From: pwestlak@eoe.co.uk (Peter Westlake)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Let them eat grass!
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:46:11 GMT
Organization: EO Europe Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

A few years ago a wildlife film was made that showed a lion attacking
a zebra. The film was fairly gory (being an accurate reflection of a
lion's table manners) and at one scene, showing the lion biting into
the underparts of the zebra, an outraged member of the audience leaped
up and cried, "This is outrageous! The lions must be made to eat grass!"

Now this story (which may be true; it was quoted in the review of the film
in _New Scientist_) is commonly told as an ironic example of the "do-gooder"
who allows sentiment to triumph over reason. However, in this age of genetic
engineering, nanotechnology, and rapid technological progress, it is worth
considering it in a different light.  Consider for a moment a future in which
genetic engineering can be carried out successfully and safely on just about
any species. Suppose also that the our understanding of the behaviour and
interaction of species advances to the point where we can safely adjust the
an ecosystem to allow for alterations to species, including turning carnivores
into herbivores. Should we then, in sober fact, make lions eat grass?

- now I know this seems like a pretty wacky question. Nevertheless, the issue
I am trying to address is one that I think will have to be faced by vegetarians
in the fullness of time, even if it is not for many millenia. To elaborate on
the matter, I note that many readers of this group consider it wrong to cause
pain or suffering to an animal, or to allow it to be caused by other people,
and I suspect that many would consider it wrong to allow it to happen, even by
accident, if they could reasonably prevent it. The recent post on ethics by
Ted Wayn Altar sums up this position rather well, along with the stronger position
that it is wrong to deprive what he refers to as a "subject-of-a-life" of that life.
Now consider: if you hold beliefs like this, what is wrong with killing and eating
a higher animal: is it the fact that *you* do it (or it is done one your behalf), 
or is it the consequential effects on the animal; and if the latter, then what does
it matter to the animal who or what kills it? What difference does it make to the cow
whether it is killed by the butcher or the lion? Any of us in the cow's place would
consider the distinction unimportant compared to the danger of a violent death.
But, goes the reply (valid until now), the lion must kill to eat; it is in its nature,
it has no choice in the matter. And that brings us back to genetic enginering.

Clearly we cannot rebuild the entire ecology from the plants up so that no organism
ever kills another, and even doing this for the animal kingdom seems hopelessly unrealistic.This is one possible answer to my question: it can't be done for all animals, so don't
bother for any. This assumes that all animals are equal in the eyes of the vegetarian.
Another answer will be given by those who are vegetarian for health reasons: the idea
is a ridiculously sentimental scheme to fill the world with fairy-tale sweetness and light,
and not worthy of any effort. Most people's views I suspect will fall between these
extremes, and here I am particularly grateful for Ted's posting, because the ethical
positions he describes generally cover just the "higher" animals (a term I will *not*
try to define - fill it in for according to your own beliefs), of which there are few
enough species to make the changes in the ecology *comparitively* (!) minor.

If you do not believe lions can be vegetarian, because of their anatomy, energy
requirements, or whatever, be creative and imagine meat growing on plants or
animals engineered to lack the means to suffer: tvp mushrooms that shoot through
the undergrowth on jets of internally-fermented methane, or antelope with lizard-like
detachable limbs that grow back. If you still find it implausible that this should ever
become possible even in the very distant future, pretend it is all done by magic and
treat the whole thing as a hypothetical exercise.  This is a question about ethics,
not technology.

Finally, I should say that I have no idea what the answer to this question is;
it is posted in the spirit of enquiry, not advocacy.

Peter.
-- 
Peter M Westlake                        EO Computer Ltd.,
Tel: +223-843131                        Abberley House,  Granhams Road,
Fax: +223-843032                        Great Shelford,
email:  pwestlak@eoe.co.uk              Cambridge CB2 5LQ,   England
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg