So - PETA...

[NeedleinA]

On 1/30/2017 at 3:19 PM, NeuroTypical said:

to breeders

I fall in this category.

Anyone care to do the math? Animals turned over to PETA vs. their kill rate vs. their placement rate?
They are only a shock and awe organization looking for donations...disguised as an "animal" group.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

There's nothing wrong with wanting the horrible abuse of animals to stop.  I'm not vegan nor vegetarian and I also want the horrible abuse of animals to stop.  So, I think the issue here is our understanding of what constitutes abuse of animals.

Possibly.  Anthropomorphism is a common method of humans to display compassion.  But this is a First World view in my opinion.  For example, in the Philippines, slaughterhouses don't need glass windows... your backyard is a slaughterhouse.

Very THIS!!! ^^^

[unixknight]

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Possibly.  Anthropomorphism is a common method of humans to display compassion.  But this is a First World view in my opinion.  For example, in the Philippines, slaughterhouses don't need glass windows... your backyard is a slaughterhouse.

I think you're right about this, but I think what @Suzie is talking about isn't the simple killing of animals for food, but rather the living conditions for the animals in the way they're kept by large corporate farms in the U.S. and similar places.  We've all heard the horror stories of how veal is produced from young calves but life really isn't that much better for other food animals, especially chickens.

I know a guy who went vegetarian purely on the basis of not wanting to eat food that was produced in this way, and I do understand where he's coming from.  He found out first hand when he worked at a Purdue farm. 

That said, I eat meat and I don't intend to stop.  I hate the way food animals are treated in larger farms, so it seems to me the solution might be some kind of reform in how farm animals are kept.  Of course, the problem is that part of the reason it's done this way is to meet demand.  What would happen to the food supply if we suddenly ceased all such animal farming to switch to a new system?  Would it be enough?  I don't know. 

To tie this in with the OT:

This isn't my area of expertise, but I feel like PETA really COULD play a positive and constructive role if they turned heir energies toward solving that kind of problem, rather than vilifying humans.

 

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I think you're right about this, but I think what @Suzie is talking about isn't the simple killing of animals for food, but rather the living conditions for the animals in the way they're kept by large corporate farms in the U.S. and similar places.  We've all heard the horror stories of how veal is produced from young calves but life really isn't that much better for other food animals, especially chickens.

I know a guy who went vegetarian purely on the basis of not wanting to eat food that was produced in this way, and I do understand where he's coming from.  He found out first hand when he worked at a Purdue farm. 

That said, I eat meat and I don't intend to stop.  I hate the way food animals are treated in larger farms, so it seems to me the solution might be some kind of reform in how farm animals are kept.  Of course, the problem is that part of the reason it's done this way is to meet demand.  What would happen to the food supply if we suddenly ceased all such animal farming to switch to a new system?  Would it be enough?  I don't know. 

To tie this in with the OT:

This isn't my area of expertise, but I feel like PETA really COULD play a positive and constructive role if they turned heir energies toward solving that kind of problem, rather than vilifying humans.

 

So, here's the difference = Someone seeing the state of food production in the US and wanting to change it versus someone seeing the state of food production in the US and becoming vegan.

Because, if someone doesn't like the way animals are treated in a slaughterhouse there are many other ways of getting meat than that without saying "if you see it, you'll go vegan" which implies that the killing is the problem and not the manner by which it was killed.  I mean, saying, "if you see it, you'll never buy chicken from the grocery again." would be reasonable for someone who doesn't find the killing itself as immoral.  There are many many local farmers who would love to get your business if you would just spend an extra dollar a pound on your meat.  And urban farming has gotten to be as trendy as veganism if not more trendy...  Rabbits and quail are common urban farm meat sources as they're not classified farm animals and are, therefore, not subject to zoning restrictions so even apartment dwellers can have a meat source that they take full control of the way the animal is raised from birth to slaughter for their own personal consumption.

 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, unixknight said:

... I think what @Suzie is talking about isn't the simple killing of animals for food, but rather the living conditions for the animals in the way they're kept by large corporate farms in the U.S. and similar places.  We've all heard the horror stories of how veal is produced from young calves but life really isn't that much better for other food animals, especially chickens.

... the problem is that part of the reason it's done this way is to meet demand.  What would happen to the food supply if we suddenly ceased all such animal farming to switch to a new system? 

This is one reason we're supposed to eat meat sparingly.  But (here's a second/third hand source) an army chaplain and I were discussing the issue of vegetarianism and the word of wisdom.  We discussed the disappearance of a comma and the definition of the word "only".  Then he told me that he had a chance to ask President Hinckley about it personally as they sat down together for a steak dinner.  The Prophet's response was "That was mostly due to preservation methods".

I had to ask further what this meant (because he said more to him than that one sentence).  The conclusion of our discussion was this: Back then, most people when they ate meat, they hunted for it.  So, if you went hunting all the time and ate only meat, we'd run out of animals.  But during the winter animals would naturally die of starvation.  So, if they're going to die anyway, we might as well make use of them for food or other needs.  (this much was spoken of by Hyrum Smith in the D&C Commentary).

Preserving meat was time consuming, etc.  So, you generally didn't have a lot left over after winter.  So, the little preserved meat you did have, you ate sparingly.  If you continued hunting throughout the year, we'd be looking at extinction of various species.  Raising them yourself was an option.  But it meant that each animal took a long time to raise.  That was the controlling mechanism to eat sparingly throughout the year.

But today's factory farms raise SO MANY cattle that we really can eat a lot more meat and we won't run out.  It is controlled by pricing through supply and demand.  The cattle farmers are not going to be stupid enough to slaughter all their cattle and not have any breed stock left.  That would destroy their business.

Edited February 27, 2017 by Guest