On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:05:03 GMT, "T.R.H" > wrote:

>Martha Jones wrote:
>
>> Their suffering is doing me a lot of good because I can enjoy eating
>> their corpses... Much better than chewing some tasteless potatoes.
>>
>> Am I aware of their horrifying living conditions? Yes. Check out
>> www.factoryfarming.com.
>>
>> What is my conclusion? When I grill a steak, I know that I am the king
>> of the animal kingdom. Thankfully, I get to eat animals, not vice
>> versa.
>>
>> Martha
>> LCing since 1/01/2002, 247/152/155
>>
>Me too!
>
>When I tear into a moose or deer steak, I get a warm fuzzy feeling

If you care about human influence on animals, you could feel
good that the meat from a hunted animal involves less animal
deaths than some type of meat substitute like tofu. People who
eat a lot of hunted meat and/or grass raised animal products are
likely to contribute to less overall animal deaths than many veg*ns.
People who eat grass raised animal products also contribute to
decent lives for farm animals, which veg*nism certainly does *not*
contribute to.

>'cause I actually did it a favour, he/she met his/her end quickly and
>painlessly, a 200 grain bullet thru the cranium and it's lights out!
>
>Better that than falling to a pack of wolves and having its hindquarters
>eaten while its bleating/braying until it passes out from shock/lack of
>blood.

It is pathetic that "ARAs" encourage (nonexistent) methods of wildlife
population management which would cause more suffering to wildlife
than human hunting. They encourage things which cause more suffering,
are a threat to the animals 24/7 instead of only during certain seasons
and during daylight hours, and that cause more suffering to young and
baby animals than human hunting:
__________________________________________________ _______
"Without hunting, deer and other animals would overpopulate and die of
starvation."
Starvation and disease are unfortunate, but they are nature's way of ensuring that the
strong survive. Natural predators help keep prey species strong by killing only the
sick and weak. Hunters, however, kill any animal they come across or any animal
whose head they think would look good mounted above the fireplace-often the
large, healthy animals needed to keep the population strong. And hunting creates
the ideal conditions for overpopulation. After hunting season, the abrupt drop in
population leads to less competition among survivors, resulting in a higher birth rate.

http://www.peta-online.org/fp/hunt.html
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>Which is usually the way most meet their end (or some similar
>way), animals dying of old age in the wild is very rare,

We don't hear much about animals out there all alone dying from cancer, etc, but
no doubt it goes on. I've heard that foraging animals die because they loose all their
teeth, if they make it that long. One specific example of that was kangaroos. It must
be horrible to die of starvation, in a world surrounded by food like you always have
been, smelling it while you starve to death.

>they usually
>meet their end in a very cruel way, thats how nature works.
>
>MEing since I can remember..
>
>"I kill it, I grill it"
>

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:58:32 -0600, (Martha Jones) wrote:

>Their suffering is doing me a lot of good because I can enjoy eating
>their corpses... Much better than chewing some tasteless potatoes.
>
>Am I aware of their horrifying living conditions? Yes. Check out
>www.factoryfarming.com.

· Because there are so many different situations
involved in the raising of meat animals, it is completely
unfair to the animals to think of them all in the same
way, as "ARAs" appear to do. To think that all of it is
cruel, and to think of all animals which are raised for
the production of food in the same way, oversimplifies
and distorts one's interpretation of the way things
really are. Just as it would to think that there is no
cruelty or abuse at all.

Beef cattle spend nearly their entire lives outside
grazing--that is not a bad way to live. Veal are
confined to such a degree that they appear to have
terrible lives, so there is no reason to think of both
groups of animals in the same way.
Chickens raised as fryers and broilers, and egg
producers who are in a cage free environment--as well as
the birds who parent all of them, and the birds who parent
battery hens--are raised in houses, but not in cages. The
lives of those birds are not bad. Battery hens are confined
to cages, and have what appear to be terrible lives, so
there is no reason to think of battery hens and the other
groups in the same way. ·

>What is my conclusion? When I grill a steak, I know that I am the king
>of the animal kingdom.

Not necessarily you, but humans as a group. You might
very well find things were a lot different if you had to get
out there and make it on your own, without the backup
from countless people who have put you in the position
you are now in. Many of the animals you feel kingly over
are able to survive well enough without significant assistance
from others of their kind.

>Thankfully, I get to eat animals, not vice
>versa.
>
>Martha
>LCing since 1/01/2002, 247/152/155

You have much to be thankful for. You can be thankful
that you weren't born one of them, or a human 500 years
ago, or 1000, or 5000, or 20000.... We are all in a very
fortunate position just to be able to discuss such things,
especially with people all over the world simply by tapping
our fingers. Being in the unique position we are in, it seems
that it might be better to encourage decent lives for billions
of farm animals than to try to prevent them from having any
life at all as "ARAs" want to do, or to enjoy the less fortunate
beings' suffering which is even worse than the "ARAs", imo.