Cds and Everyday Life
I have been lurking and lurking and thinking. I have read about the cds
and food processing. I have read some vegans eating eggs, cheese and animal products. Which I thought was vegetarian. If being Vegan is avoiding Cds, then of coarse its more than just food. So I have questions. If anyone wants to answer them I will throw out a few questions. Pet Ownership. Cats - Food = cd I read the ingredients in my cat's food and now realize that cat food = cd cd cd Dogs - Food =cd I have read my dog's food ingredients and I realize that dog's food = cd cd cd Keeping Aquariums = cd I keep and breed aquarium tropical fish. I know that if you buy a fish that some are caught which is cd, and some are raised on fish farms. Fish farms sort the fish on a sorting table and any that don't seem quite right are put in hole B and the ones that seem right are put in hole A. Hole B is shredded and fed to hole A's Fish so thats cd cd cd cd cd cd cd to infinity! With the Dogs and Cats am I to assume that because they are animals they deserve meat? and the Cds don't count? There is also other things on my mind. Like paper. wouldn't paper be a cd because of chopping down trees and taking away homes of animals? Or Cars, wouldn't cars cause cds by using gas made from fossil fuels that cause cds where they drill or oil spills? If people think that being totally vegan is doing the best you can then wouldn't that mean picking and choosing parts of vegan? Wouldn't choosing certain parts (the easy parts) be unfair to say Tropical fish cds? If everyone does the best they can picking certain things I would think that as a movement it would be chaos and confusing. Is being vegan against having pets like peta? Or are they one and the same? The more I look around my house, city and such it seems to me everything causes cds. And if that is true, then there is no total vegan only parts and pieces. I am not trying to start a fight, but am really wondering these things. I wonder if a vegan is proud not to eat meat or use any animal products and own an aquarium or a dog or cat, if they do, isn't it like one canceling the other out? Kay |
Kay wrote:
> I have been lurking and lurking and thinking. I have read about the cds > and food processing. I have read some vegans eating eggs, cheese and > animal products. Which I thought was vegetarian. Eggs, cheese, and animal products aren't vegan, nor are they CDs. CD is short for collateral deaths. Those would be the animals killed (and even injured) in the normal course of food production. They include all the rodents, birds, amphibians, reptiles, or even larger mammals like deer, that are run over, sliced and diced, left vulnerable to predation, poisoned, etc., during planting, harvesting, transportation, and storage. Some will argue that such animal deaths are accidental. The fact remains, though, that commercial food production (including crop production as well as storage and processing facilities) uses pesticides -- and those deaths are very much intentional. Most vegans cavalierly dismiss the entire issue of CDs, either outright or through a game of moral relativity. I've explained the latter as "objecting only to the 1001st death" because vegans object to the death of one cow but seem to have no problem with the first thousand so long as they don't end up on plates. > If being Vegan is avoiding Cds, then of coarse its more than just food. > So I have questions. If anyone wants to answer them I will throw out a > few questions. > > Pet Ownership. > > Cats - Food = cd I read the ingredients in my cat's food and now > realize that cat food = cd cd cd > > Dogs - Food =cd I have read my dog's food ingredients and I realize that > dog's food = cd cd cd > > Keeping Aquariums = cd I keep and breed aquarium tropical fish. I know > that if you buy a fish that some are caught which is cd, and some are > raised on fish farms. Fish farms sort the fish on a sorting table and > any that don't seem quite right are put in hole B and the ones that seem > right are put in hole A. Hole B is shredded and fed to hole A's Fish so > thats cd cd cd cd cd cd cd to infinity! > > With the Dogs and Cats am I to assume that because they are animals they > deserve meat? and the Cds don't count? Actually, some very cruel vegans try to force their peculiar values onto other species. You can do your own Google search on "vegan pets" and see how these people abuse their own pets and advocate others to do likewise. > There is also other things on my mind. Like paper. wouldn't paper be a > cd because of chopping down trees and taking away homes of animals? That's true, but it can also lead to immediate CDs of fledglings and baby squirrels and other animals nearby. Don't forget to count up all the skunks, possum, deer, and other animals run over by all the trucks carrying trees out of the forest for processing, nor all the animals killed from pollution of paper mills (another Google search: "paper mill pollution). > Or Cars, wouldn't