Do we ignore animal cruelty to suit us?

mconigol

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

why is it necessary?

So people can eat and not die obviously.

Brendog

The "See my Vest" simpsons song has been playing over and over in my head while reading this....

...."like my loafers former goafers, it was that or skin my chauffers"....

ScumLord

moonboy52 wrote: »

Humans are cruel. Period!

We forget that we are animals just like the animals we are cruel to.

We are cruel to our species too, so that to me is also cruelty to animals.


Watch a movie called Earthlings people.

Animals aren't really cruel, most other animals don't have the ability to think what might be going on in the mind of another living thing. That's something pretty unique to us, cruelty just isn't a concept they understand. It's one of those human concepts that doesn't really exist outside of human minds.

archer22

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I wonder if Hitler got any of his ideas from slaughter houses.

Just say they are inferior or some other justification so therefore their suffering doesn't count and try not to let the general public see the actual suffering. People won't care then.

Hitler was a vegetarian ,he actually had a deep love and respect for animals.One of the first laws passed after he came to power was to ban foxhunting with hounds.I think he also wanted to ban the cooking of Lobsters while they were alive..not sure if that law was passed or not.

Cupcake_Crisis

hondasam wrote: »

I stopped watching it is horrible and cruel. Why does it have to be like this?

It doesn't have to be like that, people make it like that. Sure you only have to look at the video that came out a few months ago of the slaughter house workers torturing the animals before killing them to see the blatant lack of respect people have for the animals that sustain them.


But what can ya do, people want to eat meat!

What really pisses me off is people who use vanity products tested on animals. Completely vulgar and unnecessary!

fatherted1969

ScumLord wrote: »

Their all killed the same way, it's a production line and there's no variety in production lines. It is the nicest way an animal can be killed, compared to other predators we're damned nice to our prey.
I can't watch the video yet but I'm assuming it's a worst case scenario from a foreign country.
I do think all animals should be killed through inert gas, it's painless.

i disagree with this point from scumlord. There are 2 ways to kill an animal in an abatoir humane and inhumane. With the bolt method the animal is dead and that it i haven't seen the video as i'm on a mobile phone but i've seen this loads of times over the years the animal is dead at that point everything else is just d muscles twitching. Halal killing is totally different, its for contracts in middle eastern countries that insist on this method as part of their religion. If the animal was shot in the head first it would be already dead before the throat was cut which would go against their religious beliefs. They are that serious about it that will only allow their own halal butchers to kill there animals. One last point with the bolt method to the head the vets would test the stress levels of the animals after slaughter. With this method the meat would be red but with the halal method the meat would be dark brown and this would make the meat much tougher. The video might loom bad but try googling the halal method and see barbaric. Total nut jobs they are. Sorry if this is all thrown together i'm on my phone so dont see paragraphs

paddyandy

Eating Meat makes your body stink....that's a fact.Healthy VEGETARIANS don't smell like meat eaters.Go into any Zoo and the places where meat eaters are kept & they smell much worse than the others....Smell for your self.....Also christianity has ignored the very severe prohibitions against Animal Cruelty in previous traditions.Notably the 7 noahide Laws.Many people will not eat a pig and some believe it causes crankiness because of the pigs temperament though that has not being proven as far as i know.Many believe the blood of an animal houses the spirit or soul not being proven either but some people's behaviour would make you wonder.Would eating lion flesh give me courage..i doubt it.Cruelty in the industrial and ordinary schools may well have stemmed from mistreatment of Animals first as a lot of the brothers and nuns came from Farming Backgrounds.There are plenty of websites and your answers may well be as good as mine but enquiry is useful and can be very interesting too.Ignorance is no excuse these days.

LeeHoffmann

So people can eat and not die obviously.

is it necessary to eat meat though?

Cupcake_Crisis

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

is it necessary to eat meat though?

No, humans can survive quite healthily on a diet of no meat, it's not necessary, people just like the taste of it. Obviously there's some nutritional value to it, but nothing that cant be found elsewhere.

OwlsZat

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

is it necessary to eat meat though?

Despite this obvious flaming. There is a Vegan that works with me, always looks malnutritioned/skinny/pale and gets sick and is off work at least twice as much as anyone else.

Cupcake_Crisis

OwlsZat wrote: »

Despite this obvious flaming. There is a Vegan that works with me, always looks malnutritioned/skinny/pale and gets sick and is off work at least twice as much as anyone else.

There's a huge difference between a vegan and a vegetarian though

Logical Fallacy

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

There's a huge difference between a vegan and a vegetarian though

Not really, in my experience both of them are a little bit pushy about their eating habits.

Cupcake_Crisis

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Not really, in my experience both of them are a little bit pushy about their eating habits.

But in terms of what they eat they're poles apart!

Seachmall

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

it's not necessary, people just like the taste of it.

It's a more efficient nutritional source. You can get the same nutrition on a vegetarian diet but need to piece together foods, and eat more of the veg, to get it.

It's not just taste, there are nutritional reasons too (although they're less relevant in today's world with supplements and food imports).

OwlsZat

The Vegans and Vegetarians are just another bunch of pontificating extremists. No different to the pot smoking flower power 70s brigade.

--Kaiser--

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

No, humans can survive quite healthily on a diet of no meat, it's not necessary, people just like the taste of it. Obviously there's some nutritional value to it, but nothing that cant be found elsewhere.

We humans are an adaptable species and can live on varied diets. An optimum human diet, however, includes meat. Saying people eat meat just because they like the taste is facetious.

The evolution of our large brains (consuming 20% of our energy) necessitated the eating of calorie dense animal meats. Vegetarianism is a novel concept normally espoused by modern people with warped and deluded morals (e.g. why is it not OK to kill an animal and eat it but it's OK to eat grains, the harvesting of which kills many animals that do not even get eaten? Is it not OK to a tiger to kill to eat?)

Cupcake_Crisis

Seachmall wrote: »

It's a more efficient nutritional source. You can get the same nutrition on a vegetarian diet but need to piece together foods, and eat more of the veg, to get it.

It's not just taste, there are nutritional reasons too (although they're less relevant in today's world with supplements and food imports).

And meat substitutes are really good these days, there's no need for a vegetarian to be lacking nutritionally at all these days!

--Kaiser--

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

And meat substitutes are really good these days, there's no need for a vegetarian to be lacking nutritionally at all these days!

If you're are talking about Quorn and the like I'd suggest you get a new set of tastebuds

LeeHoffmann

It's not just taste, there are nutritional reasons too

It's supposed to be healthier to be a veggie

--Kaiser--

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

It's supposed to be healthier to be a veggie

Is that your argument? OK.
It's not healthier. How about that?

red menace

ScumLord wrote: »

hondasam wrote: »

I know they were probably dead but it was horrible. I stopped watching so don't know what the end was like.

they all became happily ever after meals.

I dont think any of those animals in the video were for human consumption.
That was no slaughter house. Most likely disease control like FMD or the like

redzerologhlen

archer22 wrote: »

Hitler was a vegetarian ,he actually had a deep love and respect for animals.One of the first laws passed after he came to power was to ban foxhunting with hounds.I think he also wanted to ban the cooking of Lobsters while they were alive..not sure if that law was passed or not.

He had no problem cooking people while they were alive though:rolleyes:

paddyandy

When a Meat eater is flatulent everybody nearby soon knows it.

paddyandy

Meat was rare in the irish diet a century ago what are you a butcher or farmer.?...plenty of people throut the world are hale and hearty without meat.

Millicent

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

No, humans can survive quite healthily on a diet of no meat, it's not necessary, people just like the taste of it. Obviously there's some nutritional value to it, but nothing that cant be found elsewhere.

Yes, it's the taste but there are actually some benefits to eating meat and veg over a vegetarian diet alone. There's more than "some nutritional value" to it. For example, importantly for women especially and children, iron is much more easily ingested from meat sources than non-meat sources. Cutting out meat and fish makes it much more difficult for either group to get their RDA of iron, and I'd imagine a good deal of vegetarians don't.

LeeHoffmann

Is that your argument? OK.
It's not healthier. How about that?

you're being unnecessarily hostile. Calm down. I didn't claim it was an argument. I've read that it's healthier and I thought I'd share that. I may google it and post some links etc later when I've more time. My personal opinion is that for some, it's healthier; for others, it's not - depending on all sorts of variables from genes to amount of physical activity to quality of meat consumed to knowledge of nutritional requirements etc.

Seachmall

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

It's supposed to be healthier to be a veggie

Anyone who eats the correct amount of calories with the correct ratio of macronutrients will be healthy regardless if they get that through meat exclusively or veg exclusively.

Vegetarians are obviously more conscious than your average person of their diet and so would pay more attention to their requirements.

It's not their vegetarian diet that makes them healthier, it's being aware of their intake.

