On the Horns of a (Grain-fed Dairy Cow) Dilemma

Where I found the photo.

Caveat: In this post I am discussing veganism, a topic that a lot of people have passionate opinions about. I am genuinely looking for informed advice and commentary, so please try to remain civilized and refrain from judgmental, self-righteous, or over-generalized statements. Instead of arguing, let's strive for genuine understanding. I'm looking for perspective here. Thank you in advance. 

I find myself on the horns of a true dilemma. Earlier today I was reading a health-oriented blog I follow and a post popped up about how Anne Hathaway mentioned in an interview that she gave up being a vegan. The comments on that post threw me into complete turmoil. They were all very vehement, and very poorly spelled, and  I am positive that I would not want to be in conversation with any of these people in real life. But the most vitriolic of the comments did get me thinking.

See, I have been on the fence for a while now, debating about whether I really should be vegan. I am very passionately against the inhumane treatment of animals, and am very aware of the severe shortcomings in our country's meat production industry. Seriously, it's horrible. For everyone involved.  But I have never felt that eating meat (or animal products) was inherently inhumane. So, as a particularly angry vegan advocate compared eating animals to practicing murder and slavery (there is even a word for this among certain vegans---speciesism), I began to have an absolutely epic back and forth in my head, which raised some questions on the philosophy of being vegan. I am hoping that you all can bear with me and shed some light on these issues, because I am feeling pretty wretched.

So, firstly, one of the vegans said that humans are animals and we need to stop murdering other animals and being speciesist toward other animals. So, okay, I agree that humans are animals. But I wonder, How do vegans feel about other carnivorous predators? I am sure vegans hear from people all the time, talking about how humans have evolved to the top of the food chain, and we are predators and have a right to eat what we want (something that I feel is a pretty valid argument, really) and I have no idea what the typical response to that is. But I presume that most humans do not take issue with, say, a polar bear eating a seal. Or a shark eating a seal. Or a bear eating a shark. It seems contradictory to me to say that humans are just animals so we shouldn't be eating other animals, and yet also believe that wild predators should be allowed to eat whatever they want? Yes, humans have access to a great variety of non-meat food, (though, to bring up bears again, some other predators also have access to non-meat food and continue to be omnivorous) due in large part to agricultural processes we have developed over millenia, often with the use of animals and animal products as help. But again, humans might be considered the top predator, so, as such, are we not entitled to kill and eat lesser species?

And if you say no, we are not, then How do vegans differentiate between species? What is the biological hierarchy and how does it work? How does one animal set itself higher than another on the food chain? And where, if we are not predators of other animals, do humans fit in? Some vegans would say that any infringement on animals is wrong, including destroying natural habitat, zoos, and even owning pets. They equate animal ownership with slavery. So, I have to wonder how far this goes. Do these people allow rodents, snakes, insects, spiders, and all other manner of what would normally be termed pests to live in their home? Do they allow racoons to root through their trash? Do they let moles and squirrels into the foundation and the roof? If the answer to this is no (and I know to some it is, because I have read accounts of humane relocation for said vermin), then how can you claim any higher morality against the so-called speciesist? Should these animals not be allowed to live where they please? After all, we are in their habitat, not the other way around, right? I'm just wondering how far this extends. And, #sorrynotsorry, but I just can't believe that having pets is the same as slavery. I just can't. I don't know about you, but strictly speaking, my animals do exactly zero work for me. They spend about 22 hours a day lying around napping and the other two hours eating and begging for more food. I just do not think this life experience is at all comparable to what plantation slaves endured 150 years ago. And I also have a hard time imagining that a domesticated animal is better off in the wild or on the streets rather than in a loving home. But this does bring me back around to the idea of whether killing animals at all is inhumane, or whether there can be a distinction between humane and inhumane killing. For vegans who also house pets, when they reach the end of their life and are, say, riddled with painful cancer, or their liver shuts down, or they can't eat anymore, do you euthanize the pet? To me, right now, it seems to me that the more respectful and humane way to treat an animal is to say goodbye and put it out of its misery, especially since it is a quick and painless death. But if you truly believe that an animal dying at the hands of a human is wrong by any means, then what do you do with your pets in the end? And with that level of compassion, how can you bear to just watch them be in pain?

If you are willing to euthanize pets, then how can you say that killing an animal to eat is inherently wrong? If, in theory, a farm animal could be slaughtered completely quickly and painlessly, is that really so much different? I suspect that the response, (another thing that was mentioned in the comments of the article I read) is that slaughtering animals is murder (on par with murdering a fellow human) because those animals are happy  and they want to live. Okay, I can go along with that ideology I suppose, but How do you measure an animals happiness or desire to be alive? Is there a scientific process that is able to determine whether an animal prefers life or death, or for that matter, that animals like cows can even conceive of the difference between the two states? Right now, I personally find it doubtful that livestock are existentially aware of their being. And if that is the case, then how can it matter to them whether they continue to live or whether they die? Pain thresholds in different animals have been studied, and it has been found that different animals, even different humans, feel pain differently.  So, with that in mind, how do we know that, say, a cow is actually suffering, when it may not even be capable of suffering the same way we are?

Again, I want to be nice to animals. I want to be respectful of whatever their existence is, but I have a hard time believing that they experience things the same way humans do, so I also have a hard time believing it is wrong to not treat animals like humans. And this is the dilemma about becoming a vegan at all. As I said earlier, industrial meat production is often inhumane. Grossly so. But does this mean that meat production in itself is wrong, or that it simply needs to be regulated? If we halted all meat production, would we have beautiful roaming herds of wild cattle? Or would those domesticated species simply die out? And if you believe animals and humans are equal, can you be okay species extinction? If enough people stop eating meat, would the meat industry change its practices? Or again, would the animals just die off? This is plaguing me. I want to do the right thing, but I am not sure in this case what I actually believe the right thing is.

Please, please leave your (*respectful*) comments and help me sort through this muddle!

*Also, if you are only vaguely aware of how the meatpacking industry works, please click the links and/or watch the many documentaries about it on Netflix. It's some serious business.