 |
|
| General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Ya ever notice, these PETA people never put their cameras down and try to stop
whatever supposed cruelty they are filming? Nope, they just keep on filming, and when either all the animals are dead or they run out of film, they leave to film another day. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
How come there's no PETV -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Vegetables?
A pig's got a fighting chance to run away, but a carrot's pretty much stuck. Sure, the noise a carrot makes when under stress is too low frequency for human ears to hear, but that doesn't make them any less alive. Vegetables are slaughtered by the ton each year. Cruelly uprooted, sometimes decapitated, often eaten and cooked alive... They are frequently raised in densely populated fields, and some are repeatedly doused with the feces of cattle. Can you imagine? You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still support the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else is just a sad delusion. (Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). Marcelino wrote: > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Why do you have to show everyone how stupid you really are by saying such
ignorant things. You never know.One of those pigs getting bashed and slaughtered.Could be you in your next life. "James McIninch" > wrote in message news:93ggb.698357$uu5.113936@sccrnsc04... > How come there's no PETV -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Vegetables? > A pig's got a fighting chance to run away, but a carrot's pretty much > stuck. Sure, the noise a carrot makes when under stress is too low > frequency for human ears to hear, but that doesn't make them any less > alive. > > Vegetables are slaughtered by the ton each year. Cruelly uprooted, sometimes > decapitated, often eaten and cooked alive... They are frequently raised in > densely populated fields, and some are repeatedly doused with the feces of > cattle. Can you imagine? > > You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still support > the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else is > just a sad delusion. > > (Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). > > > Marcelino wrote: > > > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Marcelino" > wrote in message .com... > Why do you have to show everyone how stupid you really are by saying such > ignorant things. A question: Are you a vegan? -Hound |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, "Cuchulain Libby"
> writes: >"Marcelino" > wrote in message y.com... >> Why do you have to show everyone how stupid you really are by saying such >> ignorant things. > >A question: >Are you a vegan? Actually he's another of those dumb guinea *******s... ahahahahahahaha. . . ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
James McIninch > writes:
>You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still support >the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else is >just a sad delusion. > >(Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). Um, that's tongue *in* cheek. Tongues and cheeks are in headcheese. M-W tongue in cheek Function: adverb Date: circa 1934 : with insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration --- ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
Don't plants feel pain? This also is sometimes posed as, "Where do you draw
the line? Rights for roaches?" So far, as best we can determine biologically and physiologically, plants do not feel pain. They are alive and have some sort of response to light, water, etc., but they don't feel pain. Pain requires a brain, a central nervous system, pain receptors, and so on. All mammals, birds, and fish have these things. No plants do. We all know this to be true: We all understand that there is a fundamental difference between cutting your lawn and lighting a cat's tail on fire and between breaking up a head of lettuce and bashing a dog's head in. Birds, mammals, and fish are made of flesh, bones, and fat, just as we are. They feel pain, just as we do. I may not know quite where to draw the line. For example, I'm not sure what a roach or an ant experiences. But I do know with 100 percent certainty that intentionally inflicting suffering because of tradition, custom, convenience, or a palate preference is unethical. And if we're eating meat, dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally causing suffering, for no good reason "PENMART01" > wrote in message ... > James McIninch > writes: > > >You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still support > >the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else is > >just a sad delusion. > > > >(Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). > > Um, that's tongue *in* cheek. > > Tongues and cheeks are in headcheese. > > > M-W > tongue in cheek > Function: adverb > Date: circa 1934 > : with insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration > --- > > > ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- > ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- > Sheldon > ```````````` > "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
MARCELINO'S MOMMA IS A 25¢ WHORE) If You Eat Pork of any kind
Subject: Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
