So is lamb commonly eaten now?

freethink3r

I was talking to a friend of mine and he mentioned having lamb for dinner. Back when I ate meat (and I've eaten it most of my life) my parents never bought lamb. I thought it was one of those frowned upon meats.

I know vegetarians/vegans seem to get a bad rap for being preachy and judgmental, but when something involves death you SHOULD be judging it, and questioning it ~_~ death shouldn't be taken lightly.

Do none of you find yourself not respecting people who support the meat industry? If you rule out people who eat meat then you're not leaving many people to befriend. And sure, it's common and convenient and there's just a disconnect between the person and where their meal comes from. But Jesus, lamb.

the beer revolu

why is it inherently more evil to eat lamb rather than beef or chicken?
Is it because they are cute and fluffy?

Lamb has never been frowned upon, though I did know one family where the parents always referred the the lamb as mutton cause the children didn't want to eat cute fluffy lamb.

Ethically, I'd have a much bigger problem with mass produced pork and chicken. The majority of lamb sold in Ireland is Irish grass reared lamb.

Does anyone else here judge animal's value on their cuteness factor?

tfitzgerald

In our house lamb was a treat becaus it was so expensive. Btw it stil is very expensive and we only get it once every now and then

jjpep

Lamb has been commonly eaten for milliena. It's very common as a typical Sunday roast and you'll see it in pretty much every carvery. How have you not noticed this before? As for the ethics, the other poster covered most of it.

BetterThanThou

Not a vegetarian myself, but I've never heard of eating lamb being forbidden. However, I think I may know where your misunderstanding comes from. People used to eat adult sheep rather than lamb, as it's a much better use of the resources, they could use them for wool and then once they're done eat them. But in this day and age that meat is undesirable, so lamb is quite expensive.

jane82

If nobody ate sheep or used their wool would sheep be extinct by now?
I seen one staring at an open gate one day. I went into work and when I came back out for lunch he was still staring at it. Id say its helpful to sheep that people breed them to eat now all these synthetic materials are available to clothes makers.
Surely if they banned sheep to eat tomorrow itd be a death sentence for all the living sheep.

freethink3r

the beer revolu wrote: »

why is it inherently more evil to eat lamb rather than beef or chicken?
Is it because they are cute and fluffy?

Lamb has never been frowned upon, though I did know one family where the parents always referred the the lamb as mutton cause the children didn't want to eat cute fluffy lamb.

Ethically, I'd have a much bigger problem with mass produced pork and chicken. The majority of lamb sold in Ireland is Irish grass reared lamb.

Does anyone else here judge animal's value on their cuteness factor?

I never said I frowned upon it because it's a cute animal. I don't think it's right for any of them to be killed for meat (at least not in a first world country where it's unnecessary for health/survival - but that's another conversation entirely). ANYWAY. I thought lambs were kept in crates or cages so they'd stay tender, and taken off their mothers as quickly as possible.

And I'm just saying my parents never bought it. I don't know what anyone else eats on a Sunday But it's like fur farming. Most people are against fur farming even though fur is just as unnecessary as meat. I thought lamb was one of those things. Other people do care about the "cute factor". My parents certainly did.

BetterThanThou

jane82 wrote: »

If nobody ate sheep or used their wool would sheep be extinct by now?
I seen one staring at an open gate one day. I went into work and when I came back out for lunch he was still staring at it. Id say its helpful to sheep that people breed them to eat now all these synthetic materials are available to clothes makers.
Surely if they banned sheep to eat tomorrow itd be a death sentence for all the living sheep.

If nobody ate sheep or used their wool, sheep would have never existed in the first place, as they're a species created by humans. If people suddenly stopped eating their wool and using their fur now, I'm sure some zoos and petting farms would keep them alive. But even if it was illegal to eat them, I think people would still use them for their wool, as synthetic materials aren't good enough for many people.

freethink3r

jjpep wrote: »

Lamb has been commonly eaten for milliena. It's very common as a typical Sunday roast and you'll see it in pretty much every carvery. How have you not noticed this before? As for the ethics, the other poster covered most of it.

I don't go to many people's houses... My parents and relatives never eat it though. Boyfriend's parents don't either. Obviously lamb is bought by SOMEONE. But I thought it was uncommon.

And as for the ethics, as I said in the post above, it's not because a lamb is cute.

hfallada

freethink3r wrote: »

I never said I frowned upon it because it's a cute animal. I don't think it's right for any of them to be killed for meat (at least not in a first world country where it's unnecessary for health/survival - but that's another conversation entirely). ANYWAY. I thought lambs were kept in crates or cages so they'd stay tender, and taken off their mothers as quickly as possible.

And I'm just saying my parents never bought it. I don't know what anyone else eats on a Sunday But it's like fur farming. Most people are against fur farming even though fur is just as unnecessary as meat. I thought lamb was one of those things. Other people do care about the "cute factor". My parents certainly did.

How you are ever been on an Irish farm? A farm is a business and the main source of income for hundreds of thosands of Irish people. Most sheep are kept because a farmers land might be to poor for cattle and they are also used for rag worth control ( a weed can sheep can eat but makes cattle ). Lambs are killed as a source of income and because the male lamb will never produce off spring( only one ram is needed).
Why would lamb be kept in cages? They need plenty of grass and their meat is actually quite tough.

I honestly can't understand how you have connected fur farming to lambs. Wool is just the by product of sheep and makes a tiny profit. Only €1/2 a sheep. I can't see any logic of your dislike of lamb farming other than cuteness

People on this forum need to see that Irish farms are small family run businesses with a few acres and no the massive factory farms that PETA tell you your meat comes from. There is no similarities between an American farm and an Irish farm other than they are run by farmers

freethink3r

jane82 wrote: »

If nobody ate sheep or used their wool would sheep be extinct by now?
I seen one staring at an open gate one day. I went into work and when I came back out for lunch he was still staring at it. Id say its helpful to sheep that people breed them to eat now all these synthetic materials are available to clothes makers.
Surely if they banned sheep to eat tomorrow itd be a death sentence for all the living sheep.

Are you honestly saying we're doing them a damn FAVOUR ?

freethink3r

hfallada wrote: »

How you are ever been on an Irish farm? A farm is a business and the main source of income for hundreds of thosands of Irish people. Most sheep are kept because a farmers land might be to poor for cattle and they are also used for rag worth control ( a weed can sheep can eat but makes cattle ). Lambs are killed as a source of income and because the male lamb will never produce off spring( only one ram is needed).
Why would lamb be kept in cages? They need plenty of grass and their meat is actually quite tough.

I honestly can't understand how you have connected fur farming to lambs. Wool is just the by product of sheep and makes a tiny profit. Only €1/2 a sheep. I can't see any logic of your dislike of lamb farming other than cuteness

People on this forum need to see that Irish farms are small family run businesses with a few acres and no the massive factory farms that PETA tell you your meat comes from. There is no similarities between an American farm and an Irish farm other than they are run by farmers

I was connecting them just on the point that they seem to be both frowned upon (or I had thought until now).

Whether the farms are bigger or smaller though, they're still being commodified and treated however people see fit to make the biggest profit possible at the lowest cost possible. And they're killed unnecessarily. Any other similarities or differences in how they're treated aside, they're not particularly ethical anyway. They're not sustainable for the environment, not good for longterm health and certainly not good for the animals.

freethink3r

BetterThanThou wrote: »

You can have your opinions and eat what you want. But comparing eating meat to fur farming is crazy. Humans are omnivorous animals, not herbivorous. Humans are supposed to eat meat, meat isn't unnecessary. Some people can live on a vegetarian diet, but some people have no choice, I'm an athlete, I need meat and there's no way around that. And a lot of the vegetarians that do live healthily only do so by consuming man made substances made to mimic meat.

Look up vegan body builders I'm not telling you what to eat but it's just not necessary. There's even a quorn ad about their mince and how it's high in protein and low in saturated fat. Vegans and vegetarians have much lower rates of most major Western killers. Lower obesity, lower heart disease, certain cancers....

I wasn't trying to get into a huge conversation about that though. Meat is of course high in protein and good for building muscle. No argument there. I was just surprised that lamb is a lot more common than I had thought.

wexie

freethink3r wrote: »

And they're killed unnecessarily.

No they're not, they're being killed for food.

freethink3r wrote: »

not good for longterm health and certainly not good for the animals.

Eating lamb is bad for ya? Or just meat in general?

fro9etb8j5qsl2

freethink3r wrote: »

I was connecting them just on the point that they seem to be both frowned upon (or I had thought until now).

Whether the farms are bigger or smaller though, they're still being commodified and treated however people see fit to make the biggest profit possible at the lowest cost possible. And they're killed unnecessarily. Any other similarities or differences in how they're treated aside, they're not particularly ethical anyway. They're not sustainable for the environment, not good for longterm health and certainly not good for the animals.

Your post makes absolutely no sense, are you talking about the farms or the lambs?

Either way, your posts are extremely ill informed and judgemental and for someone who rabbles on about the ethical question of killing animals, it seems a little hypocritical that you hold lambs importance above cows, chickens etc.

freethink3r

wexie wrote: »

No they're not, they're being killed for food.



Eating lamb is bad for ya? Or just meat in general?

I know they're being killed for food, but that doesn't mean it's necessary. You could kill your next door neighbour and wear her skin as a shawl to keep you warm, doesn't make it necessary :P

Fish is seemingly quite healthy, but I read The China Study and it claims that animal protein "switches on" cancer, as well as causes heart disease. I'm not going to type out a wall of text but it's worth a read if you're interested. You could make up your own mind. It's a huge study they did for years and years. The biggest study ever done on the links between health and food. The idea was that in China, people tend to eat differently based on the area of China they live. Some of them ate diets rich in meat, others were strict vegetarians. And these people live in the same place for most if not all their life. So it was a great opportunity to study these links.

freethink3r

Charley Poor Watermark wrote: »

Your post makes absolutely no sense, are you talking about the farms or the lambs?

Either way, your posts are extremely ill informed and judgemental and for someone who rabbles on about the ethical question of killing animals, it seems a little hypocritical that you hold lambs importance above cows, chickens etc.

I just thought it was worse because of the brevity of their life and the conditions I thought they were kept in, but another poster told me they aren't kept in the bad conditions I had thought.

long range shooter

freethink3r wrote: »

:P Why would you even frequent the vegan/vegetarian section?

Back when I ate meat, I was really only a chicken and tuna kind of woman.

Good for you,but you are not 240 pound weightlifter.;):D

wexie

freethink3r wrote: »

I'd love to actually. Not many animals to be seen around here (Dublin southside). My dad's from Tipperary and we used to go there in the summer and you'd see lots of cows and sheep and horses, but we haven't been in years.

I live in rural Wexford and I can tell you that most farmers look after their animals pretty well, after all it's their livelihood. You can argue about whether or not eating meat is necessary (personally I believe we have canine teeth for a reason) but overall in Ireland things are done pretty well in comparison to some of the things you'd see online with regards factory farming. At least from what I can tell locally.

the beer revolu

wexie wrote: »

I live in rural Wexford and I can tell you that most farmers look after their animals pretty well, after all it's their livelihood. You can argue about whether or not eating meat is necessary (personally I believe we have canine teeth for a reason) but overall in Ireland things are done pretty well in comparison to some of the things you'd see online with regards factory farming. At least from what I can tell locally.

This is not the case, though, with most pork and chickens in Ireland.

wexie

the beer revolu wrote: »

This is not the case, though, with most pork and chickens in Ireland.

yeah I was just thinking that, you're probably right. Can't say I've ever seen any free range pigs.

freethink3r

Boombastic wrote: »

you said....

.'.....I don't think it's right for any of them to be killed for meat (at least not in a first world country where it's unnecessary for health/survival.....'

I was just interested in your ideas

It is a business

Oh, what I meant was... If I was in a third world country or something. And I couldn't get the stuff I eat now (if I'm poor, or if they just don't have it, or if I'm stranded on some desert Island or something) I would then eat meat. I mean if it really came down to survival and it was me or someone else, of course I'd kill it and eat it. But if the books I read and judged to make sense are true, and it really does take up more energy and resources to produce meat than it does for plant based foods, and if it's bad for your body, and I have the money and access to plant based foods, then I think it's a good idea to stick with that.

~_~ I don't know if I explained that well. I'm not trying to be a dick here or anything.

Oh and then with the milk and eggs... I just read awful things about them. How they de-beak chickens, how they pump the cows full of hormones (and a few other things but for the sake of brevity and clarity I'll leave it at that)... and it applied to American farming, but I thought "if something cuts costs and improves profits, why wouldn't they do it here?" and it's too hard to source every egg, every carton of milk. So I thought "best give it up just in case". And then I read that vegan diets are actually healthier because you're at a lower risk of heart disease, obesity, certain cancers. So I thought, it's just a good idea overall. And maybe they just shouldn't be commodities anyway. It doesn't seem very nice to control other creature just because we can. Now, if I had a pet chicken or something, I'd have no problem taking an unfertilized egg. The chicken's not going to do anything with it anyway, why not?

the beer revolu

Boombastic wrote: »

would the carbon emissions be worth it?

@ fre3thinker - would there be enough land to grow plant food for everyone?

It takes more land to produce meat than vegetables - rearing meat is not an efficient way of producing food. Think of all the fodder that must be grown to feed livestock.

Boombastic

the beer revolu wrote: »

It takes more land to produce meat than vegetables - rearing meat is not an efficient way of producing food. Think of all the fodder that must be grown to feed livestock.

I'm not disputing what ypu are saying but
did you take in to account the land the now wild sheep and cows etc would need to survive?

Also how much soya (for example) is produced / acre, how much does 1 person need, how many people in the world, how much arable land?

Boombastic

freethink3r wrote: »

.....And maybe they just shouldn't be commodities anyway. It doesn't seem very nice to control other creature just because we can. Now, if I had a pet chicken or something, I'd have no problem taking an unfertilized egg. The chicken's not going to do anything with it anyway, why not?

You don't think it's right to control another animal, yet you would keep chickens as pets, you would be their master, they would be under your control?

the beer revolu

Boombastic wrote: »

I'm not disputing what ypu are saying but
did you take in to account the land the now wild sheep and cows etc would need to survive?

If you were to eradicate rearing animals for meat you would, realistically, need to slaughter the majority of existing farm animals. A certain number would presumably go to zoos/wildlife reserves/petting farms etc. Their breeding would need to be controlled. I don't think any realist would advocate the general release into the wild of all farm animals. THere would be horrendous animal welfare issues on the back of such a move. I can easily imagine a world where no animals are bred for slaughter (I wouldn't like it, though - I like eating meat too much).

freethink3r

Boombastic wrote: »

You don't think it's right to control another animal, yet you would keep chickens as pets, you would be their master, they would be under your control?

I'm using the word pet because that's the only word I can think of. If I said friend I'd look weirder. I wouldn't boss 'em around. I have a big garden and sure I'd have to confine them somewhere so they don't get killed by the fox that comes in sometimes. But I wouldn't be treating him/her like he's a commodity either. Y'know what I mean ! I have three cats as pets, but I'm nobody's master. If anything they're mine :eek:

Not that I'm big on confining animals. I was just trying to get across that I'm not COMPLETELY against animal products. There could be contexts where I'd see it as OK and not harmful.

freethink3r

the beer revolu wrote: »

It takes more land to produce meat than vegetables - rearing meat is not an efficient way of producing food. Think of all the fodder that must be grown to feed livestock.

Depends on how many everyones there are Aren't there too many people on the planet as it is? It'd be easier with plant based foods but the population's growing anyway.

Boombastic

the beer revolu wrote: »

If you were to eradicate rearing animals for meat you would, realistically, need to slaughter the majority of existing farm animals. A certain number would presumably go to zoos/wildlife reserves/petting farms etc. Their breeding would need to be controlled. I don't think any realist would advocate the general release into the wild of all farm animals. THere would be horrendous animal welfare issues on the back of such a move. I can easily imagine a world where no animals are bred for slaughter (I wouldn't like it, though - I like eating meat too much).

I was thinking more along the lines of establishing areas as habitats and introducing populations to recreate as close to natural as possible..surely that is the end aim?

What's the point if they're all in parks or zoos? I knew they're be more too it than opening the gates

rubadub

the beer revolu wrote: »

why is it inherently more evil to eat lamb rather than beef or chicken?

If everybody ate beef there would be less animals killed, i.e. the single life of a cow goes to feed a lot more than say a prawn being killed. I am surprised I do not hear about this point more.

There was a program showing animal slaughter late at night recently. A farmer was talking about the request for younger and younger lambs, he was saying he did think there came a point where it was wasteful and morally questionable to be taking the life at such a young age when the animal was nowhere near its "full potential".

--LOS--

I wouldn't think of lamb as more cruel than other meat, veal is probably more cruel if you want to make comparisons, then again the whole meat and dairy industry is cruel, doesn't mean I reject vegetarians or meat-eaters just because I disagree with their beliefs.