cars cause cds by using gas made from fossil fuels > that cause cds where they drill or oil spills? Cars run over animals. They pollute, and the pollution kills animals. Etc. > If people think that being totally vegan is doing the best you can then > wouldn't that mean picking and choosing parts of vegan? Being vegan does nothing to benefit animals or protect animal welfare. It means more animals die needlessly because, with respect to diet anyway, more animals are killed than are ever eaten. Many animals are killed due to production of a field of grain or legumes. If one eats meat, otoh, the death of one animal feeds many people. One professor, Steven Davis formerly of Oregon State University, concluded that what a diet that causes the least harm to animals would consist of grazed (rather than grain-fed) meat and locally-grown produce; one would also avoid or minimize use of grains and legumes. > Wouldn't > choosing certain parts (the easy parts) be unfair to say Tropical fish > cds? If everyone does the best they can picking certain things I would > think that as a movement it would be chaos and confusing. All that picking and choosing should tell you a lot about a group of people who are best known for making categorical statements about their own moral superiority. It shows them to be rank hypocrites. > Is being vegan against having pets like peta? Or are they one and the same? Many vegans refuse to use words like "pets" because it demonstrates ownership, slavery, etc. Vegans and other animal rights activists are the loons who coined the more politically-correct term "animal companion." You'll find a range of thought on the issue among vegans and ARAs, with some thinking the idea of having pets (regardless of what they're called) as a social ill and some thinking it's mutually beneficial. And as noted above, you'll find many who think it's laudable to force a peculiar human diet onto another species for which it's entirely foreign. It's nothing but misguided bullying of the natural order. > The more I look around my house, city and such it seems to me everything > causes cds. And if that is true, then there is no total vegan only parts > and pieces. That's because veganism is a big, stinkin' load crap. There are valid reasons for having a vegetarian diet, particularly a well-planned one. But the self-righteousness and sanctimony of veganism are a false piety, and for many more reasons than the ones you've rightly noted. > I am not trying to start a fight, but am really wondering these things. > I wonder if a vegan is proud not to eat meat or use any animal products > and own an aquarium or a dog or cat, if they do, isn't it like one > canceling the other out? Yes, and you're too sharp to ever be a vegan. |
Kay wrote:
> I have been lurking and lurking and thinking. I have read about the cds > and food processing. I have read some vegans eating eggs, cheese and > animal products. Which I thought was vegetarian. Eggs, cheese, and animal products aren't vegan, nor are they CDs. CD is short for collateral deaths. Those would be the animals killed (and even injured) in the normal course of food production. They include all the rodents, birds, amphibians, reptiles, or even larger mammals like deer, that are run over, sliced and diced, left vulnerable to predation, poisoned, etc., during planting, harvesting, transportation, and storage. Some will argue that such animal deaths are accidental. The fact remains, though, that commercial food production (including crop production as well as storage and processing facilities) uses pesticides -- and those deaths are very much intentional. Most vegans cavalierly dismiss the entire issue of CDs, either outright or through a game of moral relativity. I've explained the latter as "objecting only to the 1001st death" because vegans object to the death of one cow but seem to have no problem with the first thousand so long as they don't end up on plates. > If being Vegan is avoiding Cds, then of coarse its more than just food. > So I have questions. If anyone wants to answer them I will throw out a > few questions. > > Pet Ownership. > > Cats - Food = cd I read the ingredients in my cat's food and now > realize that cat food = cd cd cd > > Dogs - Food =cd I have read my dog's food ingredients and I realize that > dog's food = cd cd cd > > Keeping Aquariums = cd I keep and breed aquarium tropical fish. I know > that if you buy a fish that some are caught which is cd, and some are > raised on fish farms. Fish farms sort the fish on a sorting table and > any that don't seem quite right are put in hole B and the ones that seem > right are put in hole A. Hole B is shredded and fed to hole A's Fish so > thats cd cd cd cd cd cd cd to infinity! > > With the Dogs and Cats am I to assume that because they are animals they > deserve meat? and the Cds don't count? Actually, some very cruel vegans try to force their peculiar values onto other species. You can do your own Google search on "vegan pets" and