From: "Marcelino" > Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:27:10 GMT In article >, "Marcelino" > writes: >Don't plants feel pain? Yep, you... a dumb potato head... now go impale your stinky butthole on a thorny berry cane, PEA brain. ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
MARCELINO'S MOMMA IS A 25¢ WHORE) If You Eat Pork of any kind
LOL...you just can't handle the truth...do you actually think that your
subject line response was recessary.Well,with that bird brain of yours,,I guess thats all that you could come up with.Try harder next time,You can do better can't you>>>>You are a sorry excuse for a person.I feel sorry 4 you in a way.. "PENMART01" > wrote in message ... > Subject: Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind > From: "Marcelino" > > Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:27:10 GMT > > In article >, "Marcelino" > > writes: > > >Don't plants feel pain? > > Yep, you... a dumb potato head... now go impale your stinky butthole on a > thorny berry cane, PEA brain. > > > ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- > ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- > Sheldon > ```````````` > "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
Marcelino wrote:
> > > And if we're eating meat, > dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally causing suffering, for no good > reason > Eggs? EGGS??? For cripes sake, chickens and other fowl lay eggs whether anyone eats the eggs or not. You'd have to listen REALLY hard to hear an egg cry out in pain. gloria p |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, Puester
> writes: >Marcelino wrote: >> >> >> And if we're eating meat, >> dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally causing suffering, for no good >> reason >> > > > >Eggs? EGGS??? For cripes sake, chickens and other fowl >lay eggs whether anyone eats the eggs or not. You'd have >to listen REALLY hard to hear an egg cry out in pain. <SUB>mama....</SUB> ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
Puester wrote:
> > Marcelino wrote: > > And if we're eating meat, > > dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally causing suffering, for no good > > reason > Eggs? EGGS??? For cripes sake, chickens and other fowl > lay eggs whether anyone eats the eggs or not. You'd have > to listen REALLY hard to hear an egg cry out in pain. (laughing) Maybe he thinks he's eating fertilized eggs? Perhaps he is but ... I doubt it. nancy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Puester" > wrote in message ... > Marcelino wrote: > > > > > > And if we're eating meat, > > dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally causing suffering, for no good > > reason > > > > > > Eggs? EGGS??? For cripes sake, chickens and other fowl > lay eggs whether anyone eats the eggs or not. You'd have > to listen REALLY hard to hear an egg cry out in pain. > > gloria p I'm going to piggy back and comment on the dairy products... I was raised on a dairy farm; my cows had it better than I did! Most cows, other than some cases sensationalized by the eco-terrorist peta types, are very well cared for and do not suffer... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
Marcelino wrote:
> Don't plants feel pain? This also is sometimes posed as, "Where do you > draw the line? Rights for roaches?" So far, as best we can determine > biologically and physiologically, plants do not feel pain. It's a well studied topic, and evidence certainly suggests that plants do feel pain (not only that, but they emit subsonic "cries" that are perceived by nearby plants and various insects). While they don't have nerves, they do exhibit startingly similar biochemical stress responses. So, yes, it's generally accepted that plants feel pain in a sense quite similar to animals. Perhaps it's not popularly understood, but true nonetheless -- either way, unless your a phytobiologist you probably don't care. After all, if you can't eat meat or vegetables, your dietary options are slim. > Pain requires a brain, a central nervous system, pain receptors, and > so on. This is not true. Many organisms very clearly experience pain without central nervous systems (C. elegans, etc.), and the body has no "pain receptors" per se. Pain is reflected quite specifically by a cascade of biochemical responses to external stressors. To you, it's perceived as pain -- unless you have lerposy. To someone with leprosy, there is no perception of pain at all. Ironically, pigs are the only mammal other than humans to contract leprosy. > All mammals, birds, and fish have these things. No plants do. We > all know this to be true: We all understand that there is a fundamental > difference between cutting your lawn and lighting a cat's tail on fire and > between breaking up a head of lettuce and bashing a dog's head in. The difference is pricipally semantic and arbitrary. It's just simpler for people to relate to a cuddly animal than objects that appear more plainly inanimate. > Birds, mammals, and fish are made of flesh, bones, and fat, just as we > are. Not all. Even then, they are frequently made of different flesh, bones and fat than we. Moreover, plants are composed of very simlar chemical constituents but in different configuration and concentrations. Like many animals, plants produce a wide array of proteins and sugars that we cannot. Likewise, we produce a number of compounds that other animals do not (for example, the neurotransmitters and receptors in animals vary quite a bit). > They feel pain, just as we do. But you