Jump to content
aberdeen-music

Animal Welfare


Recommended Posts

i haven't eaten meat (practically fuck all) in 20 years. i dont need to. i am yet to hear any compelling argument as to why we need to eat meat. your move...

We don;t feel the need to eat meat we just choose to do as we enjoy it.

I did have a chuckle at your wee "(practically fuck all)" statement. The meat you did have though, did you peacfully sedate the animal on its own free will ?o_O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the record, i am not an advocate of veganism. we humans are omnivore: we can survive on vegetation or meat or both. i chose not to eat meat.

an essential part of our very early ancestors development was the consumption, not only of meat, but of brains... low grade sausages and pies apart, we dont eat brains anymore, we dont need to. we evolved.

i haven't eaten meat (practically fuck all) in 20 years. i dont need to. i am yet to hear any compelling argument as to why we need to eat meat. your move...

fat-straws.jpg

Go on, clutch at them.

You chose not to eat meat, a decision you are free to make. Stop pedalling that opinion on to everyone, making out like our eating meat shows us as "un-evolved" What a load of pish.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh, here we go....the "you can't prove carrots dont have feelings" malarkey

face it, you enjoy eating the flesh of a (once) living animal, 'cause you think it tastes good, which is all well and good when you are completely remote from its suffering and plight. you could be forgiven for failing to recognise that half the shit in the meat counter of a super market had anything to do with an animal, until the quality control fails and you get a nice piece of meat with a cyst in it...

Hah, of course plants don't have feelings. My rainforest remark was regarding the fact that real live animals live in rainforests that are torn down to make way for soya production. A fact that I find hypocritical: Why is it bad to kill animals to eat them, while killing animals so that you can produce something veggie-friendly isn't?

I understand completely that a lot of people aren't comfortable with directly consuming meat, and I'm fine with that. I'm really just playfully ribbing you for your knee jerk posts.

let me guess, you eat mat at least three times a week, but i bet you've never slaughtered an animal in your life.

I've killed a few fish by braining them against the side of a boat if that counts. Maybe they're gross-looking enough for you to chow down on however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's completely natural for us to eat meat, Chimpanzees, bonobos and other apes do. Just as choosing not to eat meat is natural(its a decision made by the human mind)

The only problem is that we have far too much of in our diets today

You give me the awful impression of someone who has never heard any of the arguments or read any of the books against your position.

The "natural" argument just doesn't cut it. We raped, killed and enslaved others in the past, so that is just as natural as eating meat. The problem isn't our health, it's the morality of our actions.

Eating dead animals is fine, but farming and enslaving them for our consumption is undefendable. Please read some books about this, I'd start with the Peter Singer edited Companion to Ethics and then start thinking seriously about it. Or if you don't want to think seriously about it - shut the fuck up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you on about?

If you are trying to equate the nervous systems in cows which are sufficient to class as highly pain receptive to that of an ants, then once again; I'd ask you to read some books sir.

Oh isn't that good SIR!. inequality of the highest order!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eating dead animals is fine, but farming and enslaving them for our consumption is undefendable. Please read some books about this, I'd start with the Peter Singer edited Companion to Ethics and then start thinking seriously about it. Or if you don't want to think seriously about it - shut the fuck up.

If we're talking about cattle then they would never have existed as we know them today if it wasn't for our "farming and enslaving them". Same goes for sheep. Look up animal husbandry. They exist to serve a purpose and wouldn't exist if it wasn't for man.

As a species, we're meant to eat meat and through evolution our bodies have actually become more dependent on meat in recent times, not less. That's why your appendix, for example, is a redundant organ now.

There is a food chain and the last time I checked we're at the top of it. Cows are tasty and I'm going to keep eating them. Lots of them. And I'm going to keep drinking their milk. I don't care how they're slaughtered.

I find it rather amusing that people are quick to get outraged over how we treat animals yet don't seem to show the same outrage and compassion over how we treat each other. I say lets get our own house in order before we start to worry about what we're doing with our domesticated animals. Priorities please people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, if you don't want to talk seriously about this then shut the fuck up.

To expand: If I were to use your argument for anything else, it remain as invalid as it currently is, however it might expound what I'm talking about further.

If I used the same argument for murder or slavery:

"Humans are tasty and I'm going to keep eating them. Lots of them. And I'm going to keep drinking their blood. I don't care how they're slaughtered."

If you don't care about suffering then get out of the animal AND human rights debate.

You'll notice that there isn't any actually argument here, instead just a statement that you are utterly fundamentalist in this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a food chain and the last time I checked we're at the top of it.

David Hume and his good old destruction of the "is entails ought" fallacy of philosophical moralism is all thats needed here.

You seem to think that because we are at the top of the food chain, that that then entails that we should just do whatever we want to anyone or anything weaker than us.

