In a perfect world...the goal i hope...Cows would live a meaningful life. Now why the fuck should a cow live a meaningful life...interesting you should ask.
Native americans believed that all life is equal...A plant is worth as much as human life...interesting because the environment surrounding them reflected that ideogy..areas were more healthy and so on than areas untouched by them.
So again, why the fuck should a cow enjoy any sort of meaningful existence...well why should we.
In a perfect world...the goal i hope...Cows would live a meaningful life. Now why the fuck should a cow live a meaningful life...interesting you should ask.
Native americans believed that all life is equal...A plant is worth as much as human life...interesting because the environment surrounding them reflected that ideogy..areas were more healthy and so on than areas untouched by them.
So again, why the fuck should a cow enjoy any sort of meaningful existence...well why should we.
Interesting, didn't they smoke a lot of plant?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Well it is, because any substance that humans consume, humans also farm, which means they assist in the plants flourishing. It stands to reason that natives would have taken care of the resources they used, and thus why those regions of land seemed to flourish more. Much to the same vein that we breed Cattle for our consumption. There are so many cows because we breed them, the Aurochs went extinct almost 400 years ago. The domesticated cow survives because we take care of them for our own consumption. If we were to release cows into the wild now, they would go extinct.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Well it is, because any substance that humans consume, humans also farm, which means they assist in the plants flourishing. It stands to reason that natives would have taken care of the resources they used, and thus why those regions of land seemed to flourish more. Much to the same vein that we breed Cattle for our consumption. There are so many cows because we breed them, the Aurochs went extinct almost 400 years ago. The domesticated cow survives because we take care of them for our own consumption. If we were to release cows into the wild now, they would go extinct.[/quote
yea...dont' think releasing cows into the wild is the way to go her either but.
I was driving from Santa Barbara to Seattle a few years ago and I came to this ranch...by ranch I mean this 40 miles of dirt as far as you could see on both sides of the highway filled with cows shoulder to shoulder. The most miserable place I have ever seen to be honest.
So by increasing the quality of life for these animals I'm thinking we can give em some grass at least here and there...maybe a fucking tree ever few miles shit i don't know. Again it comes down to how much you respect life..not just human life.
Well it is, because any substance that humans consume, humans also farm, which means they assist in the plants flourishing. It stands to reason that natives would have taken care of the resources they used, and thus why those regions of land seemed to flourish more. Much to the same vein that we breed Cattle for our consumption. There are so many cows because we breed them, the Aurochs went extinct almost 400 years ago. The domesticated cow survives because we take care of them for our own consumption. If we were to release cows into the wild now, they would go extinct.
yea...dont' think releasing cows into the wild is the way to go her either but.
I was driving from Santa Barbara to Seattle a few years ago and I came to this ranch...by ranch I mean this 40 miles of dirt as far as you could see on both sides of the highway filled with cows shoulder to shoulder. The most miserable place I have ever seen to be honest.
So by increasing the quality of life for these animals I'm thinking we can give em some grass at least here and there...maybe a fucking tree ever few miles shit i don't know. Again it comes down to how much you respect life..not just human life.
Hmm, I think it's rather difficult to tell what a Cow thinks of it's environment. My experiences on my uncles Cattle Ranch were such that I didn't think cows cared about trees, they didn't seem to spend much time with them. They did however like their water hole, or pond.
An interesting event that happend was with a calf that had a deformed neck and could not eat and had trouble breathing. My uncle and I went out to execute the animal by lethal shotgun wound to the skull. I was tasked with the job of keeping the mother at bay. The task was not an easy one, I had to smash the heffer in the head with a massive log. The mother was very very protective of her calf, however, once the animal was dead, the heffer left and continued grazing. I'm not sure if it had a genuinely persistant emotional attachment, or if it was simply biologically inclined to protect a living offspring. It didn't seem to care much about revenge.
Either way, a real study should be performed to determine whether or not cows are (i) aware of the details of their surroundings and (ii) have a preference for decor. If it turns out to be the case, I'm in favor of imposing laws on farmers to create more habitable environments.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Hmm, I think it's rather difficult to tell what a Cow thinks of it's environment. My experiences on my uncles Cattle Ranch were such that I didn't think cows cared about trees, they didn't seem to spend much time with them. They did however like their water hole, or pond.
An interesting event that happend was with a calf that had a deformed neck and could not eat and had trouble breathing. My uncle and I went out to execute the animal by lethal shotgun wound to the skull. I was tasked with the job of keeping the mother at bay. The task was not an easy one, I had to smash the heffer in the head with a massive log. The mother was very very protective of her calf, however, once the animal was dead, the heffer left and continued grazing. I'm not sure if it had a genuinely persistant emotional attachment, or if it was simply biologically inclined to protect a living offspring. It didn't seem to care much about revenge.