see, that's a popular belief based on supposition. They feel pain, yes, but demonstrably not like we (humans do). Most animal's responses are quite different (both biochemically, but also behaviorally). We know that they, in fact, do not feel pain like we do. We know only that they, (like most anything else alive) feel pain. > I may not know quite where to draw the line. For > example, I'm not sure what a roach or an ant experiences. It's quite similar to any small animal. Typically the rate of response is faster because of the small and open circulatory system and high metabolic rate of many of these creatures. > But I do know with 100 percent certainty that intentionally > inflicting suffering because of tradition, custom, convenience, or > a palate preference is unethical. You don't know that, you believe that. That conclusion is a value judgement based on your personal beliefs, understanding of the situation, and understanding of the concept of ethics. It cannot be fundamentally correct or true because the assertion does not present a conclusive and objectively testable hypothesis. > And if we're eating meat, dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally > causing suffering, for no good reason There's little evidence for that assertion. If you perceive death or captivity as cruel outright, regardless of the situation, then perhaps the position is arguable. The fact is that while people understand the existence of cruelty, death, or undesirable conditions in some cases, they accept the conditions that actually prevail have none of these attributes (for example, the PETA site focuses on falsified videos, animal cruelty cases not associated with commercial food production, etc as a protocol for advancing a very specific agenda (originally animal welfare, but the focus is shifting to anti-globalization efforts -- that based on their more recent funding -- by attempting to adversely affect american and western-european agriculture)). > > > "PENMART01" > wrote in message > ... >> James McIninch > writes: >> >> >You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still > support >> >the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else > is >> >just a sad delusion. >> > >> >(Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). >> >> Um, that's tongue *in* cheek. >> >> Tongues and cheeks are in headcheese. >> >> >> M-W >> tongue in cheek >> Function: adverb >> Date: circa 1934 >> : with insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration >> --- >> >> >> ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- >> ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- >> Sheldon >> ```````````` >> "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." >> |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Penmart01) If You Eat Pork of any kind
James McIninch > wrote in message news:<Kppgb.701403$uu5.113994@sccrnsc04>...
> Marcelino wrote: > > > > Pain requires a brain, a central nervous system, pain receptors, and > > so on. > > This is not true. Many organisms very clearly experience pain without > central nervous systems (C. elegans, etc.), and the body has no "pain > receptors" per se. Pain is reflected quite specifically by a cascade of > biochemical responses to external stressors. To you, it's perceived as pain > -- unless you have lerposy. To someone with leprosy, there is no perception > of pain at all. Ironically, pigs are the only mammal other than humans to > contract leprosy. Uh uh. Don't forget Armadillos... There is a story behind that. I did my term paper when I took pathogenic microbiology on "Hansen's disease", aka Leprosy. Humans infected the Armadillo with it. It was not originally a vector. > > > > All mammals, birds, and fish have these things. No plants do. We > > all know this to be true: We all understand that there is a fundamental > > difference between cutting your lawn and lighting a cat's tail on fire and > > between breaking up a head of lettuce and bashing a dog's head in. > > The difference is pricipally semantic and arbitrary. It's just simpler for > people to relate to a cuddly animal than objects that appear more plainly > inanimate. I dunno, I love plants, and I eat them anyway. Bunnies too. <G> Besides, there is a difference between torturing an animal for sadistic pleasure and killing it mercifully for food! Give me a break. I do raise some of my own meat and it is important to me that the animal die instantly. It's hard to kill a plant instantly. Perhaps they suffer even more? Maybe it's more cruel to eat plants that cannot be killed easily as opposed to animals that die all too easily? What about eating fertile eggs? Can it even be considered a live animal if it is only germinated and has not really started to develop yet? We have to take a life to eat. That the way things are..... > > > > Birds, mammals, and fish are made of flesh, bones, and fat, just as we > > are. > > Not all. Even then, they are frequently made of different flesh, bones and > fat than we. Moreover, plants are composed of very simlar chemical > constituents but in different configuration and concentrations. Like many > animals, plants produce a wide array of proteins and sugars that we cannot. > Likewise, we produce a number of compounds that other animals do not (for > example, the neurotransmitters and receptors in animals vary quite a bit). That's the whole thing with essential fatty acids and essential amino acids. We HAVE to get those from