see how these people abuse their own pets and advocate others to do likewise. > There is also other things on my mind. Like paper. wouldn't paper be a > cd because of chopping down trees and taking away homes of animals? That's true, but it can also lead to immediate CDs of fledglings and baby squirrels and other animals nearby. Don't forget to count up all the skunks, possum, deer, and other animals run over by all the trucks carrying trees out of the forest for processing, nor all the animals killed from pollution of paper mills (another Google search: "paper mill pollution). > Or Cars, wouldn't cars cause cds by using gas made from fossil fuels > that cause cds where they drill or oil spills? Cars run over animals. They pollute, and the pollution kills animals. Etc. > If people think that being totally vegan is doing the best you can then > wouldn't that mean picking and choosing parts of vegan? Being vegan does nothing to benefit animals or protect animal welfare. It means more animals die needlessly because, with respect to diet anyway, more animals are killed than are ever eaten. Many animals are killed due to production of a field of grain or legumes. If one eats meat, otoh, the death of one animal feeds many people. One professor, Steven Davis formerly of Oregon State University, concluded that what a diet that causes the least harm to animals would consist of grazed (rather than grain-fed) meat and locally-grown produce; one would also avoid or minimize use of grains and legumes. > Wouldn't > choosing certain parts (the easy parts) be unfair to say Tropical fish > cds? If everyone does the best they can picking certain things I would > think that as a movement it would be chaos and confusing. All that picking and choosing should tell you a lot about a group of people who are best known for making categorical statements about their own moral superiority. It shows them to be rank hypocrites. > Is being vegan against having pets like peta? Or are they one and the same? Many vegans refuse to use words like "pets" because it demonstrates ownership, slavery, etc. Vegans and other animal rights activists are the loons who coined the more politically-correct term "animal companion." You'll find a range of thought on the issue among vegans and ARAs, with some thinking the idea of having pets (regardless of what they're called) as a social ill and some thinking it's mutually beneficial. And as noted above, you'll find many who think it's laudable to force a peculiar human diet onto another species for which it's entirely foreign. It's nothing but misguided bullying of the natural order. > The more I look around my house, city and such it seems to me everything > causes cds. And if that is true, then there is no total vegan only parts > and pieces. That's because veganism is a big, stinkin' load crap. There are valid reasons for having a vegetarian diet, particularly a well-planned one. But the self-righteousness and sanctimony of veganism are a false piety, and for many more reasons than the ones you've rightly noted. > I am not trying to start a fight, but am really wondering these things. > I wonder if a vegan is proud not to eat meat or use any animal products > and own an aquarium or a dog or cat, if they do, isn't it like one > canceling the other out? Yes, and you're too sharp to ever be a vegan. |
> > > Yes, and you're too sharp to ever be a vegan. Thank you! For the compliment, and answering my post. I have been reading for a few months now and I think you make sense and I see others explaining veganism contradicting. I came here eager to learn about it and I'm glad you guys are here. I think its important to see all sides of an issue. Kay |
> > > Yes, and you're too sharp to ever be a vegan. Thank you! For the compliment, and answering my post. I have been reading for a few months now and I think you make sense and I see others explaining veganism contradicting. I came here eager to learn about it and I'm glad you guys are here. I think its important to see all sides of an issue. Kay |
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:53:19 GMT, Kay > wrote:
>I have been lurking and lurking and thinking. That last part is unusual. Much of what people want to "teach" around here, is what *not!