Either way, a real study should be performed to determine whether or not cows are (i) aware of the details of their surroundings and (ii) have a preference for decor. If it turns out to be the case, I'm in favor of imposing laws on farmers to create more habitable environments.
Study what cows think. K thats a really bad idea, no offense. Spiritual evolution may be more important than I thought.
I had to smash the heffer in the head with a massive log. The mother was very very protective of her calf, however, once the animal was dead, the heffer left and continued grazing. I'm not sure if it had a genuinely persistant emotional attachment, or if it was simply biologically inclined to protect a living offspring. It didn't seem to care much about revenge.
If i got my head smashed with a massive log i doubt i'd care too much with what was happening around me either.
Its not so much the actual killing. Its the way the animals live their entire lives thats the problem.
The killing should be quick and painless.
The lifelong suffering, I dont think anyone would wish that on any animal.
agreed.
i did not watch the videos...yikes. :( i don't think i even have to, b/c years ago in my younger days, i was an active member of PETA, and i had read and seen just about every video and book on the topic. it IS horrifying what we do to some animals in the name of food production, testing, cosmetics, etc.
i WAS a vegetarian for 2-3 years...for this very reason. i never did go completely vegan, still ate milk, cheese and eggs.....but i also made sure i bought no cosmetic or home products tested on animals.....bought no leather....etc. sad to say really, but i've gone back to it all. well, i still avoid as many products tested on animals as possible, but i do wear leather again....and yes, eat meat. i STILL think it's horrendous what is done to animals...but yea, i just missed meat too much. funny thing is, i don't eat a LOT of it, but i do eat at least a small portion of beef, pork, chicken or fish daily. honestly, i DO feel 'healthier' eating a more balanced diet like this then i did as a vegggie....but that is only my personal experience. i know MANY vegetarians who are the picture of health and do SO well on a veggie diet.
i DO believe in the whole food chain 'cycle of life'.....don't think there is anything wrong with eating other animals for food. human beings are OMNIVORES - not purely carnivorous, nor completely herbivorous. so i do believe we are meant to eat such a varied diet. thing is though, i completely agree it's all HOW we raise and treat these animals for food that is wrong, wrong, wrong.
I was assuming that by your comments you would continue to buy food from places that treat animals in that matter. Hence, "condoning it."
Your post wasnt very detailed.:D So I apologize if I assumed that.
I define cruelty by causing, or allowing, an animal to suffer over the period of its life (by either painful methods of raising, confinement, stress, starvaton, force feeding, etc).....or, causing an animal an extensive amount of suffering at the time of its slaughter.
i did not watch the videos...yikes. :( i don't think i even have to, b/c years ago in my younger days, i was an active member of PETA, and i had read and seen just about every video and book on the topic. it IS horrifying what we do to some animals in the name of food production, testing, cosmetics, etc.
i WAS a vegetarian for 2-3 years...for this very reason. i never did go completely vegan, still ate milk, cheese and eggs.....but i also made sure i bought no cosmetic or home products tested on animals.....bought no leather....etc. sad to say really, but i've gone back to it all. well, i still avoid as many products tested on animals as possible, but i do wear leather again....and yes, eat meat. i STILL think it's horrendous what is done to animals...but yea, i just missed meat too much. funny thing is, i don't eat a LOT of it, but i do eat at least a small portion of beef, pork, chicken or fish daily. honestly, i DO feel 'healthier' eating a more balanced diet like this then i did as a vegggie....but that is only my personal experience. i know MANY vegetarians who are the picture of health and do SO well on a veggie diet.
i DO believe in the whole food chain 'cycle of life'.....don't think there is anything wrong with eating other animals for food. human beings are OMNIVORES - not purely carnivorous, nor completely herbivorous. so i do believe we are meant to eat such a varied diet. thing is though, i completely agree it's all HOW we raise and treat these animals for food that is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Your attitude reminds me of a Will Ferrell skit...
"Oh, right, Margaret, you wanted prime rib. Here's the deal: The Palm wasn't taking reservations, and I didn't even try Morton's because I understand they have a new chef. So for now, let's just go with the Alpo, okay? I know it's not your first choice but keep in mind, you're a fucking dog!"
Animals are not people. Get over it.
Are people still saying, "get over it"?
Feel free to torture whatever animals you like, I guess. I dont know what your point is.
EDIT: Try explaing your point without sarcasm, because I re-read it, I I really dont understand what you are saying.
It seems like you are saying, animals are not people, so its ok to torture them?