We have to think morally, not genetically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I used the same argument for murder or slavery:

"Humans are tasty and I'm going to keep eating them. Lots of them. And I'm going to keep drinking their blood. I don't care how they're slaughtered."

If you don't care about suffering then get out of the animal AND human rights debate.

You'll notice that there isn't any actually argument here, instead just a statement that you are utterly fundamentalist in this matter.

You obviously didn't read the last paragraph in my original post then.

I assume then that you believe that cows, sheep and indeed, any animal should be given the equal rights to a human being then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume then that you believe that cows, sheep and indeed, any animal should be given the equal rights to a human being then?

No, that would be absurd.

Morally they deserve the same right of preference utilitarianism that we enjoy. That is that they deserve not to suffer because by definition, suffering entails a preference for it to end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morally they deserve the same right of preference utilitarianism that we enjoy. That is that they deserve not to suffer because by definition, suffering entails a preference for it to end.

What exactly is your argument here? Are you saying you're happy for animals to be killed as long as they don't suffer? So you're happy for them to still be murdered as long as it is done "humanely ? Or are you suggesting that they shouldn't be murdered or "farmed" at all? Because if it's the latter then you're denying their right to exist as they wouldn't exist if it wasn't for our "farming" of them over the last few thousand of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morals exist to support our biological imperatives. Dont kid yourself and think theyre separate.

Biological, societal and logical imperatives. Also there are many biological imperatives that are considered immoral, but I basically agree with you. The point I was making was against this idea that people entertain about meat eating being "natural".

It's a semantic lumping together of many connotations, none of which hold up on their own, but when spat out onto the argument, they seem to hold weight. The idea is that when we say the word natural, we mean any number of things; for example (complete with rebuttal):

1. Conforming to the usual, common or ordinary course of society.

So this is closer to the word "normal". Eg. "Most people eat meat, it's natural!"

Doesn't take much to counter that one. "Everyone has slaves, it's natural!"

2. Existing in or formed by nature.

So this is what people often mean in this argument. Eg. "Our ancesters ate meat in the wild, it's natural!"

Well, our ancesters did A LOT of things in the wild, and not much of it would be suitable ethical behaviour for a person living in the 21st century.

And so on.

I'll stop but if you were to look in an online dictionary it wouldn't take you long to counter each individual definition, but when someone is throwing the word "natural" at you, it can appear like a real argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or are you suggesting that they shouldn't be murdered or "farmed" at all? Because if it's the latter then you're denying their right to exist as they wouldn't exist if it wasn't for our "farming" of them over the last few thousand of years.

I understand of course how we bred animals which directly led to the current sheep and cows, but I'm not sure of your point.

Do you mean that if I say that they shouldn't have been farmed, then I've somehow denied their lives in the first place? This is basically the "Beethoven Argument" which pro-lifers use in the abortion debate. I won't even start on this one because I don't think this is what you mean.

What I think that you mean is that if I were to say that animals shouldn't be farmed, then I would be asking for them to all be effectively killed because they cannot survive in the wild. If this is your question, then yes is my answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been checking out a few Web sites in regards to how I can help stop suffering in animals which are breeded to be slaughtered for Meat. Having watched a Cow being slaughtered the process absolutely disgust me. Basically I thought Cow's etc were given a quick death, naivly thinking they were given a bullet through the brain or something similar. But to my shock the animals are strung upside down, stunned by electric shock then have the Jugular slit with a Knife! In a video I watched the Cow wasn't even stunned properly, and ended up kicking and trying to free itself from the chain while bleeding slowly and painfully to death! It was absolutey shocking to watch.

Now I am a strict Vegetarian, but I'm not naive enough to expect everyone to become one and therefore save the torture of these poor animals. But surely in this day and age we can find a more humane way of slaughtering our animals.

And before anyone says it, the arguement that it makes the beef more succulant or whatever, cuts no ice with me.

Tomas

Sorry but I couldn't ber bothered reading all 5 pages but I feel the need to comment on this.

I am a meat eater and use to work in a slaughterhouse. I was not involved in the killing but have had the tour and seen the killing first hand.

The slaughter of these animals is as humane as possible.

They are kept in clean pens over night to calm them down. If any animal is seen to be in distress it is isolated and allowed to calm down. (Admittedly this is because killing a stressed out animal makes the meat tougher.)

They are moved through into the slaughter hall where they are stunned using an electrical charge then immediately killed using a boltgun that thrusts a long threaded bolt into there brain.

Death is instant.

What you have desciibed is, as someone else mentioned, possibly the halal traditional method. This is not common practice within modern slaughterhouses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humans are basically opportunistic feeders, omnivores as far back as science can trace. Farming the descendants of our prey is just one of many techniques we've used to landscape our environment and divide our labour. Perhaps dietary technology can support the vegan well enough to maintain their optimal health but an interest in nutrition seems to play second fiddle to their evangelism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...