Why I no longer feel bad wasting food at parties

This post is directly related to my recently-posted thoughts on the value of the life of an animal.

When I was small, and I had never thought about non-vegetarianism, I used to believe that at social gatherings like parties and otherwise, us humans shouldn't waste food. I was taught that there are hundreds of millions of undernourished humans in this world, and every gram of food that we don't waste can potentially go into the stomach of a poor man. Then as I grew up, I developed a keen interest in the related concepts of animal rights and non-vegetarianism. At a tender age, I developed a love for animals (especially birds, cats, and dogs), but I saw immense cruelty being inflicted by humans to animals, both around me and on TV.

I began to try to help animals in whatever small ways I could, but the blatant abuse of animals that I saw on TV and on the Web (especially via PETA.org and YouTube) disturbed me quite a lot.

A few years ago, I was watching a video on the Discovery Channel (or maybe it was on Nat Geo) in which the narrator was describing a confrontation between a crocodile and a python. At the end of the video, just as the crocodile shattered the python to pieces and consumed it, the narrator concluded the scene saying, "In nature, nothing goes waste.".

I thought about this. How true, I wondered! Nothing goes waste. Even if I throw some food while at a wedding function, it'll ultimately end up being eaten by birds and cats and dogs and insects and microorganisms. It won't be wasted. It might not go into a hungry human's stomach, but it'll go into a hungry dog's. Coupled with my strong opinion about animal rights, I decided to never worry again about throwing food. Just because some food doesn't go into a human's stomach doesn't mean that it has got wasted. This arrogant thought is yet another example of the selfishness of the human species. I'm happy I've gotten rid of it.

Questioning the huge disparity between the value of a human life and of an animal life

This title stems from my thoughts about humans and non-vegetarianism. I sometimes wonder:

1. Why do we humans value a human life more than the life of any other species?
2. Why do we pronounce the death punishment for someone who murders another human, but not for a human who kills a horse or a tiger. Why is an animal that attacks humans killed without a second thought, but not vice versa?
3. Have non-vegetarians seen how the meat they enjoy is prepared? Its entire lifecycle? Do they know that the animal suffers so much pain that even its soul cries? Have they seen a chicken or a goat howl relentlessly when its throat is being cut? Do they ever compare this pain to the pain they feel when a thorn pricks into their finger?
4. Which celestial entity has given us humans the right to treat animals as property?
5. Why are we, as a species, so protective of humans but so disregarding of animals?
6. Are the non-vegetarians weak people? Do they want to hide away from the ugly truth about how the meat they find so delicious is prepared? The story of death behind it?
7. Why do we kill billions of creatures of non-human species each year, but frown upon cannibalism? Does this disparity stem from some self-protecting genetic code in our DNA? What logic, what reasoning do we have to believe that it's alright (and in most cultures a symbol of celebration and joy) to kill and eat an animal, but not a human?
8. What meaning do the daily prayers and religious activities of non-vegetarians have? Are they trying to cleanse their sins? Do they never realize that whenever they eat an animal, there's an ugly story of death behind it?
9. Is it okay to to call a kind human kind, if he or she is a non-vegetarian? What relevance does the kindness (to humans or even to animals) of non-vegetarians have?
10. When humans celebrate at mortuaries like KFC, do they ever think about those yellow chicks, those babies, who got slaughtered (long before they could grow up and live their lives) only to satiate the tongues of humans who chose to not care?
11. Doesn't the meaning of the word humane smack of an arrogant self-righteousness of us humans? Shouldn't this word instead signify a negative connotation?

A few pictures to accompany the above questions:

A pig suffers excruciatingly during its slaughter as humans rejoice.

A pin can make us cry. How much pain did this tied animal feel?

Her smile shocks me. Will we ever stop farming of animals?

If nothing else, perhaps we can do some justice to the animals by acknowledging that we're the most selfish species on planet Earth...

Update [21-Oct-19]: Read an article in The Guardian today, in which it was written that scientists have voiced their opposition to the ongoing trend of growing brain "organoids" in the lab, and/or transplanting these organoids into the brains of animals such as mice. Two words stand out here - sentience, and suffering. These so-called highly-qualified scientists don't want a human brain's organoid to experience the feeling of pain/suffering, but these same scientists have no problems with the hundreds of thousands or perhaps hundreds of millions of animals which are slaughtered each day, often accompanied with excruciating and prolonged pain/suffering. Are animals sentient? Is sentience a yes/no feeling? Doesn't it have levels? If it has levels, and if the level of sentience of an organoid is much, much lower than the level of sentience of, say, a cow or a pig, then why is any potential suffering experienced by a human brain's organoid of any higher consequence or importance than the certain suffering suffered by a cow or a pig? Isn't this some sort of racism [or "speciesism"], where we suddenly become the most noble and kind-hearted creatures when it's about our own species, and turn into cruel monsters when it's about other species? Why is a sentient lump grown in a lab any worse than doing experiments on much more sentient monkeys in those same labs? Only because it's from our own species? And during lunch breaks, these oh-so-kind geniuses enjoy their portions of beef, bacon, fish and all other forms of meat.

In Anna Hazare, a rare glimpse of pre-freedom India (and on nonviolents vs. a revolutionaries)

I wasn't aware of Anna Hazare's efforts until many days had passed since his movement began. I wasn't reading newspapers and I wasn't watching the news much, so I was practically unaware that there's a nationwide movement going on against corruption, spearheaded by Hazare. But after an uncle gave me a summary of what Lokpal Bill is who Anna Hazare is and what he's doing, I got interested [I'm so tired of bribing Municipal Corporation clerks and officers just so that they quickly sign property documents that I desperately wish this disease leaves this country].

I returned to home that day, launched YouTube, and watched a couple of videos of Anna Hazare [as opposed to about Anna Hazare] put up by Aaj Tak, NDTV, Star News and others.

 

I felt, observed and realized two important things:

1. Non-violence vs. revolution: Since my school days, I've criticized freedom fighters who used non-violence [Gandhi, Nehru, et al.]. I've praised revolutionaries who resorted to violent means to scare and oust foreign bodies [Azad, et al.], and I've mocked at Indians who accepted the suffering of lathi-charge at the hands of the sadistic British men. However, when I watched Anna Hazare spew sharp words at the corrupt ministers and politicians of this nation, I felt the impact of those words right in my head. I, someone who had long believed that only bombs and swords could've contributed meaningfully to India's independence, felt the power of an old man's fearless tongue. The videos of Anna Hazare that I watched have fundamentally altered my views about the efficacy of non-violent methods of opposition. I don't see myself criticizing non-violence anymore. Which brings me to the second point.
2. A (rare) glimpse of pre-independence India: I keenly watch those low-resolution photos and videos depicting lectures by Gandhi or Subhas Chandra Bose in pre-independent India [the 30s and 40s]. It's such a good feeling watching India's freedom struggle [as opposed to reading about it in textbooks]. Of course, those freedom fighters don't exist anymore, and the small repository of photos and videos that exist is the only way to experience India's struggle for independence. However, when I watched Anna Hazare roar and spit at the corrupt top of this country, I saw in him a rare glimpse of pre-independent India. I likened his feelings to those of Senapati in the legendary 1996 movie Hindustani. Hazare, a former soldier, also sees the present day India as a nation that might have got freedom from the British, but is being gagged by its own people. I saw in him that same unadulterated altruism and patriotism that we're told existed in our freedom fighters. And in this context, I think he's one of those rare people still alive who genuinely love Bharat [as opposed to the iPod and McDonald's generation], and are ready to fearlessly sacrifice even their own life for the sake of their motherland.