What If: Major Religions Meat Prohibition

What if all of the worlds major religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam,) apart from some of the Dharmic religions which already do, had prohibitions on the consumption of most or all meats, with the exceptions of Fowl, such as Chickens, Turkey, etc. and seafood, like Fish, clams, Crabs etc.

You can assume that their are some denominations that are totally vegetarian and don't eat any meat and some that are less so, allowing for the consumption of fowl, fish, and perhaps one other type, excluding large animals, but the ones that allow the consumption of more than that are very small minorities.

While the three Abrahamic religions and Hinduism and Buddhism must remain major religions, you can come up with one to three additional major religions, but they must all share the same trait of not allowing the consumption of most meats.
The OTL major religions don't have to be exactly the same either, different denominations may develop or dominate and they may spread geographically differently then OTL.
 
Last edited:
To get things rolling, one difference would be that global climate change and ecological destruction would'nt be as bad as they are now.

Bovines and other large mammals that are used as food sources are very land extensive and are a main cause of deforestation in many parts of the world, especially Brazil.
Bovines also produce a high amount of GHG's through flatulence as well, so much so that actually cutting the demand for them (and thus stopping and in some cases reversing their pop. growth) OTL would actually see a drop in GHG emissions globally.
 
We probably wouldn't notice any big changes until we got up to the Industrial Revolution; before that, people just didn't eat enough meat for this to matter much.
 
What if all of the worlds major religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam,) apart from some of the Dharmic religions which already do, had prohibitions on the consumption of all meat excluding fish.
:eek: Why would they do something so horrible to their followers?
 

Keenir

Banned
What if all of the worlds major religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam,) apart from some of the Dharmic religions which already do, had prohibitions on the consumption of all meat excluding fish.

you'd get some very interesting religious dispensations.

as one example from OTL: the world's largest rodent is classed as a fish (to Catholics), and thus may be eaten during Lent.


and-or you'd have the laborers classed closer to the untouchables, because the laborers would need to eat more meat in order to do the labor that is vital to civilization.
 
To get things rolling, one difference would be that global climate change and ecological destruction would'nt be as bad as they are now.

Bovines and other large mammals that are used as food sources are very land extensive and are a main cause of deforestation in many parts of the world, especially Brazil.
Bovines also produce a high amount of GHG's through flatulence as well, so much so that actually cutting the demand for them (and thus stopping and in some cases reversing their pop. growth) OTL would actually see a drop in GHG emissions globally.

Not just that, cattle do a helluva lot more damage than nondomesticated animals. Buffalo and deer browse. They eat a bit of gras here and there.

Cattle graze. They eat every last blade there is, and sometimes they tear it up by the roots. Much more destructive.

I wouldn't miss beef. It's pretty bland, and steak actually tastes pretty gross, esp rare. I'm convinced people eat it mostly as a status symbol. I'll take bison anyday, a good buffalo burger or as a topping on frybread. Now pork, I would miss, as unhealthy as it is. And no hooved animal can compare to good seafood.

Back on topic, if major religions prohibit most meat eating, the members who do choose to eat some would like choose the healthier and saner choices of wild game vs domesticating.

I could actually see this POD being done. Were any of the early Christian sects vegetarian, taking Thou Shalt Not Kill to its logical conclusion? If they influenced church doctrinal leaders...
 

MrP

Banned
It'd be weird for Christianity to have that sort of thing. Catholicism has a prohibition against eating meat on a Friday - which prohibition is either defunct or just widely ignored these days (obviously, it makes no difference to my diet!) - but that's an anti-excessive consumption thing. But for Christianity in toto the idea early on was to be more accessible to converts, and part of that was achieved by removing the OTL's Jewish dietary restrictions - somewhere in the Acts of the Apostles, I think, is a vision given by the Holy Spirit to someone (St. Peter?) to the effect that Christians can eat and drink anything. I think the only exception is cannibalism, but I know blood's verboten (that's the basis of the Jehovah's Witnesses' refusal to sanction blood transfusions, ISTR).

Anyway, stacking on more dietary restrictions will make these religions less appealing to converts, and possibly even non-viable in places where fish is unavailable as a food source.
 

MrP

Banned
I could actually see this POD being done. Were any of the early Christian sects vegetarian, taking Thou Shalt Not Kill to its logical conclusion? If they influenced church doctrinal leaders...

Well, the omission of meat and such is generally seen as a form of penitence or piousness, since it's associated with wealth. So particularly holy and abstemious sects would give it up. Though not for any sort of animal rights reason, AFAIK. I have a vague feeling some of the rarer Jewish sects omitted meat, but Leo's really the man to ask about that sort of thing.
 
Anyway, stacking on more dietary restrictions will make these religions less appealing to converts, and possibly even non-viable in places where fish is unavailable as a food source.

