Poke Alster
ye why not :)

HAH! I like you already!

I'm against animal cruelty.

***************
WARNING: VID CONTAINS GRAPHIC CONTENT
***************



But some of these animal rights people have turned me off. Like when I posted on one of their msg boards saying I'm a meat eater and I'm for humane methods of killing and for the elimination of unnecessary animal suffering. And how I wanna try my best to cut down the meat in my diet and eat more vegetables...

I got flamed. As far as theyre concerned, I'm the enemy. A meat eater. :(

I'm a meat eater too as well, but I'm also all for humane treatment of animals.

Yeah. it's a pity that PETA has soured the tide of people who are animal activists.

it was once upon a time that one could be all for animal rights without having to assocate with the fuzzy logic of so-called "animal rights" groups like PETA. Did you know that they don't even treat animals right like they claim to? That makes it even more worse. =(
Basically, groups like PETA believes that animals and humans should be competely seperated.... one shouldn't have to do ANYTHING to do with the other. That means no pets, no farms, etc.

Which I find to be stupid and ridiclious. there's been tons of evidence that Animals and Humans needs each other a lot. for instance, dogs and cat befints from us in terms of longer lifespans thanks to our medical care, and they give us the same avatange in return by simply reducing our stress/etc with thier mere loving presence.
http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20010301-000023.html


So basically for more reasonable people such as ourselves who wants animal to be treated humanely, we have to work twice as hard to undo any damage that crazy groups like Peta may have done for the whole "humane treatment of animals" movement.

kyupol
But some of these animal rights people have turned me off. Like when I posted on one of their msg boards saying I'm a meat eater and I'm for humane methods of killing and for the elimination of unnecessary animal suffering. And how I wanna try my best to cut down the meat in my diet and eat more vegetables...

I got flamed. As far as theyre concerned, I'm the enemy. A meat eater. :(

That's like posting you're an atheist in a fundamentalist Christian message board: no matter if you agree with them, because you're technically on the other side of the fence from them, everything you say is an affront to their movement...and their mental well-being.

With animal rights, you're either full-fledged support against anything having to do with harming/touching animals--or even looking at them cruelly--or you're in support for their wholesale slaughter. Middle ground need not apply.

That's a perfect example of a differant kind of bigot.

Considering that all the animal rights activists that I've run across have been very vocal--screaming minority, if you will--in condemning everyone that doesn't conform to their views, I've got a limited pool of reference.

Yes, I suppose for some people "Animal rights" and "Humane treatement of animals" are very different things.

to me, I don't see them differently though.

I mean, basically I believe that all living things deserve our respect and good treatment, even if we eat some of them.
After all... if we're gonna eat something living, then at least we can do our best to make thier life the best it can be for as long as they live. Before we kill them.
Oh, and we can't kill them in any way that's really painful. it has to be quick and painless, period.
I want the chicken and turkeys I eat to have led a happy and content life, roaming around in the sunlight, getting nice and fat.
And not cramped into a hot, sweaty metal building wandering around in the darkness fighting for food, because crowds of other birds are trying to hoard food for themselves. A lot of those birds starve to death in those metal deathtraps.

They have the right to a happy life, no matter how short it may be. That's what I believe. and I'll be damned if some PETA freak start calling me the enemy and other names because of that... espeically if they were one of those PETA people who delebrately kill off millions of animals for no good reason each year!

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

Mister Mxyzptlk

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

Ahh, the old "I'll become a vegetarian when a Tiger becomes a vegetarian" argument. It sounds so cool.

But wolves also roll around in feces, and I'm going to guess that you don't, unless you want to claim you do in order to be clever.

Saying that animals are cruel is little excuse for humans being so, we have the big brains and opposable thumbs, we're supposed to know better.

Personally, I do eat meat, but not because wolves do. I just like it. But that doesn't mean I want my dinner to suffer unneccessarily, like veal often does, or foie gras, or even factory cow farms. So what do I do, I cut down my meat intake, and steer clear of certain foods and franchises. Am I a saint for doing so, definitely not, but I am trying to do the right thing as much as possible and still be able to enjoy my bacon and eggs.

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

But some of these animal rights people have turned me off. Like when I posted on one of their msg boards saying I'm a meat eater and I'm for humane methods of killing and for the elimination of unnecessary animal suffering. And how I wanna try my best to cut down the meat in my diet and eat more vegetables...

I got flamed. As far as theyre concerned, I'm the enemy. A meat eater. :(

You gotta admire someone who rushes to the defense of others just a bit. It's inspiring to see someone get so passionate about the life of another being, even if it's an animal.

That said, I am not surprised you got flamed. Zealots are often hard to reason with. Once you make the leap internally to consider meat murder, then your moral imperative is to stop it at all costs. Remorse or moderation means nothing to someone who considers every being sacred. Still it was brave of you to attempt to engage them, perhaps some day there will be some sensible consensus, and if there is, it will be efforts like yours that will pave the way.

