A ring a ding ding
aah! Because I’m sat here eating a delightful chili.
I agree that the life conditions the animals in corporate factory farms are horrible and that it is even worse than the actual act of slaughter, but have you ever seen a pig being slaughtered? I saw it only on TV, but it's still horrifying. I think that having to watch that would be enough to turn anyone vegetarian, you don't even have to think about the meat industry and corporate farms. If someone raised me and took care of me for years, and then when I grew up took a knife and cut my throat to use me for food....well, let's say I wouldn't feel happy or grateful. BTW, pigs are known to be very intelligent animals, but it seems that since they are 1) big and fat, and 2) thought of as dirty (would it really be impossible for people to train them not to be?), so it's supposed to be OK to slaughter them and eat them, while the same is not OK for pets like dogs and cats.Human animals are omnivorous. We evolved to have longer digestive systems than carnivores (cats for example) yet too short too properly digest most plants--unlike cows. Domesticated farm animals only exist because we raise them for consumption. So, is it better to have at least lived than never to have existed at all? Although I do not morally object to eating meat, I do have a huge problem with the way animals are treated in these corporate factory farms. It is abhorrent.
All animals should be treated humanely during their lifetimes. This is why I claim to be a supporter of animal welfare rather than animal rights. PETA and other groups should channel their energies and resources into passing legislation that would protect farm animals from abuse and neglect. While the act of slaughter is gruesome, it is rather swift compared to the countless hours these animals spend in dirty, cramped quarters. It is these appalling conditions that need to become the focus of our efforts for change.
I don't think it is morally right to kill animals for food, or even to steal their eggs or milk.
I think humans abuse their higher power because they can, and because so many humans are on some kind of sad power trip.
The people who really anger me are the people who know the truth and have seen the violence and still continue to eat meat. It is either wilful, arogant selfishness or complete madness, one or the other.
Morrissey has been vegetarian for over thirty years now, does he look in any way frail or sickly? No. I'd venture so far as to say he looks the picture of health.
Surprise, surprise, they didn't, and they didn't talk to me either! You are right, they were downright rude! They should all be shot!And how did the stray dogs greet you when you met a few of them? with a bow or a curtsy? Did they give any details of their next venture?
Ah, so there are decent "veggie" shoes out there, somewhere - that don't look like the box they came in - tell me more anyone?
but saying you wouldn't even be friends with an omnivore, like he did on Johnathan Ross, is just silly.
The Crime of the Century rarely have I seen anyone post so much nonsense!
I eat meat cos I like it, I respect vegetarians but don't want to be one myself, all that talk of 'power trips' 'arrogant selfishness' etc.
50 quid says your only a veggie cos of 'Lord' Morrissey- that shows a complete lack of willpower and independent thinking
mr. m. is a very wealthy individual and, as such, he is cushioned from many of the hardships of life. as such, it would be very surprising if he was anything other than "the picture of health".
why is it "wrong"? (i'm not saying it's "right"; simply want you to elaborate.)
Well, for starters, feeding humans cows milk is somewhat strange, when you really think about it. It's meant for cows. It is unnatural, whatever way you look at it. Plus the antibiotics that the cows are given pass into the milk. Mmm, tasty. I don't think it's fair to steal the eggs from the chickens because they bond with them. They consider them offspring, even before they hatch. Anyhow.
i don't think that people who eat meat do so for any kind of egotistical purpose. this is nonsense.
Humans abuse their power over animals. Abuse of power is linked to arrogance.
perhaps they don't think of the slaughter of animals as "violence". why is it "complete madness" to eat meat? i suspect that most meat eaters would think it wholly rational.
Slitting an animals throat isn't violence? Er, okay.
What about the hundreds of images/videos captured by undercover animal rights activists which have been obtained? Of slaughterhouse workers smashing turkeys heads against walls, stamping on their heads, kicking them until they die? Photos and videos cannot lie, incidentally. Or a slaughterhouse worker who stands and watches as pregnant sows are cramped into crates so small they cannot move, covered in bleeding, pus-filled sores, whilst their piglets lie in their own excrement and blood, and dead piglets litter the floors of slaughterhouses? Violence? Like slaughterhouse workers who repeatedly kick livestock, hit them with crowbars or any other blunt object which comes to hand? No, you're right, there's no violence.