* to think about. >I have read about the cds >and food processing. · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does. What they try to avoid are products which provide life (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have to avoid the following in order to be successful: Tires, Surgical sutures, Matches, Soaps, Photographic film, Cosmetics, Shaving cream, Paints, Candles, Crayon/Chalk, Toothpaste, Deodorants, Mouthwash, Paper, Upholstery, Floor waxes, Glass, Water Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer, Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides, Insulation, Linoleum, Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen, Heparin, Insulin, Pancreatin, Thrombin, Vasopressin, Vitamin B-12, Asphalt, auto and jet lubricants, outboard engine oil, high-performance greases, brake fluid, contact-lens care products, glues for paper and cardboard cartons, bookbinding glue, clarification of wines, Hemostats, sunscreens and sunblocks, dental floss, hairspray, inks, PVC Explosives, Solvents, Industrial Oils, Industrial Lubricants, Stearic Acid, Biodegradable Detergents, Herbicides, Syringes, Gelatin Capsules, Bandage Strips, Combs and Toothbrushes, Emery Boards and Cloth, Adhesive Tape, Laminated Wood Products, Plywood and Paneling, Wallpaper and Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane Wrap and Tape, Adhesive Tape, Abrasives, Bone Charcoal for High Grade Steel, Steel Ball Bearings The meat industry provides life for the animals that it slaughters, and the animals live and die in it as they do in any other habitat. They also depend on it for their lives like the animals in any other habitat. If people consume animal products from animals they think are raised in decent ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the future. · [...] >If people think that being totally vegan is doing the best you can then >wouldn't that mean picking and choosing parts of vegan? Wouldn't >choosing certain parts (the easy parts) be unfair to say Tropical fish >cds? If everyone does the best they can picking certain things I would >think that as a movement it would be chaos and confusing. > >Is being vegan against having pets like peta? Or are they one and the same? PeTA is an "Animal Rights" group. "ARAs" want to eliminate domestic animals: __________________________________________________ _______ [...] "One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding...We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding." (Wayne Pacelle, HSUS, former director of the Fund for Animals, Animal People, May 1993) [...] Tom Regan, Animal Rights Author and Philosopher, North Carolina State University "It is not larger, cleaner cages that justice demands...but empty cages." (Regan, The Philosophy of Animal Rights, 1989) http://www.agcouncil.com/leaders.htm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ [...] "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Toward a Nation of Animal Rights" (symposium), Harper's, August 1988, p. 50. "Liberating our language by eliminating the word 'pet' is the first step... In an ideal society where all exploitation and oppression has been eliminated, it will be NJARA's policy to oppose the keeping of animals as 'pets.'" --New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance, "Should Dogs Be Kept As Pets? NO!" Good Dog! February 1991, p. 20. "Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. [...] "We are not especially 'interested in' animals. Neither of us had ever been inordinately fond of dogs, cats, or horses in the way that many people are. We didn't 'love' animals." --Peter Singer, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd ed. (New York Review of Books, 1990), Preface, p. ii. "The theory of animal rights simply is not consistent with the theory of animal welfare... Animal rights means dramatic social changes for humans and non-humans alike; if our bourgeois values prevent us from accepting those changes, then we have no right to call ourselves advocates of animal rights." --Gary Francione, The Animals' Voice, Vol. 4, No. 2 (undated), pp. 54-55. "Not only are the philosophies of animal rights and animal welfare separated by irreconcilable differences... the enactment of animal welfare measures actually impedes the achievement of animal rights... Welfare reforms, by their very nature, can only serve to retard the pace at which animal rights goals are achieved." --Gary Francione and Tom Regan, "A Movement's Means Create Its Ends," The Animals' Agenda, January/February 1992, pp. 40-42. [...] http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~powlesla...ights/pets.txt ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ Animal Welfare is a completely different thing, because it allows for the animals: __________________________________________________ _______ AVMA Policy on Animal Welfare and Animal Rights Animal welfare is a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of animal well-being, from proper housing and nutrition to preventive care, treatment of disease, and when necessary, humane euthanasia. The AVMA's commitment to animal welfare is unsurpassed. However, animal welfare and animal rights are not the same. AVMA cannot endorse the philosophical views and personal values of animal rights advocates when they are incompatible with the responsible use of animals for human purposes, such as food and fiber, and for research conducted to benefit both humans and animals. http://www.avma.org/policies/animalwelfare.asp ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ [...] As two recent issues of Alternatives in Philanthropy discussed ("Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights: The Case of PETA," July 