|
Post by Henrik on Apr 28, 2003 7:01:47 GMT -5
Interesting how this thread has turned out. Must say I didn't expect this as I posted the article.
What can I add? I suppose we all have very different opinions on this topic. Personally I eat meat but not very often. Primarily chicken or turkey, but I also like the occasional ostrich steak. Beef and pork is not really for me, but lamb I like.
However, what I prefer is fish, and so I though I would launch the question here what is your position on fishing? Many of you have stated how you oppose the cruelty of raising and slaughtering cows/pigs etc, but how about fish? They must go through what is the most cruel end. Still, I can't say that I think about that as I have my sushi/sashimi or a nice oven cooked cod.
What I do oppose very strongly however is the killing of endangered species just so some idiot can have a trophy, or somebody can have the fur. These are animals living in the wild that are on the verge of exctinction, and we owe it to nature to ensure they survive. For me the penalty for poaching should be the most severe, at least on the level of what is applied for the murder of another human being.
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Apr 28, 2003 8:16:13 GMT -5
Do you eat eggs Smokingun? Battery hens are some of the most appaulingly kept animals there are, they have theyre beaks cut off and are often left to rot if they die...in the middle of a 2x2meter cage with 100+ other hens. Do you consider eating eggs as in the same bracket? yes. i eat eggs. i also eat beef, chicken, pork, mutton and fish. i suppose i should have said this earlier, though i did say that i love pepper steak with fried onions. there was a very brief time that i became a pure vegetarian. i insisted that i would not eat anything else, because i detest cruelty to animals. my mother who is a very busy woman even till today put up with cooking veg dishes for about a week. but she soon told me that she could not afford to cook seperately for my dad (he loved fish/meat/chicken) and my siblings as well as cook veg food for me. lol that ended my veg trip, but given a choice i prefer veg food. eating meat for nourishment is fine. hell eating meat sometimes because you like the taste is ok as well. but to gorge yourself on brutalised animals because you like it all the time is cruelty. untill we reduce demand, animals will be killed in the most horrifying manner. JWK, i would rather animals put to sleep with drugs that become harmless on cooking the meat, rather than a blow to the head. tribes in south america use curare to hunt animals. curare becomes harmless to humans when the meat is cooked. there are ways to slaughter animals in as humane a way as possible. surely the added cost is not to heavy a burden esp when eating the meat gives us so much pleasure?? Henrik, do you like shark fin soup?? sharks have their fins cut off and are then tossed back some still alive into the sea where they drown to their death. these things trouble me deeply. if we are a civilized species, how have we allowed ourselves to become so savage and brutal. there are only 150 tigers left in siberia and around 2000 in india. an intact tiger hide is worth 50000 USD. i would rather see the bastards willing to pay that much of money drawn and quatered rather than just hanging the poachers. a kg of whale meat in Japan is worth 2000$. somewhere the "eat to live" logic seems to burried along with any sense of morality that these bastards have and the silent unheard screams of these poor, brutalised and traumatised animals. in the hyderabad zoo, in the fecking zoo!! a tiger was skinned alive, while her mother watched. oh God, i still have to shudder when i think of the look in the mother's eyes or the carcass of a perfectly healthy young tigress. we are the most vile, the most cruel and the most despikable animals to walk on this planet. smokingun
|
|
|
Post by Henrik on Apr 28, 2003 8:29:43 GMT -5
Shark fin soup? No, I don't think I ever had it, and most certainly oppose the way it is produced!
I do like eating oysters though, served live. However, can oysters be considered thinking beings?
Then there is the issue with frog legs. Or how about cooking lobster, throwing them live in to boiling water (actually as is done with the shrimps as they are trawelled aboard, dumped straight in to massive cooking vats). To be honest, I love lobster, but the thought of putting them live in boiling water revolts me, and it has been a while since I last had lobster. Perhaps kill it first, and then grill over a bbq instead!