our diets and will die without them. Animal sources are much more efficient for both. To my knowlege, there is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate. <G> That is the main nutrient in plants. > > > > > They feel pain, just as we do. > > But you see, that's a popular belief based on supposition. They feel pain, > yes, but demonstrably not like we (humans do). Most animal's responses are > quite different (both biochemically, but also behaviorally). We know that > they, in fact, do not feel pain like we do. We know only that they, (like > most anything else alive) feel pain. God, that is SO true! I do some wildlife rescue work and have had to treat seriously injured animals. I have reduced compound fractures without anesthesia and get no reaction from the animal. A human would probably pass out from that kind of pain... I do what I can with locals/xylocaine, but it's not always possible. Like that rabbit I did minor surgery on to remove a massive abcess the size of a baseball. I removed quite a bit of dead tissue that probably had no feeling, but I had to get rid of it all to healthy flesh. Rabbits can scream bloody murder if you hurt them. This one uttered not a single peep. Yes, it survived. Lived with me for about 5 years. :-) It was a domestic rabbit some ass had released into the wild. They don't do well. Birds can die from pain, but I reduced a compound lower leg fracture in a barn owl, (and according to the vet that did an x-ray on the splinted leg later, I got it right. <G>) and the owl only reacted slightly and more from being handled at all than from the pain of pulling the bone back in thru the skin. It survived and was later released after I sent it to an owl rehabber. I also watched a raptor specialist vet down in San Antonio reduce a wing compound fracture. I held the hawk for him so I know damned well that most bird vets don't try to put a bird under to do this. It's too risky. Anesthesia is very, very risky to birds. I was not comfortable with doing a wing myself so just wrapped the exposed bone with neosporin and saline moistened gauze to keep it wet and let HIM do it. I worked with one of the vets I use with a large Texas rat snake that someone had beaten with a 2x4. It had several broken ribs and the primary lung was punctured in 3 places according to the vet. We had to decide whether or not to treat or put it to sleep. Snakes cannot scream so other than reflex reaction, it's hard to tell if you hurt them. With lots of care, it survived and healed. Snake anatomy is pretty unique. Sorry, I'm rambling. Doing wildlife rescue work is fascinating. > > > > > I may not know quite where to draw the line. For > > example, I'm not sure what a roach or an ant experiences. > > It's quite similar to any small animal. Typically the rate of response is > faster because of the small and open circulatory system and high metabolic > rate of many of these creatures. Sorry but I refuse to feel sorry for pests/insects. That is where I draw the line. I kill mosquitos by the millions and will continue to do so. I don't eat them tho! LOL! > > > > But I do know with 100 percent certainty that intentionally > > inflicting suffering because of tradition, custom, convenience, or > > a palate preference is unethical. > > You don't know that, you believe that. That conclusion is a value judgement > based on your personal beliefs, understanding of the situation, and > understanding of the concept of ethics. It cannot be fundamentally correct > or true because the assertion does not present a conclusive and objectively > testable hypothesis. If you raise it humanely and kill it painlessly, you are NOT causing it to suffer! Most animals would never have been born at all or lived at all if they were not being raised for food. Humane husbandry practices are pretty much the law now. If you really want to know where your meat has been, raise it yourself. > > > > And if we're eating meat, dairy products, or eggs, we're intentionally > > causing suffering, for no good reason > > There's little evidence for that assertion. If you perceive death or > captivity as cruel outright, regardless of the situation, then perhaps the > position is arguable. The fact is that while people understand the > existence of cruelty, death, or undesirable conditions in some cases, they > accept the conditions that actually prevail have none of these attributes > (for example, the PETA site focuses on falsified videos, animal cruelty > cases not associated with commercial food production, etc as a protocol for > advancing a very specific agenda (originally animal welfare, but the focus > is shifting to anti-globalization efforts -- that based on their more > recent funding -- by attempting to adversely affect american and > western-european agriculture)). > Raising animals for food is not cruel. There are plenty of laws in place for humane treatment of animals! > > > > "PENMART01" > wrote in message > > ... > >> James McIninch > writes: > >> > >> >You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still > support > >> >the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else > is > >> >just a sad delusion. > >> > > >> >(Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). > >> > >> Um, that's tongue *in* cheek. > >> > >> Tongues and cheeks are in headcheese. > >> > >> > >> M-W > >> tongue in cheek > >> Function: adverb > >> Date: circa 1934 > >> : with insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration > >> --- > >> We have to kill to eat. Whether or not it is a plant or animal, you are still taking a life...... C. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