1997, and "The Humane Society of the U.S.: Its Not about Animal Shelters," October 1997), animal rights organizations seek to end traditional uses of animals. By contrast, animal welfare organizations seek to improve the treatment of animals. Animal lovers who wish to support animal-interest organizations should keep this distinction in mind. [...] http://www.responsiblewildlifemanage...mal_rights.htm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ >The more I look around my house, city and such it seems to me everything >causes cds. And if that is true, then there is no total vegan only parts >and pieces. · From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals derived from grass raised cattle. Grass raised animal products contribute to less wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. · >I am not trying to start a fight, but am really wondering these things. >I wonder if a vegan is proud not to eat meat or use any animal products >and own an aquarium or a dog or cat, if they do, isn't it like one >canceling the other out? > >Kay If you want to contribute to decent lives for animals with your lifestyle, you need to be a conscientious comsumer of animal products because you can't do it by being a vegan. If you are providing a decent home for your pets then you can feel good about that, and don't let anything make you feel otherwise. You are their life, and if you were not then the only options would be for them to die, or for someone else to care for them instead of you. I'd bet that you're the best thing for them, and hopefully you can happily feel the same way. |
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:53:19 GMT, Kay > wrote:
>I have been lurking and lurking and thinking. That last part is unusual. Much of what people want to "teach" around here, is what *not!* to think about. >I have read about the cds >and food processing. · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use of wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types of buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else does. What they try to avoid are products which provide life (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would have to avoid the following in order to be successful: Tires, Surgical sutures, Matches, Soaps, Photographic film, Cosmetics, Shaving cream, Paints, Candles, Crayon/Chalk, Toothpaste, Deodorants, Mouthwash, Paper, Upholstery, Floor waxes, Glass, Water Filters, Rubber, Fertilizer, Antifreeze, Ceramics, Insecticides, Insulation, Linoleum, Plastic, Textiles, Blood factors, Collagen, Heparin, Insulin, Pancreatin, Thrombin, Vasopressin, Vitamin B-12, Asphalt, auto and jet lubricants, outboard engine oil, high-performance greases, brake fluid, contact-lens care products, glues for paper and cardboard cartons, bookbinding glue, clarification of wines, Hemostats, sunscreens and sunblocks, dental floss, hairspray, inks, PVC Explosives, Solvents, Industrial Oils, Industrial Lubricants, Stearic Acid, Biodegradable Detergents, Herbicides, Syringes, Gelatin Capsules, Bandage Strips, Combs and Toothbrushes, Emery Boards and Cloth, Adhesive Tape, Laminated Wood Products, Plywood and Paneling, Wallpaper and Wallpaper Paste, Cellophane Wrap and Tape, Adhesive Tape, Abrasives, Bone Charcoal for High Grade Steel, Steel Ball Bearings The meat industry provides life for the animals that it slaughters, and the animals live and die in it as they do in any other habitat. They also depend on it for their lives like the animals in any other habitat. If people consume animal products from animals they think are raised in decent ways, they will be promoting life for more such animals in the future. · [...] >If people think that being totally vegan is doing the best you can then >wouldn't that mean picking and choosing parts of vegan? Wouldn't >choosing certain parts (the easy parts) be unfair to say Tropical fish >cds? If everyone does the best they can picking certain things I would >think that as a movement it would be chaos and confusing. > >Is being vegan against having pets like peta? Or are they one and the same? PeTA is an "Animal Rights" group. "ARAs" want to eliminate domestic animals: __________________________________________________ _______ [...] "One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding...We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding." (Wayne Pacelle, HSUS, former director of the Fund for Animals, Animal People, May 1993) [...] Tom Regan, Animal Rights Author and Philosopher, North Carolina State University "It is not larger, cleaner cages that justice demands...but empty cages." (Regan, The Philosophy of Animal Rights, 1989) http://www.agcouncil.com/leaders.htm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ [...] "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." -- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Toward a Nation of Animal Rights" (symposium), Harper's, August 1988, p. 50. "Liberating our language by eliminating