Is Vegetarianism/Veganism Harmful?

[Fkkize]

Disclaimer: I'm a (almost) vegan myself and this argument relies on the assumption that painlessly killing an animal which had a happy life is not wrong.

A friend of mine suggested that by being a conscientious omnivore one supports people who profit from more stringent laws concerning the quality of animal life. Vs withhold their money from those people and since Vs don't have a lobby to exert pressure on politics thus the resulting improvement to animal life are less than if they bought food from organic farmers.

I'm not sure wether I made the point clear, but I allready have a opinion on the topic, I just wanted to share this and hear yours
What do you think, was he on to something or was he talking out of his ... you know what I mean.

[Anon0045]

If more people buy expensive "happy meat", then that would increase the market for such product and decrease the market for cheap meat, and perhaps there will be lobbyists who will bring the price down on such products, leading to more people buying them, increasing the market further. Vegans don't have to support the meat industry and go against their core principles in order to improve the welfare of animals though. They could give money to animal rights organizations. That way, the message of both welfarism/abolitionism is spread more, leading to more people caring. Not sure how to measure the effectiveness of either approach. Intuitively, more slaughter has to lead to more suffering, both in the short run and long run.

There are also problems with "happy meat".
1) It requires a lot more land. We don't want people to eat a lot of "happy meat" for environmental reasons and because clearing land will also affect wild life a lot.
2) Animals are properties, and that means that human interests will almost always trumph over the interests of animals unless there is a win-win situation. There is a limit as to how far welfarism can go. The amount of money people are willing to spend sets that limit.

On the other hand, in a way it is a good thing that people start to think about these things and care about how animals live their lives. It is a step in the right direction and a step towards veganism from a psychological perspective. I know many abolitionists don't think so, but I do.

[brimstoneSalad]

Disclaimer: I'm a (almost) vegan myself and this argument relies on the assumption that painlessly killing an animal which had a happy life is not wrong.

The assumption is wrong. If you start with a false premise, you will reach an unsound conclusion.
Is it not wrong to painlessly kill a human who was living a happy life? How about if that human's friends and family would be killed simultaneously, so none would have to mourn the others? Is it wrong to instantly and painlessly wipe out all life on Earth?

A friend of mine suggested that by being a conscientious omnivore one supports people who profit from more stringent laws concerning the quality of animal life. Vs withhold their money from those people and since Vs don't have a lobby to exert pressure on politics thus the resulting improvement to animal life are less than if they bought food from organic farmers.

Vegans do lobby for animal welfare laws (and more of them should), so that's nonsense.
Economic pressure is a common argument, but in order for economics to work, the system has to be sustainable, and this is not. "Organic" meat, which isn't in any meaningful way less cruel than conventional meat (make no mistake), is a top shelf product made for the minority of consumers who will pay for it. It isn't a replacement for current meat production.

Anon0045 already covered that a bit.

A replacement has to solve the environmental concerns, and be sustainable and scalable. Bioreacted meat fits that bill. Oysters aren't so bad either.