Feel free to torture whatever animals you like, I guess. I dont know what your point is.
EDIT: Try explaing your point without sarcasm, because I re-read it, I I really dont understand what you are saying.
It seems like you are saying, animals are not people, so its ok to torture them?
I guess that depends on what you consider torture?
If the most viable way to raise enough food to feed everyone is to have these animals live in less than perfect conditions is your definition of torture than too bad. What difference does it make? Why are you so empathetic with something that is essentially just a fuel source?
I'm saying animals are not people and it is perfectly fine to harvest them in the most efficient way. It's good for us, not so good for them. Pretty much the same for any predator/prey relationship I guess.
Pretty much the same for any predator/prey relationship I guess.
No other animal (and we are animals) systematicaly debases, tortures, and deforms their pray in the days, weeks, months and years before it consumes it!
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
I guess that depends on what you consider torture?
If the most viable way to raise enough food to feed everyone is to have these animals live in less than perfect conditions is your definition of torture than too bad. What difference does it make? Why are you so empathetic with something that is essentially just a fuel source?
I'm saying animals are not people and it is perfectly fine to harvest them in the most efficient way. It's good for us, not so good for them. Pretty much the same for any predator/prey relationship I guess.
i kinda agree with you. as ron white once said (and i posted this round here somewhere): "i didnt crawl all the way to the top of the fucking food chain to eat lettuce."
No other animal (and we are animals) systematicaly debases, tortures, and deforms their pray in the days, weeks, months and years before it consumes it!
None? Maybe not years, but cats will systematically slaughter entire families of rabbits or other rodents for the sheer fun of doing it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
No other animal (and we are animals) systematicaly debases, tortures, and deforms their pray in the days, weeks, months and years before it consumes it!
They would if they could.
No herbivore has their baby spinach washed and bagged. No herbivore can select from the vast array of veggies in the supermarket. Are you advocating that we not have farms providing goods to markets? Perhaps we should only grow and hunt what we eat.
I guess I don't understand your point.
In the wild, many animals are alive while they're being consumed. You aren't advocating that we emulate nature in all cases are you?
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I guess that depends on what you consider torture?
If the most viable way to raise enough food to feed everyone is to have these animals live in less than perfect conditions is your definition of torture than too bad. What difference does it make? Why are you so empathetic with something that is essentially just a fuel source?
I'm saying animals are not people and it is perfectly fine to harvest them in the most efficient way. It's good for us, not so good for them. Pretty much the same for any predator/prey relationship I guess.
If we can feed cattle wine (to enhance the flavors), grain, and whole plethora of other things and go to enormous cost and effort to have "gourmet beef" for the boutique and organic markets, it really shouldn't be that bloody difficult to ensure the health and well being of animals prior to their slaughter. It's not rocket science. It's fine to be efficient, it's not ok to be cruel. And I'm a meat eater. The upshot will be that if I cannot get my meat from reliable, cruelty free, best practice suppliers I'll stop purchasing it. This is a problem that a lot of suppliers are finding here. We are buying less because we aren't happy with the way things are being done.
I was informed of KentuckyFriedCruelty.com by a KFC employee so I checked out the website. The one run by Pam Anderson. They kept blaming KFC for the treatment by the farmers and slaughterhouses, which I couldn't understand. They had petitioned KFC to stop buying from those farmers, and KFC's response was basically "We buy chicken from supermarkets".
I think the only people that can legitimately be blamed for the cruel treatment of farm animals, is the farmers themselves, beyond that its questionable whether the individuals have any knowledge of, or control over, the treatment of animals.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Let's not forget the damage a single fox can do to a hen house. And it's not like they're eating them either!
Nope. And primates will brutally murder and tear the genitals off of "stranger" primates. That is, primates of the same species that are not part of their in-group. It's known as out-group hostility. It's common amongst humans and other animals alike. Cruelty it seems, is a fact of nature. That doesn't excuse it, of course, humans should have functioning inhibitors called the Prefrontal Cortex. The PFC woks such that it can inhibit the natural desire to brutually maim an out-group member, or a chicken. Unfortunately it's contextual and rather unreliable, completely ureliable if it the PFC has sustained damage.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I was informed of KentuckyFriedCruelty.com by a KFC employee so I checked out the website. The one run by Pam Anderson. They kept blaming KFC for the treatment by the farmers and slaughterhouses, which I couldn't understand. They had petitioned KFC to stop buying from those farmers, and KFC's response was basically "We buy chicken from supermarkets".
I think the only people that can legitimately be blamed for the cruel treatment of farm animals, is the farmers themselves, beyond that its questionable whether the individuals have any knowledge of, or control over, the treatment of animals.
