Meat Without Murder
William Saletan of Slate has written an interesting article which foresees sources of meat grown in labs rather than butchered in slaughterhouses. The science is already progressing in that direction, but the fascinating part of Saletan's article is how he reads this technological development as a moral solution to hunger rather than a pragmatic one.
As non-evangelical vegans for two decades, we tend to overlook the fact that just because many people scarf bacon doesn't mean they aren't troubled by their actions. Without any self-congratulatory intentions, we know that it takes an iron will to eschew meat and animal products in a society whose rabid consumption offers few other options. In the last twenty years, it has gotten better. And living in Silicon Valley helps.
We are most definitely the kind of vegans who crave meat. It is a constant and occasionally painful struggle. But what Saletan and many non vegetarians apparently don't know is that while our biology may have a definite taste for meat, the biology also works the other way. Veganism has become much easier knowing that any deviation into animal consumption will be violently rejected by the body which has adapted and grown quite comfortable with its vegetarianism.
We have mixed feelings about the whole homegrown meat experiment. We like that animals are taken out of the equation. Vegetarianism for us is a moral choice. Our all-purpose ethical postulation which defines our vegetarianism is relatively simple:
If I can survive, and even thrive in health, without eating meat then why should I? For all the many reasons why I should not eat meat (health, animal welfare, environmental destruction, human safety), there is only one reason why I should: yummy, yummy, yummy. Therefore, is my lust for meat more important than the life of the animal, any animal? The only moral answer to that question has to be "no". And that ain't an easy "no", it's a reluctant, gut-wrenching, and ethically honest "no".
For those of us who crave meat, yet retain the moral fortitude to reject the violence inherent in that mouthful of tasty, laboratory meat sounds like a godsend. Laboratory meat eliminates the pain and death to a fellow animal with a central nervous system. So why are we skeptical?
Perhaps it's because bioengineering is still a new science whose potential for infinite human good is overshadowed only by its potential for apocalyptic disaster. Perhaps it's because this new science is largely in the control of corporations: totalitarian entities devoid of ethical judgment by design. Perhaps it's because we should not become dependent upon laboratories for our food sources. Perhaps it's because the will to kill animals, and with it the will to kill humans, might still be a necessary survival impulse in humanity. And perhaps mostly it's because those who have moral reservations about eating meat should just stop eating meat and not wait for scientists to solve your fucking moral dilemma for you!