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Apr 28, 2003 8:49:43 GMT -5
I do like eating oysters though, served live. live oysters, hmmmm Then there is the issue with frog legs. frog legs is a delicacy over here, though it is illigel to kill frogs for meat. the code name during the season is "jumping chicken" in a retaurant that cooks frog legs.
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Apr 28, 2003 8:50:38 GMT -5
I'm in agreement with those that said eating meat is OK... I do think in many cases farm animals are treated worse than they should be- and there SHOULD be strict laws on farmers, even if it causes prices to go up!
Do you realise, more animals are killed per hectare of arable farming than in pastoral farming!
No, not cows, sheep and pigs: but voles, mice, rabbits, birds etc...etc...etc
Changing an arable field to a pastoral field would cause 50% LESS animals to be killed...
According to a science article I read once, if we all switched to a vegan diet- MORE, not less animals would be killed. (I can refind it online if you like).
(BTW yes I am aware farm animals are supplemented by crops- and I am aware pastoral fields feed a population less/hectare than arable fields.- but the article makes an interesting point)
As a 2nd point in favour of meat. It is difficult (not impossible) to gain the necessary nutrition from vegtables alone.
1) Vegetarians typically succumb to more disease and die younger. 2) Women who are vegetarians during pregnancy give birth to children with lower average IQ levels. (in fact there is direct correlation with our pre-homo sapien ancestors between brain size and meat content in our diet)
If people want to live off a vegetarian diet- IT CAN be done in a healthy way. However, I wouldn't recommend it. Too many people rush off to be vegetarians without researching ways to get the essential nutrients the body needs that it usually gets from meats.
It's so much easier being an Omnivore- just like my ancestors all the way back to homo austrailapithicus (sp) were!
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Apr 28, 2003 9:11:58 GMT -5
eating meat for nutrition is fine, but more can and should be done to make the practice as humane as possible. i agree with most of what you say wycco, however.. 2) Women who are vegetarians during pregnancy give birth to children with lower average IQ levels. (in fact there is direct correlation with our pre-homo sapien ancestors between brain size and meat content in our diet) most higher class hindus are pure vegetarians. as are jains and buddhists. one of my friends comes from a very very orthodox hindu family. they do not even eat eggs. he is one of the most brilliant engineers that i know. smokin
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Apr 28, 2003 9:20:29 GMT -5
SG, I'm not saying all people that are the offspring of omnivours are smarter than all people who are the offspring of vegetarians. Since my wife is pregnant currently, I've been doing a fair bit of research on what to eat and whatnot to eat. One of the things stressed in the books we've read is the importance of meat (especially in first trimester) to help the babies brain develop- they mention loss of IQ can be accreditted to lack of meat consumption. (BTW- I can back this up with a source if you like- this is something I've read recently!) There are vegetarian alternatives to meat that DO contain the right nutritions- the problem is many vegetarians don't know how to be vegetarians correctly! (I know I wouldn't know without doing some research!) My guess is: your friend comes from a line of educated people who know how to compensate for lack of meat in their diet... LOL- either that or he lucked out!
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Apr 28, 2003 9:37:40 GMT -5
Or how about cooking lobster, throwing them live in to boiling water (actually as is done with the shrimps as they are trawelled aboard, dumped straight in to massive cooking vats). To be honest, I love lobster, but the thought of putting them live in boiling water revolts me, and it has been a while since I last had lobster. I've never had lobster partially for the above reason, and partially because the idea of eating lobsters seems disgusting to me- hell, it took a long time before I could get past the idea of eating shrimp- having to rip the head and tail off an animal just before you eat it always put me off (although, thankfully, in America they normally come beheaded!)... Now I know that shrimp are boiled alive too- I think that might put shrimp off my dining list too! (I didn't know that before). (BTW- cats are prepared the same way- to aid in skinning them! ) LOL- one Carolina tradition that I find particulary cruel (to plants) is "heart of palm". You take one palm tree, cut out the heart (growing tip), cook it, and eat it. Supposedly, it's delicious- its served in all the "exclusive" restaurants in South Carolina... Problem is- cutting out that one little part of the tree kills the whole tree- and the rest of the tree is pretty useless. It always seemed excessive to me to kill such a beautifull tree (that happens to be our state logo) just for a tiny morsal of food.
|
|
|
Post by who won on Apr 28, 2003 17:49:21 GMT -5
Not true that meat eaters are healthier. More and more studies link meat directly to cancer. If you want to lower your risk of countless chronic (including arthritis) and terminal i(ncluding cancer and heart disease), then give up meat.
There is plenty enough nutrition available in non meat products to totally invalidate the argument that we REQUIRE meat to live. We dont, and we can be healthier for it.
I'm not going to tell people what to eat, but I find it incredibly hypocritical when a meat eater is outraged because another person is wearing fur. They both amount to the same thing uneccesary slaughter of animals for self gratification.
Killing endangered species is worse, and I find that less hypocritical that a meat eater be outraged at that.
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Apr 29, 2003 0:00:17 GMT -5
ruby2, you got that right!! i would classify myself among those who are responsible for cruelty to animals. to think otherwise would make me a horrible hypocrite. that is why, i can make a choice, to choose to eat only what i need for nutrition. to make an effort to include more vegetarian produce in my diet. we all sail in the same boat, but if we spare a thought to how the animals are brutalised, we can make the world a better place for a lot of these animals. wycco, you and your wife, owe it to your tax-deduction to do anything that you can to ensure that it is healthy. my point was that there are pure vegetarians who give birth to perfectly healthy children who appear to suffer no loss in IQ. maybe as you say, they know what diet to is good for them. who won, absolutely correct. it is hypocracy to look down upon people who use a carcass as a fashion statement, when we choose to eat them, both for self gratification. however people recuperating from sickness, pregnant women, growing kids, athletes etc. can and should eat a diet that includes more meat if it is beneficial to them. the point that i object to is choosing to eat meat just because we like the taste of it. we must eat to live, not vice versa. smokingun
|
|
|
Post by JWK on Apr 29, 2003 1:42:33 GMT -5
There are studies that link absolutely everything to cancer these days...
|
|
|
Post by OT on Apr 29, 2003 4:50:43 GMT -5
I know we are off topic here but - who won - be careful with your selection of generalisations - be more rounded in your argument; as JWK says if we wanted to avoid all carcinogens and lead the perfectly healthy life, then we would have to give up everything - even breathing.
Moderation is the key.
Statistical studies can be contorted any which way you like - not so would we be healthier for not eating meat - not everyone that is. We can generalise about things and fake an argument to go in any direction. It is common knowledge that some people DO need meat.
A sad story recently where a young expectant mother was told that fish would be good the child she was carrying. She ate fish 3 times a day. Unfotunately, the unborn child died from mercury poisoning.
Moderation and balance.
|
|
|
Post by OT on Apr 29, 2003 4:55:23 GMT -5
Back on topic - why do the vegetarians get a clean slate here?? Why have we dismissed cruelty to vegetables?? We know they are a living, breathing organism - why are they exempt from pain??
|
|
|
Post by smokingun on Apr 29, 2003 6:29:59 GMT -5
Back on topic - why do the vegetarians get a clean slate here?? Why have we dismissed cruelty to vegetables?? We know they are a living, breathing organism - why are they exempt from pain??
damn, i just knew this was going to turn up . well TC, veggies do not have brown, warm and friendly eyes. at least teh veggies that i eat don't. but i fully agree on the moderation bit though. smokingun
|
|
|
Post by JWK on Apr 29, 2003 6:36:25 GMT -5
well TC, veggies do not have brown, warm and friendly eyes. They dont!?? ... crap, what have i been eating then!?
|
|