I did say fowl to, so basically Chicken, Turkey etc. along with Fish and seafood (which I should have mentioned but sort of blur both as the same thing).


Another thing I thought of, their would likely be several hundred species still around as they would'nt have been killed off from deforestation and the environmental damage that comes from industrial meat production.

People would also probably be healthier since they would'nt be eating as much fat.
 
This wouldn't have that much effect until recently - due to the costs and such, meats were a "rich man's club" with meats only being consumed by the average man maybe one a month. Fish, instead, were consumed far more, though because of preservation problems, they weren't really consumed very much away from the coastal regions.

Though I think there's something to consider about the lack of protein. A lack of meat in the mediaeval diet has been blamed on several occasions for exacerbating problems about the diseases of the past few centuries, as a lack of protein hampers the body's ability to heal itself.
 

Stephen

Banned
This POd leads to these religions being alot less popular than OTL leading to a Pagan middle ages scenario.

If these religions become popular then the number of animals used on medieval farms probably stays the same as you need animals to pull the plows and turn food wastes and infertile grassland into something edible like milk or useful like wool it just means that when they die all the meat goes to waste. WHat do Hindus do with exess calves?
 

MrP

Banned
I did say fowl to, so basically Chicken, Turkey etc. along with Fish and seafood (which I should have mentioned but sort of blur both as the same thing).


Another thing I thought of, their would likely be several hundred species still around as they would'nt have been killed off from deforestation and the environmental damage that comes from industrial meat production.

People would also probably be healthier since they would'nt be eating as much fat.

As Falastur says, the fat thing won't have much impact until modern society. Prior to that, one just tried to get calories whatever way one could. It's just that different geographic locales have different general fat sources. The Mediterranean Diet is regarded as superior to that of Northern Europe, since it tends to be high in olive oil as opposed to the animal fats of NE. Getting fats from plants in NE is considerably harder than in Italy (though not impossible, e.g. walnut oil), so animal fats were used instead. Now life is more sedentary than it once was this is a problem.

I dunno I'd agree with a Pagan Middle Ages, Stephen, since the blow to recruitment would probably be so harsh that Christianity wouldn't get taken on as the religion of the Empire. Then again, if Judaism had such dietary laws . . . I dunno - I'm being swarmed by butterflies. IOW, all bets are off.
 
No consumption of meat by the Christians mean that there would be more pigs than the humans in OTL. No meat consumption means also that Argentina would be a basketcase in entire 19th century.
 
Well, we're assuming that the major religions IATL have prohibitions against meat eating, so no pagan middle-ages, unless you have massive crusades and forced conversion, which is'nt that unbelievable all things considered.

And something you would notice early on, all those kings and aristocrats would'nt be fat since they would'nt be eating meat, so no obese aristocrats in paintings. :D

I realize that most of the differences would'nt be felt until the 1800's onward, but it is still interesting to think about how things would develop.

Oh, and Argentina was actually one of the first things I thought of, but I don't know enough to figure out exactly what affects it would have do to not having the large Beef sector as a part of their economy.


Another thing I've thought of, hunting, I'm guessing it would probably be basically illegal in most places since by the modern day the only justifiable reason people have for it is to get food, but with that removed it becomes nothing more than people going around killing animals for their perverse pleasure, which I figure would end up with it being illegal almost everywhere.
 

MrP

Banned
And something you would notice early on, all those kings and aristocrats would'nt be fat since they would'nt be eating meat, so no obese aristocrats in paintings. :D

I'm vegan. Don't make me show you a picture of my stomach to show you just how wrong that assumption is. ;)
 
I'm vegan. Don't make me show you a picture of my stomach to show you just how wrong that assumption is. ;)

Oh, alright, not anywhere near as many of them, and no stories describing the barbaric ways people ate.

I must say, after thinking about it, it could well do their complexion wonders, not having all that grease on their hands (which would then get everywhere else).
 

MrP

Banned
Oh, alright, not anywhere near as many of them, and no stories describing the barbaric ways people ate.

I must say, after thinking about it, it could well do their complexion wonders, not having all that grease on their hands (which would then get everywhere else).

Yeah, that should work.
 
Are there any major religions that prohibit meat eating OTL? The only one I can think of is Jainism, AFAIK, although some forms of Buddhism discourage it.

Having ALL major religions prohibit it (which seems to be what you want) would be rather ASB, I'd think.
 
Are there any major religions that prohibit meat eating OTL? The only one I can think of is Jainism, AFAIK, although some forms of Buddhism discourage it.

Having ALL major religions prohibit it (which seems to be what you want) would be rather ASB, I'd think.

Well Hinduism is split down the middle from what I can tell, though none of them eat cows.

The major religions of the world apart from Buddhism and Hinduism are the three abrahamic religions, so it's really them that I'm focusing on.


And again, not prohibitve of all meat, just anything other than seafood and Fowls.
 
Top