It certainly won't come from me, I'm scared of those guys!!

Mister Mxyzptlk

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

Animal rights argument for this:

Wolves at least let the deer roam free before they rip them apart for their food. Unlike humans who force innocent chickens, pigs, and cows into 'farms' that are more of concentration camps. (*more blabla about factory farms = concentration camp and other references comparing factory farms with the 3rd reich and the holocaust*)

kyupol

Mister Mxyzptlk

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

Animal rights argument for this:

Wolves at least let the deer roam free before they rip them apart for their food. Unlike humans who force innocent chickens, pigs, and cows into 'farms' that are more of concentration camps. (*more blabla about factory farms = concentration camp and other references comparing factory farms with the 3rd reich and the holocaust*)

and not only that, but wolves will only go after the elderly. they usually steer clear of the young and or stronger adult deer. If there's no elderly, they also go after the sick ones.
This gives the deer more chance to not only breed more, but it cuts down on sickness spreading in the herds. the only way a wolf pack would go after the more healthy and or younger deers were if they were really hungry.

So in a way you could say they also let the deer has a full life of grazing and having a chance to breed and have a "family", and then growing old before they die. Which is just life when you think about it.
The only difference is that when they die in the end, they also feed a family of wolves.

Why shouldn't we do the same for any other animals that we eat? let the turkeys, pigs, and others just roam around on a farm, live to thier fullest, let them have offspring... let them grow a little bit old, then kill and eat them.

bobhhh
Saying that animals are cruel is little excuse for humans being so, we have the big brains and opposable thumbs, we're supposed to know better.

Really? Humans seem to be pretty darned nasty to each other too. Why should they be any kinder to their food when they are so bad to their neighbors?

kyupol
Wolves at least let the deer roam free before they rip them apart for their food. Unlike humans who force innocent chickens, pigs, and cows into 'farms' that are more of concentration camps.

Yeah, but the bunny huggers don't like humans hunting wild critters either.

Why shouldn't we do the same for any other animals that we eat? let the turkeys, pigs, and others just roam around on a farm, live to thier fullest, let them have offspring... let them grow a little bit old, then kill and eat them.

"Living to their fullest" would mean tough, gamy and just plain inedible meat. Ever eaten an old bull or sow? I have. They make ok ground meat for casseroles and sauces but no steaks, roasts, chops, hams or bacon. Living to the fullest means no marbling, no fat layering and no tender juicy meat.

Mister Mxyzptlk
"Living to their fullest" would mean tough, gamy and just plain inedible meat. Ever eaten an old bull or sow? I have. They make ok ground meat for casseroles and sauces but no steaks, roasts, chops, hams or bacon. Living to the fullest means no marbling, no fat layering and no tender juicy meat.

that doesn't nessicarly apply to all animals. But yeah, if not let them grow old, then AT LEAST just let them roam around outside letting themselves become fat by eating tons of grass outside, etc. At least give them a good short life, and then kill them quickly. An animal will taste tons better when it's had a good life instead of a totured one.

Ever had meat from an animal that died slowly and painfully? I have, and it wasn't good meat at all.

Aurora Moon
if not let them grow old, then AT LEAST just let them roam around outside letting themselves become fat by eating tons of grass outside, etc. At least give them a good short life, and then kill them quickly. An animal will taste tons better when it's had a good life instead of a tortured one.

You buy a lot of those free range chickens? Shell out for much of that grass fed beef? Pony up for pork that isn't "white meat"? Can you imagine a family of four living near the poverty line having to pay those rates for putting meat on the table a few times a week? You'd be consigning them to a vegan lifestyle, which would cost more too because land that grows crops would have to be used for raising meat animals thus making all the food we eat more costly. Idealism is all well and good, but it runs into reality pretty hard at the poverty line.

Or do you care more about critters than the poor?

Mister Mxyzptlk

Aurora Moon
if not let them grow old, then AT LEAST just let them roam around outside letting themselves become fat by eating tons of grass outside, etc. At least give them a good short life, and then kill them quickly. An animal will taste tons better when it's had a good life instead of a tortured one.

You buy a lot of those free range chickens? Shell out for much of that grass fed beef? Pony up for pork that isn't "white meat"? Can you imagine a family of four living near the poverty line having to pay those rates for putting meat on the table a few times a week? You'd be consigning them to a vegan lifestyle, which would cost more too because land that grows crops would have to be used for raising meat animals thus making all the food we eat more costly. Idealism is all well and good, but it runs into reality pretty hard at the poverty line.

Or do you care more about critters than the poor?

LOL, there's tons of cheap ways to eat a well-balanced meal without any cruelty to animals. Yes, there's a lot of expensive so-called "vegan" crap out there along with expensive cruelty-free stuff.