James McIninch wrote:
> How come there's no PETV -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Vegetables? > A pig's got a fighting chance to run away, but a carrot's pretty much > stuck. Sure, the noise a carrot makes when under stress is too low > frequency for human ears to hear, but that doesn't make them any less > alive. > > Vegetables are slaughtered by the ton each year. Cruelly uprooted, sometimes > decapitated, often eaten and cooked alive... They are frequently raised in > densely populated fields, and some are repeatedly doused with the feces of > cattle. Can you imagine? > > You're a hypocrite if you pan the consumption of animals yet still support > the slaughter of vegatation. It's omnivory or autotrophy, anything else is > just a sad delusion. > > (Incidentally, that's tongue and cheek, all). I've actually seen studies where they used ecg machines on plants with startling results. They took two plants that were grown side by side; they "knew " each other. Then, they sent a number of people into the room to "visit" the plants, but the last one had instructions to destroy one of the plants. They then hooked the ecg up to the remaining plant. As each of the people re-visited the remaining plant, no matter what order they were sent in, the remaining plant "knew" which one killed it's "friend" and it showed unmistakably on the ecg! In another incident, a plant detected the researcher merely thinking of burning a leaf with a lighter. This wasn't even intended to be a test; he was just thinking of what tests he could do while it happened to be hooked up to the ecg. In another study, they used an ecg on cups of yogurt. They fed one (sugar) while they starved the other, and they monitored both on the ecg. When one was fed, the other showed a reaction ("desire") to the first being fed. Granted, yogurt is not a single plant, but a colony of culture. So, there's more to plants and living cultures than people think! Gary -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Marcelino" > wrote in message .com... > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm Are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA newsletter? Dimitri |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
I dont know who you refer when calling and Idiot,But all I had done was
posted a link and you guys done the rest.......... "Dimitri" > wrote in message m... > > "Marcelino" > wrote in message > .com... > > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm > > > Are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA newsletter? > > Dimitri > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Animals eat one another in nature, so why shouldn't we eat animals?
Variations on this include, "Aren't humans at the top of the food chain?" and "Aren't humans omnivores?" Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them and then killing them in gruesome ways, and try to tell me that this is moral. Nature 's law is, without a doubt, Darwin's "survival of the fittest." Some animals may procreate by rape; other animals may fight territorial battles to the death. But we hold ourselves to a higher standard in our interactions with one another. We even hold ourselves to a higher standard with regard to animals we often form special bonds with, such as dogs and cats-readily granting them some basic protections. What animal welfare advocates suggest is that we should also be compassionate toward all animals. "Marcelino" > wrote in message .com... > I dont know who you refer when calling and Idiot,But all I had done was > posted a link and you guys done the rest.......... > "Dimitri" > wrote in message > m... > > > > "Marcelino" > wrote in message > > .com... > > > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > > > > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm > > > > > > Are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA newsletter? > > > > Dimitri > > > > > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Marcelino" > wrote: > Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in > slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them and then > killing them in gruesome ways, and try to tell me that this is moral. Nature > 's law is, without a doubt, Darwin's "survival of the fittest." Some animals > may procreate by rape; other animals may fight territorial battles to the > death. But we hold ourselves to a higher standard in our interactions with > one another. We even hold ourselves to a higher standard with regard to > animals we often form special bonds with, such as dogs and cats-readily > granting them some basic protections. What animal welfare advocates suggest > is that we should also be compassionate toward all animals. Do you assume that factory farms producing vegetables do not harm animals? I would think that they do and in great numbers. Machines used to both prepare the land as well as harvest the food can do a lot of damage to the animal population in a field. Never mind pesticides used in non-organic farming. Of course most of these animals are little things like lizards, rodents, snakes, etc. that we don't like anyway and we can't easily get video of them being ripped apart or exposed to predators when we destroy their cover. The point I'm trying to make