the word 'pet' is the first step... In an ideal society where all exploitation and oppression has been eliminated, it will be NJARA's policy to oppose the keeping of animals as 'pets.'" --New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance, "Should Dogs Be Kept As Pets? NO!" Good Dog! February 1991, p. 20. "Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles--from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." --John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), 1982), p. 15. [...] "We are not especially 'interested in' animals. Neither of us had ever been inordinately fond of dogs, cats, or horses in the way that many people are. We didn't 'love' animals." --Peter Singer, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd ed. (New York Review of Books, 1990), Preface, p. ii. "The theory of animal rights simply is not consistent with the theory of animal welfare... Animal rights means dramatic social changes for humans and non-humans alike; if our bourgeois values prevent us from accepting those changes, then we have no right to call ourselves advocates of animal rights." --Gary Francione, The Animals' Voice, Vol. 4, No. 2 (undated), pp. 54-55. "Not only are the philosophies of animal rights and animal welfare separated by irreconcilable differences... the enactment of animal welfare measures actually impedes the achievement of animal rights... Welfare reforms, by their very nature, can only serve to retard the pace at which animal rights goals are achieved." --Gary Francione and Tom Regan, "A Movement's Means Create Its Ends," The Animals' Agenda, January/February 1992, pp. 40-42. [...] http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~powlesla...ights/pets.txt ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ Animal Welfare is a completely different thing, because it allows for the animals: __________________________________________________ _______ AVMA Policy on Animal Welfare and Animal Rights Animal welfare is a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of animal well-being, from proper housing and nutrition to preventive care, treatment of disease, and when necessary, humane euthanasia. The AVMA's commitment to animal welfare is unsurpassed. However, animal welfare and animal rights are not the same. AVMA cannot endorse the philosophical views and personal values of animal rights advocates when they are incompatible with the responsible use of animals for human purposes, such as food and fiber, and for research conducted to benefit both humans and animals. http://www.avma.org/policies/animalwelfare.asp ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ __________________________________________________ _______ [...] As two recent issues of Alternatives in Philanthropy discussed ("Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights: The Case of PETA," July 1997, and "The Humane Society of the U.S.: Its Not about Animal Shelters," October 1997), animal rights organizations seek to end traditional uses of animals. By contrast, animal welfare organizations seek to improve the treatment of animals. Animal lovers who wish to support animal-interest organizations should keep this distinction in mind. [...] http://www.responsiblewildlifemanage...mal_rights.htm ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ >The more I look around my house, city and such it seems to me everything >causes cds. And if that is true, then there is no total vegan only parts >and pieces. · From the life and death of a thousand pound grass raised steer and whatever he happens to kill during his life, people get over 500 pounds of human consumable meat...that's well over 500 servings of meat. From a grass raised dairy cow people get thousands of dairy servings. Due to the influence of farm machinery, and *icides, and in the case of rice the flooding and draining of fields, one meal of soy or rice based product is likely to involve more animal deaths than hundreds of meals derived from grass raised cattle. Grass raised animal products contribute to less wildlife deaths, better wildlife habitat, and better lives for livestock than soy or rice products. · >I am not trying to start a fight, but am really wondering these things. >I wonder if a vegan is proud not to eat meat or use any animal products >and own an aquarium or a dog or cat, if they do, isn't it like one >canceling the other out? > >Kay If you want to contribute to decent lives for animals with your lifestyle, you need to be a conscientious comsumer of animal products because you can't do it by being a vegan. If you are providing a decent home for your pets then you can feel good about that, and don't let anything make you feel otherwise. You are their life, and if you were not then the only options would be for them to die, or for someone else to care for them instead of you. I'd bet that you're the best thing for them, and hopefully you can happily feel the same way. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter