, water is not an issue. "Livestock take up more land than humans! About 30% of our earth we devote to livestock." -Why is this a problem? We can't do anything about this even if we were vegan! If we became vegan, our former livestock still exist and breed, thus they still take up space and land. -The only way we can recover land back from livestock is to kill them all, which would be a huge waste of meat if we were vegan. Furthermore, vegans don't kill animals! -So, in the end, if we all become vegan, 30% of our earth are still taken by livestock and because we don't kill them, they will keep breeding and increasing in numbers. Therefore, if we become vegan, even more of our earth will be taken up by livestock that we don't kill and eat. "It would make people more healthy and thus happier and less of a burden on society." -Health and happiness are not deeply connected. As a matter of fact, I would be less happy because some of my favorite foods contain meat, milk, and cheese. And the fact that I can't eat them will make me less happy. -As mentioned in my 5th contention last round, billions of people will lose jobs. The unemployed are the burden of society economic wise. Therefore if the world was vegan people would be more of a burden on society. "Well may I ask you if you think we had an obligation to free the slaves?" -We have an obligation to free slaves because slavery violates the Human Rights I mentioned in my first contention last round. [1] -The 4th Human Right prohibits slavery. Therefore we are obligated to be against slavery. There are no Human Rights prohibiting drinking milk or eating cheese and meat, therefore we are not obligated to become vegan. "We don't have an obligation." -Pro has conceded that there is no obligation for mankind to become vegan, thus negating his resolution. "So the real question is: do you have 'being good' as an obligation or not." -People have different views of what 'being good' means. You are using your own view and trying to account for every human being in the world. -I do not follow your view of 'being good', and I was never obligated to follow your beliefs in the first place. "The morality of the world does not come the human rights treaty." -It doesn't come from you either. -However, the Human Rights is the closest thing to it mankind can get because it's the only thing almost every nation has agreed upon. "Organised animal cruelty will just be illegal. Don't you see the hypocrisy though my friend?" -Organised animal cruelty is illegal because in most cases we don't eat them. I don't see the hypocrisy. "what about the animals choices? Do they not matter?" -Humans eat animals. Animals don't want to be eaten by humans, but humans want to eat them. Humans and animals want different things. If I had to choose, I would side with my own species. "You are using the idea of rights to deny rights!" -Humans and animals have different rights, and this is due mainly to the fact that we are more intelligent than them. A human can get the right to wield weapons and drive vehicles. Animals cannot have these rights. Therefore we have different rights. "If nobody ate meat, they would be no meat products available." -Yes, but people HAVE eaten meat, and meat products have ALREADY been available! Your resolutions states "we should move towards a world where everybody is vegan", implying that all the meat eaters today stop eating meat tomorrow. "in that typical scenario that happens to us all (being stranded in the wilderness), eating an animal to survive is survival" -Pro has conceded again that there are instances in which not being vegan is allowed. "Food reduction argument-totally wrong, look at my points." -Your points haven't shown why it is "totally wrong". "Murder and rape create jobs, so does suffering and death, loosing and creating jobs means nothing, also the society would evolve. We don't still fret over having no town crier." -Please elaborate *Voters I apologize for the lack of sources. My Internet access is limited so I am basing my claims off my knowledge from my AP Biology, Economics, and Ecology courses I took in high school.