We should move towards a world where everybody is vegan

Thank you for accepting. First I will state my arguments, then I will address your points. Overview. I am not saying we should force anyone to be vegan, meat should not be illegal to consume. I am saying that in a better version of our society, that we should hope to see in the future, eating animals should become less common. I think that the general trend of the world in getting fairer, will eventually lead to the absence of animal cruelty. Argument 1. Killing animals is not a nice thing to do, and not doing it is the right moral thing to do, for our society. People always say its natural to eat meat. True. Its not natural however, to eat the meat of any animal that has not been hunted fairly. 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. The only reason most people don't think it's bad, is because they don't know enough, and they dont have to do the killing. Repetitive stress is 35 times higher in slaughter house workers than manufacture workers. Also illness in more than 3 times more common amongst slaughterhouse workers than the general population. This reflects the grief and trouble that is caused to humans when they are exposed to the reality of the meat market. Even people who are 'hardened' to it. Animals suffer and we make them suffer. Also, if we have learned anything from the Zimbardo prison study, slaughterhouses are breeding grounds for abuse. Low-paid, uneducated, not exactly the most compassionate portion of the population and the presence of a sub-group of individuals in the power of the higher-group; these are all things that encourage abuse of the sub-group. In my belief, it's prevalent in every slaughterhouse to a high extent. We may not have a duty to care too non-humans creatures, but we certainly have a duty to respect our position of power and not force others to suffer. 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? So my first point is that it's wrong to make anyone suffer, I hope my opponent doesn't disagree with this. My second argument is that it would be better for the environment and the environment is essential. We need to look for ways of reducing greenhouse gasses. (For anyone who is unaware of the effect of eating meat on the environment, this fact will have to suffice for now: livestock and meat consumption does more damage to the environment than all the transport in the world combined.) My third argument is that it's far less taxing on the worlds resources to make plant sustenance than to raise livestock. It takes about 2,400 litres of clean water to make one pound of meat. In comparison with 20 or so litres for a pound of grain. Also it takes far more food to feed the livestock than they produce. Livestock take up more land than humans! About 30% of our earth we devote to livestock. Pants can be grown in multy story greenhouses as tall as skyscrapers. My fourth argument is that a properly managed vegan diet is more healthy than a meat diet. It would make people more healthy and thus happier a d less of a burden on society. My response to your argument: You ask me to prove why we have obligation to be vegan. Well may I ask you if you think we had an obligation to free the slaves? you will find your answer entertaining this notion. If you dont think we where obliged to free slaves, then we cannot rely on your definition of this word to bring us any enlightenment. However if you do think we where obliged to free them, then that same obligation is the one we bare to animals. But if you want my understanding: We don't have an obligation. But only because obligation is abstract. It would be more virtuos,kind,compassionate and 'good' to move toward a world that doesn't use animals as commodities. I think you would agree yes? So the real question is: do you have 'being good' as an obligation or not. If you don't oblige yourself to do the right thing then you have no obligation to be vegan. If you habitually oblige yourself to do the right thing, then you are obliged to be vegan. Okay for your second point, your using a man made idea of what humans rights should be, to legitimatise animal cruelty. The morality of the world does not come the human rights treaty. You say people should have the right to choose. They do have the right too choose. Organised animal cruelty will just be illegal. Don't you see the hypocrisy though my friend? I mean, I feel stupid and condescending saying it but: what about the animals choices? Do they not matter? Also, people don't have rights to make others suffer. You are using the idea of rights to deny rights! Can you not see the hypocrisy? Your food luxury argument is flawed. If nobody ate meat, they would be no meat products available. And no, in that typical scenario that happens to us all (being stranded in the wilderness), eating an animal to survive is survival and you have hunted its fairly, presumably. Food reduction argument-totally wrong, look at my points. People will loose their jobs. Open your mind. 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. Sorry for short argument. Been very busy.