I Support the Gradual Abolition of Meat.

It seems to me the far majority wants this (certainly after being confronted with the malpractices in the industry), but people differ in opinion what this exactly entails.
The intensive dairy farmer says they are mollycoddled and get footbaths and heated walls etc (lol), I say if that life obstructs them from being outside in a meadow it means little to me. It's kind of true the milk cows get really well taken care off in most advanced intensive dairy farms, just not in the exact way i find important. Besides, once they don't give (enough) milk anymore its over. And producing the amount of milk on a daily basis on such a farm is hard work. Top sport.

 

I saw a video from a farm in New Zealand, cows.. the woman goes out in the field, picks up the calf that was born a few hours before and slings it into the back of her truck as if it's a sack of potatoes. The mother cow chases after the truck as she drives off.

That might not seem horrific to someone who doesn't think animals are equal, emotionally, and I'm sure you'll tell me about how quickly mother cow will be happily frolicking around the field again, with no memory of her baby. But it looks fucked up to me and it always will.

That's a goat one from Canada.

There are many cases where MAYBE the farm as a whole is "not cruel" ..but if you have workers who kick animals, mishandle them, etc, it's the farm's responsibility.

I know the feeling. I have ripped legs off live crabs and it's so easy to feel angry at the crab for not being cooperative in letting me untangle him. And that's ME with my animals-are-equal mindset. Average people working on goat farms.. I'm not surprised what ends up happening.

"oh we all have different ideas about what is cruel or not"... it's a mindset. If the workers love and respect the animals, there will not be cruelty. If they see them as objects which produce milk(money) then things go wrong.

 

Doesn't sound like the way to seperate cow and calf at all, I agree.

About holding on to a particular sheep or goat: we used a similar method with adult animals. You grab m by a hind leg. You do consider the animals wellbeing while doing that though. I think its hard to get properly informed by one such vid and how it implies how that general ok practice with one recorded example is abusive by default. If a sheep needs treatment this is the best way to get it from a herd in a pasture or big barn.

 

But what if there ISN'T a way to do it kindly. It might be the only way to give the sheep treatment.. but the sheep wants to live its own life without another creature dragging it by its leg. You must get that. It doesn't matter if we know it's for the sheep's own good. It might "get over it" and there is no lasting injury.. I just don't find myself feeling like, oh that's okay then. Anyway it isn't just the method of handling, it's the mindset that is clearly behind it. These are not people who view the goats as sentient creatures.

I'm sure there were black slave owners who believed that they were not doing anything morally objectionable. (specifically, ones who did acknowledge black people were human and deserving of fair treatment)

Yes. "hard to be informed by one video". That's the usual response. But there are tens of these videos.
I've seen more than I need to see to know this isn't isolated abuse. There will be abuse throughout the industry.

Just like we have found with sexual abuse of human women. The two things might seem wildly unrelated.. you often find my comparisons hard to understand.. the point is, it's easy to pretend something is a minority of what's happening, just because there is an interest in keeping it hidden. It doesn't mean it's a minority of what's happening.

 

The NZ cow dairy video.

 

in a world where people are starving to death, how do you justify the abolition of an entire food source? If you're a vegan because you like it, it makes sense to you, and (this is important) your physiology is able to thrive on it, great. I ain't mad at that. But the second you start preaching it and worse, enforcing it, you're no different than the right wing groups trying to ban gay marriage. You're trying to force your lifestyle onto others. Do you seriously not see anything wrong with that?

 

Lets say a sheep is being eaten alive by maggots. I should not grab it by the hind leg, tie it or lock it up temporarily so i can treat it?
Is the sheep better off living their own life?
Isn't it the shepherd or farmers responsibility to grab the sheep and save it from its painful affliction?

 

Are you talking to me?
I'm not even vegan.

But as for "in a world where people are starving to death" ..it's been said (I will have to fact check) that world hunger could be ended easier if everyone was vegetarian. Two fields. One full of cows, one full of plants to feed the cows. OR two fields of plants to feed the humans.

 

I don't think there are many people advocating promoting vegetarianism in third world, impoverished nations. Or who would advocate denying a starving person a plate of beef.

Totally agree with you though, on all points. I’m just saying I don't see militant veganism here, unless I’m mistaken.

 

Seems Baegz responded to the OP and thread topic, not us @Driftrue

 

I take issue with this, too.
I do not believe in forcing anyone to eat, or not eat, anything.
But it's NOT the same as trying to ban gay marriage.
The people who seem like they want to enforce this are being motivated by seeing another sentient creature in pain.
Not some repressed desires of their own that they can't cope with

 

Of course grab it's leg.
Asmo, I feel I have already made all my points that answer this...
You know, intent, how the person views the animal, etc etc.

But also these animals have been bred into creatures that nature didn't intend anyway, in order to up the milk or meat production.
I have a problem with that too. Would be better if we used natural animals and got lower yields.

It's about living in balance with nature, or out of balance.

 

If YOU think staying in lockdown matters and caring for elderly humans is important, fine.. but the second you start preaching it...

People preach what they believe is important for the world to consider, and so they should. The enforcing it part, or the feeling of being absolutely in the right.. I agree, everyone needs to remember the other points of view, and how having those points of view feels.

 

To you? No. About you, yes. As in, you're the person who eats that way because of your own personal reasons and how you're not the one trying to push those reasons on to others. My post was mainly aimed at the OP and those who agree with their "abolition" meat idea. I consider you one of the good guys. I don't take issue with people based on what they eat. Its when they take issue with me based on what I eat. Then it becomes upsetting

As for your 2 fields analogy, you know what i do for a living and you know how I feel about food. I can get more nutrients out of 8 ounces of meat than I can out of 8 ounces of vegetables. If you and I were to eat the same amount of food, me in animal proteins and you in plant protiens, I could survive on less food than you. So I think (and I do think this... it may not be fact) that cancels out the whole "2 fields of veggies yield more food than 1 field of cows" argument

But thats not even what I was talking about. I was talking more about the indigenous peoples of the American pacific northwest who've been eating salmon for generations, who did not evolve to digest things like carbohydrates. Or the native people in Alaska who have thrived eating bear, whale, and seal meat. Or people on small island nations who must rely on seafood because they don't have the interior farmlands that countries like the US have. This also applies to peoples living in the desert and frozen tundra.

Its a 1st world luxury to be able to be picky about what you eat and I think a lot of us forget that. And I haven't even touched on the cultural aspects yet. The abolition of eating meat is the abolition of culture. I just can't support that.

So no Rue, I wasn't talking to you. My beef (see what I did there?) is with the people unlike you, those who are intolerant of meat consumption. Those who want to see it abolished. I take full responsibility for what I've done every time I put a piece of chicken, fish, pork, or beef in my mouth. I don't need to be shamed by others

 

Maybe I need to re read the OP. I thought it was about the abolition of meat and not the abolition of meat only in 1st world countries

 

being happy to think something that may not be fact... seems weird. but okay.

I recently heard that the only reason buddhism is associated with vegetarianism is because people were too poor to eat meat, so richer people in higher places put that in their religion. not sure of the truth of that but it would go against what you're saying.

 

I do think that word is important.
I still don't see abolishing it as remotely my aim.. but I would hope in a thousand years it is what has happened, yes.
Or we grow meat that was never consciously alive in the first place.

 

What about female genital mutilation? some might consider that their culture.
Or what if ritual canibalism is a part of a culture?
What about marrying six year old girls to grown men?

If something is part of a culture, it shouldn't be abolished?

 

Rue, please don't be upset with me. I'm not talking about you. You seem to be very rational. You live your life and you're good with that. Its the people who decide everyone else must live their lifestyle too that I take issue with.

 

Do you see how none of that is the same as eating a hamburger?