Discussion about whether it is ethical to take a life needlessly – or to subject sentient beings to the horrors of factory farms or to the torturous deaths that occur regularly in the animal agricultural and fishing industries – is not silly. In fact, it’s something we all should think about if we aspire to live a life that, to the extent practical and possible, does not exploit or inflict avoidable harm on others.

I agree with you that gluttony is no virtue, and I think your maxim about taste and health is a good rule of thumb (though I like to reward myself with dessert on a regular basis). However, it is – to borrow your term – silly to speak of being “moderate” when one kills and inflicts harm – or pays others to do so – for pleasure. We are so indocrinated and addicted to using animals as disposable commodities, and inflicting all manner of cruelties upon them on a daily basis (stealing newborns from their mothers, amputating body parts without pain killers, crushing or suffocating 300 million male chicks at hatcheries, culling pigs by slamming them against the floor, forcing broiler chickens to overproduce so much flesh that many keel over heart attacks when as young as two week old, etc.) that “only” participating in these atrocities about half as much as our neighbors is now called “moderation.” It may be a nice-sounding, and possibly self-serving term but it is misappropriated if it means “only killing and maiming and torturing a little bit.”

Why not would strive for a goal of trying to be as respectful to the lives of other individuals as much as possible? The first step along that path would be to stop participating three times or more a day in the mass killing and bodily harm done to animals. That requires essentially no time and no new costs, and therefore doesn’t interfere with other efforts to make the world a better place.

Tuna is one of the few foods for which the USDA regularly issues health warnings, because of high mercury content. Bottom-feeder fish may ingest all manner of other pollutants. A recent meta-study suggests that the presumed advantages of eating fish may be a mirage, because the benefits can be attributed to other factors. If you want, I can get the details of the study.

We can get omega-3s from plant sources and be perfectly healthy without exploiting and intentionally killing animals (most of them babies who had a miserable life), so why not take the peaceful route to health? That way, we bestow our blessings on more living creatures and honor not only our bodies but our deepest morals. I hope you’ll give this non-violent alternative some thought.

Hi Amy,
Well, we’re certainly not going to advocate trying sardines (vegans here!). But the rest of the list… Eat up!