In the NY Times, Jonathan Safran Foer has written an opinion piece about how we must stop eating animals. That it is a duty. That it shows we actually "care" about the poor and racial justice. Of course, this opinion is dumb. It is deadly. It is even dangerous and it is being consumed as absolutely factual by many. This is an opinion. Like armpits, we all have them and they all stink.
Every time I see people talking about "synthetic meats", I wonder about the health risks of GMOs. Even the vegan "substitute meats" he talks about in his article often times contain walloping amounts of sodium that realistically nullify any protein supplement. I am not saying that one cannot have a healthy vegan diet but that does not consist of eating nothing but tofu. The Church indeed abstains from meat quite regularly throughout its calendar year. Not to say that meat is bad but to reinforce the fact that meat is good.
Actually, the position that Foer takes is also heretical to church teaching. Genesis 9:3 decrees "[e]very moving thing that lives shall be food for you" and St. Paul warns "that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, ... and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth" (1 Tim. 4:1-3). The ideology that giving up the eating of animals is some sort of racial justice or act of charity is clearly nullified and rejected by established church teaching. Since those who dwell in the church, dwell in truth, it cannot be said that the church is neglecting charity or justice by refusing to give up the consumption of animals.
Even more concerning is that like most people I have asked about health concerns, Foer seems to have a lack of knowledge of people's overall health options. If someone has allergies to a severe degree or must count their carbohydrates wisely, an entirely plant-based diet is not a viable option for them. My godmother is one person who cannot have a high intake of carbohydrates. There are certain plants that she can consume. She will bake with coconut flour. She can have olives since they have a high fat content. But for the most part, the only foods she is capable of consuming without severe detriment to her own health are meats and cheeses. Jonathan Safran Foer would rather witness her deterioration and possible death and claim that it is an act of care for the poor and racial justice not to let her suffer. This is why my reaction to his article is quite personal since the first time I ever really noticed divine love before was when she looked at me the week before I was received into the church.
Is it really racial justice to let people whose health conditions require them to receive a greater intake of fats and proteins die? Is that what caring for the poor looks like too? The modern left is really messed up. Foer's article shows just how far the modern leftists are willing to go to not only kill off as many people as they can but also mask it as an act of charity and justice. They know the left-hand path leads to their eternal damnation. They want more people damned with them. By masking evil as charity and justice, they lead others away from the right-hand path. But it is Foer who is the immoral one. A deceiver and a con-artist.
No comments:
Post a Comment