But... you don't seem to realize that there's a lot of cheap good foods that poor people can still eat in order to have a balanced meal.
Take fish for example... fish cannot feel pain as they lack the appropriate neocortex of the brain. (Which explains why a lot of people will eat fish even though they refuse to eat any other animals.)
And Fish/seafood are pretty cheap, relatively.... some even just low as one dollar and 10 cents for a large fillet of fish. And it holds all the protein you need without much of the fat. So there's the meat.
Vegetables and fruit such as tomatoes and corn, are only like 1.20, especially if you buy them canned. So you got your fruit and vegitables...
Bread's pretty cheap too, so you got your wheat.... and around here it only costs like $1.25

Wow, a full meal for the whole family for only like 3.55 dollars!!

you see, I'm pretty poor too.. considering that I'm in college....AND living in an apartment on my own. But I still manage to buy cruelty-free stuff that are CHEAP, because I tend to buy from what you would call a "Farmer's market" instead of the commercial crap from Supermarkets. And there's plenty of places where you can buy outside of a supermarket where they sell good quality foods that you know where it came from.

And by the way, you used the wrong word... I think you meant Vegetarian, not Vegan.

A vegan doesn't even eat animal products of any kind, while a simple vegetarian WILL eat things like eggs and milk.

Aurora Moon
there's tons of cheap ways to eat a well-balanced meal without any cruelty to animals. Yes, there's a lot of expensive so-called "vegan" crap out there along with expensive cruelty-free stuff.

To let the animals have a "good life" you need more land. Land costs money. To let them free range means slower growth, thus more time from birth to harvest. All those factors raise the cost. The reason you can get cheep meat in the stores is the factory farm. Get rid of them and you will see the cost of food go up, way up.

Aurora Moon
you don't seem to realize that there's a lot of cheap good foods that poor people can still eat in order to have a balanced meal. Take fish for example... fish cannot feel pain as they lack the appropriate neocortex of the brain.

Talk to Greenpeace about fishing and how it's killing the biodiversity of the oceans. Talk to them about how farming fish for food (say that five times fast) is damaging the ecosystem by concentrating waste products. If you try top replace chicken and pork with fish you will accelerate the process of ecological destruction as fish farms will have to crank up the production even more.

Mister Mxyzptlk

bobhhh
Saying that animals are cruel is little excuse for humans being so, we have the big brains and opposable thumbs, we're supposed to know better.

Really? Humans seem to be pretty darned nasty to each other too. Why should they be any kinder to their food when they are so bad to their neighbors?

Have you met my neighbors? I'd rather have a moose over for drinks.

Mooses's are actually very nice animals to have around for tea

bobhhh
I'd rather have a moose over for drinks.

Now I'm as open minded as the next guy but I don't want my strait friends telling me about their dating adventures any more than I want my gay friends talking about it. What makes you think I want to know about your dating life anymore than theirs?

Mister Mxyzptlk

Aurora Moon
there's tons of cheap ways to eat a well-balanced meal without any cruelty to animals. Yes, there's a lot of expensive so-called "vegan" crap out there along with expensive cruelty-free stuff.

To let the animals have a "good life" you need more land. Land costs money. To let them free range means slower growth, thus more time from birth to harvest. All those factors raise the cost. The reason you can get cheep meat in the stores is the factory farm. Get rid of them and you will see the cost of food go up, way up.

Aurora Moon
you don't seem to realize that there's a lot of cheap good foods that poor people can still eat in order to have a balanced meal. Take fish for example... fish cannot feel pain as they lack the appropriate neocortex of the brain.

Talk to Greenpeace about fishing and how it's killing the biodiversity of the oceans. Talk to them about how farming fish for food (say that five times fast) is damaging the ecosystem by concentrating waste products. If you try top replace chicken and pork with fish you will accelerate the process of ecological destruction as fish farms will have to crank up the production even more.

But couldn't we say the same about any other farm where they only plant crops? In order to be a farm that produces enough crop for the whole country, one would need more than ten acres of land! Which of course should up the price for the crops being produced, right? Yet in a lot of cases this isn't the case.

In order for animals to have roaming land... one actually doesn't need that much land as you would seem to think. only one or even two acres would do it for a large herd of cows and other grazing animals. As seeing they tend to move slowly, and tend to only move in groups. sometimes cows simply stand outside in the same spot for a couple of hours, just grazing if the grass around in the area is particularly good.

I've been to farms before... and my father happened to have a friend who let us stay on a farm once for a week because my father wanted the whole family to have a "break" from city life, so I've seen how well they can treat the cows... the cows can be happy just with a single acre of land and a big barn that's big enough to house the whole herd.

And in case you were wondering how long an acre could be, One acre is 90.75 yards of a 53.33-yard-wide American football field. That's plenty of space for a nice-sized herd of cows, seriously.