It is okay and perfectly morally acceptable to eat meat. Keep repeating that over and over again until you actually start to believe it. There's no abuse. The animals on your plate die perfectly humane deaths, they don't suffer. Yup, self-denial is the way to go..
mr. m. is a very wealthy individual and, as such, he is cushioned from many of the hardships of life. as such, it would be very surprising if he was anything other than "the picture of health". Irrelevant point to make. I have been a vegetarian whilst unemployed, and whilst earning minimum wage. We all eat food, strangely enough. Morrissey probably eats a lot of vegetables, which are quite cheap. Oddly enough, that's why he calls himself a vegetarian
I eat meat because I want to get one over on the cows.
Fnck 'em, they're idiots. They don't even know what electricity is.
Excuse me, but why is it strange? How do you know that it's meant for cows? Meant by whom?? Cows produce more than enough milk for both their calves and humans. And what does it mean that something is 'unnatural'? Who decides what is 'natural', and what isn't?Well, for starters, feeding humans cows milk is somewhat strange, when you really think about it. It's meant for cows. It is unnatural, whatever way you look at it.
Thank you for opening my eyes, I never knew that milk tastes do bad... But I'll trust to believe you rather than my own taste buds.Plus the antibiotics that the cows are given pass into the milk. Mmm, tasty.
How do you know what chickens think?? I admit I am no expert in chicken psychology - are you one??I don't think it's fair to steal the eggs from the chickens because they bond with them. They consider them offspring, even before they hatch. Anyhow.
Excuse me, but why is it strange? How do you know that it's meant for cows? Meant by whom?? Cows produce more than enough milk for both their calves and humans. And what does it mean that something is 'unnatural'? Who decides what is 'natural', and what isn't?
Thank you for opening my eyes, I never knew that milk tastes do bad... But I'll trust to believe you rather than my own taste buds.
If the argument is that the antibiotics are unhealthy, what about the chemicals that are used to grow the vegetables and fruit that we eat?
How do you know what chickens think?? I admit I am no expert in chicken psychology - are you one??
And many eggs aren't even fertilized, so they aren't really any more of their offspring than menstrual blood is my 'offspring'.
If these are really the best arguments for veganism you can produce, you're not going to convince many people... not even many of those who don't eat meat, or who care about animal rights.
it isn't "somewhat strange" for humans to drink cows' milk; as far as i can see, it's a fairly common practice.
please define "unnatural".
why is the ingestion of antibiotics not "tasty"?
i don't really care if chickens "bond" with their unhatched eggs. should i? if so, why?
no, it isn't. it's the beginning of a pragmatic process of transforming one thing into another (i.e. flesh into meat). moreover, you have not clarified why it is, supposedly "complete madness" to eat meat.
the incidents you detail are not necessary to the slaughter of animals; they are a by-product of other factors that could be tackled without ending the practice of animal slaughter, for the purpose of meat production.
once again, animal slaughter doesn't necessitate the kind of treatment of animals you detailed above.
it's entirely relevant to point out that people who are vegetarian may be healthier than many non-vegetarian people for reasons other than the fact that they are vegetarian. being vegetarian was posited, by another contributor to this thread, as a causative factor in the apparent good health of vegetarians and i suggested that those who do not eat meat are more likely to enjoy a relatively advantaged and healthy "lifestyle" and that it is this, overall, which causes their comparatively better health status. this is simply an impressionistic observation rather than an empirical finding, but i suspect, strongly, that research would support the hypothesis.
My favourite part of your post is the statement "I think your tone reeks of typical carnivore arrogance", which is very amusing - I don't know how I managed a 'tone of typical carnivore arrogance', considering the fact that I am not one. But I really hope, if I ever try to explain to anyone why I don't meat, that I will never sound anything like you. The parts I've highlighted in your post are just the most typical of your absurd arrogance and annoying holier-than-thou attitude. You just forgot to say that all the infidels who doth not listen to your word will burn in hell and that only you and the few righteous who have seen the light will be saved...My statements are made on the basis of a wealth of animal rights literature I have read, including studies which conclude that chickens do bond with their eggs before they are wrenched away from them. I think your tone reeks of typical carnivore arrogance. I have neither the time nor the need to lay out a thoroughly researched and exhaustive argument here, for something which should be based on moral reasoning and basic common decency anyway. Although if I wanted to, I could quite easily lay out a ten or eleven page argument here, meticulously researched. I now see that there would be no point, though. Many people are too set in their ways to live a more enlightened, open-minded, harm-free way of life. It is an effort for most people to even buy cosmetics of cleaning materials which haven't caused needless suffering to animals. I shall have to accept that most people have pitifully low standards, and that in otherwords, there is none so blind as they who refuse to see.