Getting Tired of Vegetarians

Aren't we a bit self righteousness

I'm seeing a lot of stuff like that picture above lately. I'm even reading some of it in unlikely places. I'll save my review of Walden for when I finish it, but I can tell you this much, it will be a long post for good and for bad. There is a part in it that really illustrates what my point, "I believe that every man who has ever been earnest to preserve his higher or poetic faculties in the best condition has been particularly inclined to abstain from animal food". There seems to be this belief throughout society that eating vegetarian is of a higher moral plane. It is not.

Let me first begin by saying that I am not against eating only plants. If that suits you, do it, but get of your high horse. Although, the only argument I have ever heard that is acceptable to be vegetarian is that the person didn't like the taste of animal. There is no morality in what we choose to eat.
We were designed to eat meat and plant (and to some degree fungi). That's it. There is an overwhelming body of evidence in anthropology that leads to this conclusion. Yes, when we look at nutrition we start getting confused and I've gone over why these quack-scientists are to be ignored completely. What I'm getting at here is that there is no physiological reason for us to be vegetarian. Period.
So, lets turn to morality. There is a theme that is constant through every non-hunter/gatherer society, that we were put here to turn the Earth to our needs. We try to remove ourselves as far from the animal or natural world as possible. One way we do this is abstaining from participation in the eating of other animals. Partly, it is also our ability of abstract thought and how awful it must be to be a prey. And this is particularly true when we see human traits in or perceive a higher intelligence (I would say soul, though I don't want to tread into religion). We then try to apply humanity to the natural world. This is impossible because natural world is the true law (of god, if you must). What this amounts to is that true morality is derived from our place in nature and not our perceived place. Herbivores are moral when they eat plants. Carnivores, when they eat animal. Omnivores, when they eat anything. Clearly, there are ethics involved in the treatment of animals - as in, killing them for sport, for a piece of them (like a tusk), because they compete with us for food, "farming" them, or just killing out of spite - but, for the most part, these are outside the discussion of eating them for sustinence with the exception of "farming" or killing competition.
Is it more moral to raise them for the specific goal of eating them or to give them a chance of living (aka hunting)? I'd say the latter. I understand this is how we get our principle amount of animal food, however, this doesn't mean that vegetarians are more moral than those who eat a steak. Is it more moral to displace animals (now days, to the point of endangering the species) or to kill them because they are destroying our crops (killing competition) that you vegetarians so cherish. No, it's not. It's way too grey of an area for anyone to say what is more moral to nature, to grow animals vs. killing them off so we can eat plants. If someone comes out claiming this is more or less moral, they are full of shit.
Like I said, the highest morality is nature's law and therefore to hunt (and gather). So, stop thinking you're saving the world by eating vegan or vegetarian or other extremes. You are killing animals too, but not for the purpose of sustaining your life directly from their sacrifice. In my opinion, if you have such a hard on for animals, you'd believe that their lives are worth more than some grass that you are going to turn into bread.
I suppose since that the picture above talks about going green, I should mention that agriculture as it is today, is likely THE leading cause of environmental damage to the earth. For those who are so concerned over that still unproven global warming destroying the earth theory, agriculture is by far the leading consumer of oil (I vaguely remember a number like 90% of oil consumed in the USA) and is more a contributor to greenhouse gas than the personal use of cars/suvs/trucks. Also, it requires more and more land to support growing populations and new bio-technologies. What does that mean since trees are an enemy to an efficient field?
So, to reiterate my point, I don't want you to get hurt should you be bucked from that tall fucking horse you're on. You aren't any more moral than anybody else, you're just an asshole who wants to be better than other people. In other words, shut the fuck up.