And for the price of per acre land-- they run for $1,200 per acre. (or at least last time I heard in 2002) ... which is CHEAP if you happen to own a farm that makes a $400,000 profit in half a year. So a small farm could only have one extra acre of land and still have plenty of space for a herd of cows or horses to run around.

Sorry, but do you honestly live in an State that has farming as a large part of the state's income? There's a reason why North Dakota is a part of the Nation's "Breadbasket"...... we were taught basic things like this in school.

Aurora Moon
But couldn't we say the same about any other farm where they only plant crops? In order to be a farm that produces enough crop for the whole country, one would need more than ten acres of land! Which of course should up the price for the crops being produced, right? Yet in a lot of cases this isn't the case.

It comes down to calories per acre. Grain is the most efficient, vegetables and fruit next followed by meat animals. Also grain is less labor intensive than the others.

Aurora Moon
In order for animals to have roaming land... one actually doesn't need that much land as you would seem to think. only one or even two acres would do it for a large herd of cows and other grazing animals.

Maybe east of the Missouri River but in western states you need acres per cow instead of cows per acre for grass fed beef. You need the concentrated calories of grain to feed them up on less land. Also you need to worry about winter forage in states where the grass is covered by snow for up to six months.

Aurora Moon
And for the price of per acre land-- they run for $1,200 per acre. (or at least last time I heard in 2002) ... which is CHEAP if you happen to own a farm that makes a $400,000 profit in half a year. So a small farm could only have one extra acre of land and still have plenty of space for a herd of cows or horses to run around.

Gee, I'll have to pass your message to my father whose been raising cattle for 40 years in the Dakotas. He will be glad to know he can completely shift his business model and sell off most of his land. And to think, all these years he and all his neighbors were putting their cattle on too large a patch of land. Amazing!

Mister Mxyzptlk
You buy a lot of those free range chickens? Shell out for much of that grass fed beef? Pony up for pork that isn't "white meat"? Can you imagine a family of four living near the poverty line having to pay those rates for putting meat on the table a few times a week? You'd be consigning them to a vegan lifestyle, which would cost more too because land that grows crops would have to be used for raising meat animals thus making all the food we eat more costly. Idealism is all well and good, but it runs into reality pretty hard at the poverty line.

Or do you care more about critters than the poor?

That in a nut shell is the difference between "urban poverty" and "rural poverty". There's a couple of grass fed farms around here. If you buy it direct, then it's pretty much the same price as the stuff you get at the store. Not to mention all the wild game and the personal garden. I wonder some times if they shouldn't put a rider on welfare checks making people move out of the ghettos to a place where they can be more self supportive. Of course, that's off topic.

horseboy
There's a couple of grass fed farms around here. If you buy it direct, then it's pretty much the same price as the stuff you get at the store.

Very true, the rising price of oil hits every sector of the economy. Shipping from rural to urban areas has become a big hit for the retailers.

horseboy
I wonder some times if they shouldn't put a rider on welfare checks making people move out of the ghettos to a place where they can be more self supportive.

Yeah, that would go over real well. We cant even require welfare recipients to go on birth control and you want to make them move to the country? Even if that were practical what kind of jobs do you think these urban failures could find in a rural area?

Mister Mxyzptlk
Yeah, that would go over real well. We cant even require welfare recipients to go on birth control and you want to make them move to the country? Even if that were practical what kind of jobs do you think these urban failures could find in a rural area?

Uh, they're on welfare, why would they need jobs? ;)

horseboy
Uh, they're on welfare, why would they need jobs? ;)

Well, I know most people on welfare stay on welfare until they die and are buried at taxpayer expense. However there is that delusion that welfare is supposed to be a safety net and if that is to ever have any possibility of happening they would need job opportunities.

Mister Mxyzptlk

horseboy
Uh, they're on welfare, why would they need jobs? ;)

Well, I know most people on welfare stay on welfare until they die and are buried at taxpayer expense. However there is that delusion that welfare is supposed to be a safety net and if that is to ever have any possibility of happening they would need job opportunities.

I take it someone's sarcas-o-tron was in the shop.

in my opinion i think it's cruel, and they probably don't choose to do this. it's like. like alien abduction. it's not like you choose to get disected.

Mister Mxyzptlk

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

well, actually the wolf has to kill the deer to survive. we on the other do not need a wolf coat to survive. we have sheep. and some people shoot deers for fun, which i think is wasting the world.

jagular

Mister Mxyzptlk

kyupol
I'm against animal cruelty.

So am I. I wish those wolves would be nicer to the deer when they rip them apart.

well, actually the wolf has to kill the deer to survive. we on the other do not need a wolf coat to survive. we have sheep. and some people shoot deers for fun, which i think is wasting the world.

Apparently some people do need to torture and kill animals cruelly, or at least feel the need to justify it.