The places shown in the video are large-scale corporate owned warehouses. They are not the typical family farm.
Nope. And primates will brutally murder and tear the genitals off of "stranger" primates. That is, primates of the same species that are not part of their in-group. It's known as out-group hostility. It's common amongst humans and other animals alike. Cruelty it seems, is a fact of nature. That doesn't excuse it, of course, humans should have functioning inhibitors called the Prefrontal Cortex. The PFC woks such that it can inhibit the natural desire to brutually maim an out-group member, or a chicken. Unfortunately it's contextual and rather unreliable, completely ureliable if it the PFC has sustained damage.
What are the odds of an organization like Meat & Livestock Australia or Meat Producers Australia P/L having a bloke at the top with sustained damage to the PFC?
The places shown in the video are large-scale corporate owned warehouses. They are not the typical family farm.
And that implicates KFC because?
It's a logistical issue, I buy chicken from KFC, KFC buys chicken from the Atlantic and Pacific Corporation, A&P buys it from one or more corporate farming companies. If cruel treatment of animals is occuring at the farming level, it does not follow that A&P, or KFC or I should know about it. Ultimately most of the chicken I eat at restaurants or at home will have come from A&P or some other supermarket that also sources chicken from the same cruel farmers. It's the farmers who are responsible for the in vivo treatment of their animals.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
In a perfect world...the goal i hope...Cows would live a meaningful life. Now why the fuck should a cow live a meaningful life...interesting you should ask.
Native americans believed that all life is equal...A plant is worth as much as human life...interesting because the environment surrounding them reflected that ideogy..areas were more healthy and so on than areas untouched by them.
So again, why the fuck should a cow enjoy any sort of meaningful existence...well why should we.
Interesting, didn't they smoke a lot of plant?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs
Well it is, because any substance that humans consume, humans also farm, which means they assist in the plants flourishing. It stands to reason that natives would have taken care of the resources they used, and thus why those regions of land seemed to flourish more. Much to the same vein that we breed Cattle for our consumption. There are so many cows because we breed them, the Aurochs went extinct almost 400 years ago. The domesticated cow survives because we take care of them for our own consumption. If we were to release cows into the wild now, they would go extinct.
Hmm, I think it's rather difficult to tell what a Cow thinks of it's environment. My experiences on my uncles Cattle Ranch were such that I didn't think cows cared about trees, they didn't seem to spend much time with them. They did however like their water hole, or pond.
An interesting event that happend was with a calf that had a deformed neck and could not eat and had trouble breathing. My uncle and I went out to execute the animal by lethal shotgun wound to the skull. I was tasked with the job of keeping the mother at bay. The task was not an easy one, I had to smash the heffer in the head with a massive log. The mother was very very protective of her calf, however, once the animal was dead, the heffer left and continued grazing. I'm not sure if it had a genuinely persistant emotional attachment, or if it was simply biologically inclined to protect a living offspring. It didn't seem to care much about revenge.
Either way, a real study should be performed to determine whether or not cows are (i) aware of the details of their surroundings and (ii) have a preference for decor. If it turns out to be the case, I'm in favor of imposing laws on farmers to create more habitable environments.
Study what cows think. K thats a really bad idea, no offense. Spiritual evolution may be more important than I thought.
The idea is that all life is sacred...
I think the meaning of "humane treatment of animals" comes into play here. You're right, though, why would we need to study that?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
How do you know where I buy my food?
And another question is how you define cruelty.
naděje umírá poslední
agreed.
i did not watch the videos...yikes. :( i don't think i even have to, b/c years ago in my younger days, i was an active member of PETA, and i had read and seen just about every video and book on the topic. it IS horrifying what we do to some animals in the name of food production, testing, cosmetics, etc.
i WAS a vegetarian for 2-3 years...for this very reason. i never did go completely vegan, still ate milk, cheese and eggs.....but i also made sure i bought no cosmetic or home products tested on animals.....bought no leather....etc. sad to say really, but i've gone back to it all. well, i still avoid as many products tested on animals as possible, but i do wear leather again....and yes, eat meat. i STILL think it's horrendous what is done to animals...but yea, i just missed meat too much. funny thing is, i don't eat a LOT of it, but i do eat at least a small portion of beef, pork, chicken or fish daily. honestly, i DO feel 'healthier' eating a more balanced diet like this then i did as a vegggie....but that is only my personal experience. i know MANY vegetarians who are the picture of health and do SO well on a veggie diet.
i DO believe in the whole food chain 'cycle of life'.....don't think there is anything wrong with eating other animals for food. human beings are OMNIVORES - not purely carnivorous, nor completely herbivorous. so i do believe we are meant to eat such a varied diet. thing is though, i completely agree it's all HOW we raise and treat these animals for food that is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I was assuming that by your comments you would continue to buy food from places that treat animals in that matter. Hence, "condoning it."