I'd imagine most elite athletes, who are presumably some of the healthiest people on this planet, are meat-eaters.

OwlsZat

Both vegetarian and normal diet can be healthy so long as they are varied and balanced.

Vegetarians have trouble taking in enough protein/iron/calcium.

Normal diets can be excessively high in fats/sugars if poor choices are made.

You will be able to find just about anything online arguing that different foods/diets are healthier for x, y, and z reasons and so wouldn't use it as the starting point of any debate.

Chuck Stone

What can I say?

I love spicey meat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

archer22

redzerologhlen wrote: »

He had no problem cooking people while they were alive though:rolleyes:

Well you could say that about all the leaders in ww2...remember Dresden,Hamburg,Hiroshima,Nagasaki etc etc...anyhow thats a different topic.

paddyandy

There are no scientists here to make judgements about balanced diets etc.Human metabolism does its own balancing act too though diet is important too.

paddyandy

People have lived on bread and tay to a great old age.Diets are books tv$$€€€

--Kaiser--

paddyandy wrote: »

There are no scientists here to make judgements about balanced diets etc.Human metabolism does its own balancing act too though diet is important too.

paddyandy wrote: »

People have lived on bread and tay to a great old age.Diets are books tv$$€€€

Nurse! Nurse! He's out of bed again!

archer22

Far more food could be produced and with far less environmental damage if we did not eat meat.Anyhow I am sure there would be a hell of a lot less meat eaters if people saw what goes on in slaughter houses.Pigs for example which are highly intelligent animals sense what is going on the second they enter a factory...their crying is heart wrenching and pitiful.

Seachmall

archer22 wrote: »

Far more food could be produced and with far less environmental damage if we did not eat meat.Anyhow I am sure there would be a hell of a lot less meat eaters if people saw what goes on in slaughter houses.Pigs for example which are highly intelligent animals sense what is going on the second they enter a factory...their crying is heart wrenching and pitiful.

Wouldn't change my opinion a bit and Pigs aren't self-aware.

archer22

Seachmall wrote: »

Wouldn't change my opinion a bit and Pigs aren't self-aware.

"arent self aware" are you serious?!!

--Kaiser--

archer22 wrote: »

Far more food could be produced and with far less environmental damage if we did not eat meat

Animals bred for slaughter can co-exist with local flora and fauna, whereas intensive crop farming destroys the habitat for the same

archer22

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Animals bred for slaughter can co-exist with local flora and fauna, whereas intensive crop farming destroys the habitat for the same

First we would not need to use as much land to produce food.Second the Amazon is being destroyed to make cattle ranches and third plants dont produce greenhouse gasses.Other than that I partially agree with your statement.

--Kaiser--

archer22 wrote: »

First we would not need to use as much land to produce food.Second the Amazon is being destroyed to make cattle ranches and third plants dont produce greenhouse gasses.Other than that I partially agree with your statement.

Paddy fields are a huge source of greenhouse gases. I not sure about the needing more land thing, I don't have any sources on that, but then again, I doubt you do either

redzerologhlen

archer22 wrote: »

Well you could say that about all the leaders in ww2...remember Dresden,Hamburg,Hiroshima,Nagasaki etc etc...anyhow thats a different topic.

True but it is off topic, Just too tempting to say nothing:). Everyone has a different opinion on this and there is no point in attacking anyone's beliefs or life choices. Personally I like meat and would be slow to eat a meal without it. Being a farmer I would also say that Irish cows and sheep live a fairly good life in most cases. I dont think there is a more humane way of killing them but killing an animal isint humane anyway is it?? People may have evovled enough to think for themselves but we still have to eat, We are omnivores after all. I know some people dont eat meat and that is their decision and should be respected. Saying that the world could grow more grain and things like that is a bit simplistic as a drought is never far away IMO. When people were at a different stage of evolution they wouldnt have thought killing something to eat it was wrong as they did not have the ability to think like that.....perhaps the human race has become so intelligent that it will be the downfall of itself......Rant over:D

archer22

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Paddy fields are a huge source of greenhouse gases. I not sure about the needing more land thing, I don't have any sources on that, but then again, I doubt you do either

Do you have any sources for Paddy fields being a "huge source of greenhouse gasses".And I presume the Paddy fields you speak of are rice fields in far east not farmers fields in Ireland .

Cupcake_Crisis

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

If you're are talking about Quorn and the like I'd suggest you get a new set of tastebuds

The sausages are muck, but some of it is actually lovely! Birdseye veggie burgers are amazing too!