is that if any of us choose to live in modern society, vegetarian or not, we are killing animals. It's next to impossible to avoid. Probably the way we could kill the least number of animals in our diet, without growing it all ourselves, would be to add hunted meats to our menu. Of course, there are plenty of other things we use in day to day life that cause the death of animals. -Mike |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Mike Pearce" > wrote > Do you assume that factory farms producing vegetables do not harm animals? I > would think that they do and in great numbers. Machines used to both prepare > the land as well as harvest the food can do a lot of damage to the animal > population in a field. [...] Good points Mike, you forgot about all the animals killed generating the electricity this wacko needs to post on Usenet. And how the dye in his clothes was bonded to the fabric. -Hound |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Hark! I heard "Mike Pearce" > say:
<snip> > most of these animals are little things like lizards, rodents, > snakes, etc. that we don't like anyway This isn't aimed at Mike or anyone in particular: We've wandered far afield here (imagine that!), but I did want to put in a good word for non-poisonous snakes & spiders, as well as lizards and bats. These are great critters with bad reputatons; they help keep the bug population under control and generally are not a hazard to us. I'm terrified of spiders, but I don't kill them, I gently move them outside of the house. I'd much rather have these animals around than a swarm of mosquitos (yuck!). Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now... ;-) -- j*ni p. ~ mom, gamer, novice cook ~ ...fish heads, fish heads, eat them up, yum! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:22:29 GMT, "Marcelino"
> wrote: >Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in >slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them What we do to animals is to restrict their movements. If they were thinking beings that might be a problem. But they are not. Other then that the human feed & water them and keep them alive longer then if they had been in the wild. > and then >killing them in gruesome ways, If the bolt gun is used properly the death is instantaneous, without pain. (Death would occur before the pain was felt. ) >and try to tell me that this is moral. Yes. What is immoral is mans actions towards other men. If one person dies because an animal is to live, that is immoral >What animal welfare advocates suggest >is that we should also be compassionate toward all animals. > No what animal welfare advocates, (those that I know), are saying is that "I'm holier then thou". Not knowing that they look foolish. If you can tell me that you have never killed an animal,( including bugs, rats, snake, ect.) then you can preach. Oh and instead of throwing paint on a little old ladies' fur, throw it on a biker's leather. Then you can talk. Pan Ohco |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 15:14:02 -0500, Pan Ohco > wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:22:29 GMT, "Marcelino" > wrote: > > >>Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in >>slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them > >What we do to animals is to restrict their movements. If they were >thinking beings that might be a problem. But they are not. Other then >that the human feed & water them and keep them alive longer then if >they had been in the wild. Yes, it's a problem, even if you mistakenly believe that only humans think. How could anyone who claims to have humanity not be disgusted by veal crates, gestation cages, or discarding half-dead animals in piles? Sue(tm) Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Pan Ohco wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:22:29 GMT, "Marcelino" > > wrote: > > > >>Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in >>slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them > > > What we do to animals is to restrict their movements. If they were > thinking beings that might be a problem. But they are not. Other then > that the human feed & water them and keep them alive longer then if > they had been in the wild. > > >>and then >>killing them in gruesome ways, > > > If the bolt gun is used properly the death is instantaneous, without > pain. (Death would occur before the pain was felt. ) > > >>and try to tell me that this is moral. > > > Yes. What is immoral is mans actions towards other men. If one person > dies because an animal is to live, that is immoral > > >>What animal welfare advocates suggest >>is that we should also be compassionate toward all animals. >> > > No what animal welfare advocates, (those that I know), are saying is > that "I'm holier then thou". Not knowing that they look foolish. > > If you can tell me that you have never killed an animal,( including > bugs, rats, snake, ect.) then you can preach. > > Oh and instead of throwing paint on a little old ladies' fur, throw it > on a biker's leather. Then you can talk. Once, in New York city, a guy came at me with a spray can of Day-Glo red paint. I was wearing an Icelandic sheepskin coat at the time. I said one word to him as he raised the can at me. I pointed at the can. "Suppository." He didn't spray me. Pastorio |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 15:14:02 -0500, Pan Ohco > wrote:
>On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:22:29 GMT, "Marcelino" > wrote: > > >>Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in >>slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them > >What we do to animals is to restrict their movements. If they were >thinking beings that might be a problem. But they are not. Other then >that the human feed & water them and keep them alive longer then if >they had been in the wild. Recent research shows that pets (companion animals) *do* have discernable feelings for their people. While a cow's thoughts may not be particularly philosophical, I wouldn't regard it as an "unthinking" animal. There's no particular reason to make any creature's life miserable. Sensational TV shows that many serial killers began as children torturing animals. Brrr. As a carnivore, I can't start viewing every pig as 'Babe' -- at least that is an expression of our natural sympathy with other living things. And a tendency to anthropomorphize. One doesn't have to set up retirement homes for old cattle to still believe food animals should enjoy reasonably "natural" lives. As should we all. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:22:29 GMT, "Marcelino"
> wrote: >Please examine what we do to animals on factory farms and in >slaughterhouses, denying animals everything that is natural to them and then >killing them in gruesome ways, and try to tell me that this is moral. It isn't. And I believe ongoing efforts to treat food animals in reasonably "humane" ways is an excellent idea. I do, however, value human lives above those of animals. That is, the conditions engendered by huge poultry 'factories' aren't ideal for the chickens, but are *also* miserable and exploitative of human workers in the 'industry.' Rather than try and convert us all to vegetarianism, how 'bout a push to pay a bit more for 'ethical' meat products? If more expensive 'organic' fruit and veg are economically viable, why not ethical beef and chicken? While I realize that outrageous PR is used by many groups to 'shock and awe' people, I was much more impressed when PETA (headquartered in the area) had a very quiet program that built and delivered dog houses to homes and farms where dogs were observed outdoors without shelter. Prancing around naked to promote a message butters no parsnips, IMHO. There must be more benign efforts to actually *improve* the conditions of animals than nasty and unproductive confrontation. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
"Marcelino" > wrote in message .com... > I dont know who you refer when calling and Idiot,But all I had done was > posted a link and you guys done the rest.......... > "Dimitri" > wrote in message > m... > > > > "Marcelino" > wrote in message > > .com... > > > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > > > > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm > > > > > > Are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA newsletter? > > > > Dimitri I guess you don't know how to read either. What I asked is, "are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA newsletter?" That is a simple question that would require a yes or know answer. Do you understand the question? Have you been subscribing people other than yourself to their newsletter? BTW if you fail to understand the question then you are an idiot. Dimitri |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
Can't you read moron..Clearly my answer is in what I had written.It Takes
someone with some sort of brains to break it down and understand it I guess...DO you need help Understanding what I just wrote You Moron... "Dimitri" > wrote in message ... > > "Marcelino" > wrote in message > .com... > > I dont know who you refer when calling and Idiot,But all I had done was > > posted a link and you guys done the rest.......... > > "Dimitri" > wrote in message > > m... > > > > > > "Marcelino" > wrote in message > > > .com... > > > > You really need to check this out... Pork eater especially. > > > > > > > > http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs....nahan-pig-farm > > > > > > > > > Are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the PETA > newsletter? > > > > > > Dimitri > > I guess you don't know how to read either. > > What I asked is, "are you the idiot who has been subscribing people to the > PETA newsletter?" That is a simple question that would require a yes or know > answer. Do you understand the question? > > Have you been subscribing people other than yourself to their newsletter? > > BTW if you fail to understand the question then you are an idiot. > > Dimitri > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, "Marcelino"
> writes: >"Marcelino"<---WOP MOTHER****ER ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, "Marcelino"
> writes: >"Marcelino"<---WOP MOTHER****ER ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, "Marcelino"
> writes: >"Marcelino"<---WOP MOTHER****ER ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If You Eat Pork of any kind
In article >, "Marcelino"
> writes: >"Marcelino"<---WOP MOTHER****ER ---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- Sheldon ```````````` "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| a different kind of uni? | Sushi | |||
| Kind of OT | General Cooking | |||
| Which kind of Pu'erh tea to get? | Tea | |||
| Tomato Sauce- do you mean the Aussie kind or the American kind? | Preserving | |||
| If You Eat Pork of any kind | General Cooking | |||
)
Hybrid Mode