Your post wasnt very detailed.:D So I apologize if I assumed that.
I define cruelty by causing, or allowing, an animal to suffer over the period of its life (by either painful methods of raising, confinement, stress, starvaton, force feeding, etc).....or, causing an animal an extensive amount of suffering at the time of its slaughter.
Just chop off its head and be done with it.
Nuclear fission
Again, we're on the same wave length here.
Nuclear fission
Thats a good point actually.
Nuclear fission
Are people still saying, "get over it"?
Feel free to torture whatever animals you like, I guess. I dont know what your point is.
EDIT: Try explaing your point without sarcasm, because I re-read it, I I really dont understand what you are saying.
It seems like you are saying, animals are not people, so its ok to torture them?
Nuclear fission
I guess that depends on what you consider torture?
If the most viable way to raise enough food to feed everyone is to have these animals live in less than perfect conditions is your definition of torture than too bad. What difference does it make? Why are you so empathetic with something that is essentially just a fuel source?
I'm saying animals are not people and it is perfectly fine to harvest them in the most efficient way. It's good for us, not so good for them. Pretty much the same for any predator/prey relationship I guess.
No other animal (and we are animals) systematicaly debases, tortures, and deforms their pray in the days, weeks, months and years before it consumes it!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
i kinda agree with you. as ron white once said (and i posted this round here somewhere): "i didnt crawl all the way to the top of the fucking food chain to eat lettuce."
None? Maybe not years, but cats will systematically slaughter entire families of rabbits or other rodents for the sheer fun of doing it.
They would if they could.
No herbivore has their baby spinach washed and bagged. No herbivore can select from the vast array of veggies in the supermarket. Are you advocating that we not have farms providing goods to markets? Perhaps we should only grow and hunt what we eat.
I guess I don't understand your point.
In the wild, many animals are alive while they're being consumed. You aren't advocating that we emulate nature in all cases are you?
If we can feed cattle wine (to enhance the flavors), grain, and whole plethora of other things and go to enormous cost and effort to have "gourmet beef" for the boutique and organic markets, it really shouldn't be that bloody difficult to ensure the health and well being of animals prior to their slaughter. It's not rocket science. It's fine to be efficient, it's not ok to be cruel. And I'm a meat eater. The upshot will be that if I cannot get my meat from reliable, cruelty free, best practice suppliers I'll stop purchasing it. This is a problem that a lot of suppliers are finding here. We are buying less because we aren't happy with the way things are being done.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2006/02/12/1567920.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/08/23/2013501.htm
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Yea, sorry for sounding a bit off.
I was informed of KentuckyFriedCruelty.com by a KFC employee so I checked out the website. The one run by Pam Anderson. They kept blaming KFC for the treatment by the farmers and slaughterhouses, which I couldn't understand. They had petitioned KFC to stop buying from those farmers, and KFC's response was basically "We buy chicken from supermarkets".
I think the only people that can legitimately be blamed for the cruel treatment of farm animals, is the farmers themselves, beyond that its questionable whether the individuals have any knowledge of, or control over, the treatment of animals.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Nope. And primates will brutally murder and tear the genitals off of "stranger" primates. That is, primates of the same species that are not part of their in-group. It's known as out-group hostility. It's common amongst humans and other animals alike. Cruelty it seems, is a fact of nature. That doesn't excuse it, of course, humans should have functioning inhibitors called the Prefrontal Cortex. The PFC woks such that it can inhibit the natural desire to brutually maim an out-group member, or a chicken. Unfortunately it's contextual and rather unreliable, completely ureliable if it the PFC has sustained damage.
The places shown in the video are large-scale corporate owned warehouses. They are not the typical family farm.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
OLS posted the link to eatwild way back on page one I think.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
What are the odds of an organization like Meat & Livestock Australia or Meat Producers Australia P/L having a bloke at the top with sustained damage to the PFC?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
And that implicates KFC because?
It's a logistical issue, I buy chicken from KFC, KFC buys chicken from the Atlantic and Pacific Corporation, A&P buys it from one or more corporate farming companies. If cruel treatment of animals is occuring at the farming level, it does not follow that A&P, or KFC or I should know about it. Ultimately most of the chicken I eat at restaurants or at home will have come from A&P or some other supermarket that also sources chicken from the same cruel farmers. It's the farmers who are responsible for the in vivo treatment of their animals.