Moral Food

 This is another journal entry for my religion class. The topic was moral food. These were my two favorite entries thus far, and since I am starting this blog six weeks into the semester, I thought I would make sure everyone is up to date on what I have been learning.

Values differ from person to person based on their culture, upbringing, community, religion, and many other things. In this same way, the idea of what can be regarded as “moral food” can vastly differ amongst persons. Everyone has a different definition of what this does or does not include. Many adults tell their children to finish their plate because “there are starving children in Africa.” Others strongly oppose vegetarianism, claiming that, “God created them animals for eatin’!” Those who follow the laws of Kashrut argue that in order for food to be moral, it must be slaughtered and prepared a certain way. There are also a growing number of persons who think it is unethical to eat living creatures in general.  

Moral food involves much more than the eating of animals. Our dietary choices affect other nations, the environment, as well as our personal health. These ideas were displayed in Whitebread Protestants. Many leading activists of the time advocated for a vegetarian diet. Dr. Kellogg (of Kellogg’s cereal) advocated one by creating the cornflake, a meat-free breakfast option. Others, such as Dr. Graham (the maker of graham crackers) thought that we should eat a natural diet. These leaders argued these changes for the health of men, while others, such as Lappe, argued for these changes in light of world hunger issues. All these persons, however, advocated for “moral food,” believing that humans had an obligation to display their values in their dietary choices.

While some find it difficult to purchase a product without much research, many prefer to live happily in oblivion. Many would “rather not know” about the effects the food they eat have on the animals themselves, the environment, the laborers involved in the production, and their personal health. The “rather not know” remark has been made to me a hundred and one times. Then, there are those of us who through curiosity and a sense of injustice cannot help but research the effects and learn more.

Being one of those curious persons has led me to a point where I feel guilty about eating anything at all. However, I understand and value the communal aspect of food. I am left perplexed, wanting to make moral food choices, but not wanting to separate myself from society, or its norms. While I refuse to buy animal milk, I will not say no to a friend making me a dinner of homemade alfredo sauce and pasta. I will wholeheartedly thank that friend and enjoy every bite. I eat the foods others share with me without protest because I desire to strengthen my relationship with them, as well as to please them. However, I feel somewhat guilty doing so, not desiring to live a “wishy-washy” life. I can please myself and offend others or I can continue being informed, yet inconsistent.

While claiming that a certain diet “offends others” can sound harsh, I have found that this is the case. Whenever anyone makes a dietary change to vegetarianism, veganism, or even pescatarianism, the response from meat eaters is always a brute one. People cannot help being offended when one poses a stance that is vastly different from their own. It is difficult for people to separate the opposition of a stance from a personal attack. No one wants to feel as if someone else is judging their dietary choices. But do they feel this way because they too feel that there is injustice?

As the lent season approaches, I hope to fulfill forty days of ethically eating. I am sure there will be shortcomings, as our society makes it somewhat difficult to follow through with this (due to false labeling, as well as other things). Yet, I look forward to eating a significant amount of graham crackers, as my friend Dr. Graham’s treat is still considered a vegan delight.