--Kaiser--

archer22 wrote: »

Do you have any sources for Paddy fields being a "huge source of greenhouse gasses".And I presume the Paddy fields you speak of are rice fields in far east not farmers fields in Ireland .

Yup

The main thrust of my argument that vegetarianism would not save the world is that animals can be grown locally with little impact to the environment. If no one is eating meat than a lot more grain crops will be needed to displace this food, needing more intensive crop farming, which is devastating to local eco-systems, add to that that growing the same crops on the same depleted soil requires more fertilizers, pesticides etc.....plus animals are still dying (combine harvesters, destruction of habitat and the like), they're just not being eaten.

archer22

redzerologhlen wrote: »

True but it is off topic, Just too tempting to say nothing:). Everyone has a different opinion on this and there is no point in attacking anyone's beliefs or life choices. Personally I like meat and would be slow to eat a meal without it. Being a farmer I would also say that Irish cows and sheep live a fairly good life in most cases. I dont think there is a more humane way of killing them but killing an animal isint humane anyway is it?? People may have evovled enough to think for themselves but we still have to eat, We are omnivores after all. I know some people dont eat meat and that is their decision and should be respected. Saying that the world could grow more grain and things like that is a bit simplistic as a drought is never far away IMO. When people were at a different stage of evolution they wouldnt have thought killing something to eat it was wrong as they did not have the ability to think like that.....perhaps the human race has become so intelligent that it will be the downfall of itself......Rant over:D

Well Darwin gave Human evolution in the following stages (I am going from memory here) primitive man can only feel empathy for himself and his family..further up the evolutionary ladder is the man who can feel empathy for his own kind and finally,the most evolved...those who feel empathy for all living beings.

Local-womanizer

paddyandy wrote: »

Eating Meat makes your body stink....that's a fact.Healthy VEGETARIANS don't smell like meat eaters.Go into any Zoo and the places where meat eaters are kept & they smell much worse than the others....Smell for your self.....Also christianity has ignored the very severe prohibitions against Animal Cruelty in previous traditions.Notably the 7 noahide Laws.Many people will not eat a pig and some believe it causes crankiness because of the pigs temperament though that has not being proven as far as i know.Many believe the blood of an animal houses the spirit or soul not being proven either but some people's behaviour would make you wonder.Would eating lion flesh give me courage..i doubt it.Cruelty in the industrial and ordinary schools may well have stemmed from mistreatment of Animals first as a lot of the brothers and nuns came from Farming Backgrounds.There are plenty of websites and your answers may well be as good as mine but enquiry is useful and can be very interesting too.Ignorance is no excuse these days.

This is mad!

I also smell lovely.

--Kaiser--

Local-womanizer wrote: »

This is mad!

I also smell lovely.

Mad is just the word. Having read a few of this guy's posts I am genuinely concerned about his mental health

--Kaiser--

archer22 wrote: »

Well Darwin gave Human evolution in the following stages (I am going from memory here) primitive man can only feel empathy for himself and his family..further up the evolutionary ladder is the man who can feel empathy for his own kind and finally,the most evolved...those who feel empathy for all living beings.

Therefore the most evolved man will be unable to kill any living thing ('living thing' including bacteria, fungi and plants) and thus kill himself to avoid causing the suffering of any other organism.

Give me a break

archer22

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Yup

The main thrust of my argument that vegetarianism would not save the world is that animals can be grown locally with little impact to the environment. If no one is eating meat than a lot more grain crops will be needed to displace this food, needing more intensive crop farming, which is devastating to local eco-systems, add to that that growing the same crops on the same depleted soil requires more fertilizers, pesticides etc.....plus animals are still dying (combine harvesters, destruction of habitat and the like), they're just not being eaten.

Kaiser I can see your point.But what I am saying is that far less land would be needed in food production..provided there was sensible population control as well.Then perhaps we could set aside land for nature and not need to exploit it all.

Millicent

For all the Quorn fans out there (WHY?! Bleurgh!), give some Indian cooking a go. Those guys know how to do vegetarian without all the chemicals. Nom nom nom.

archer22

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Therefore the most evolved man will be unable to kill any living thing ('living thing' including bacteria, fungi and plants) and thus kill himself to avoid causing the suffering of any other organism.

Give me a break

Thats just tearing the sh1t out of it!!.You know what it means and it said empathy which is not your version of it.