Channel: Home | About

Needs to include compassion. What was it Paul said (and forgive my taking him tangentially out of context here)? "All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient"? I mean to say, food production-- while necessary --creates unnecessary, and even callous waste of life.

A shout-out to Dan, and anyone else who'll listen.



This is the result of Dan's "Hyperconsumerism", and to this extent I agree 100,000%. This is absolutely disgusting. And it is evidence like this that continues to push me closer and closer to becoming a Vegan.

[hat tip to BenT for the video link]


7 Comments:

  1. Dan Trabue said...
    Instead of becoming vegan (which I'm not opposed to), why would we not seek out and encourage responsible, small, local farmers who raise chickens (and other foods) in a more wholesome manner?
    Eric said...
    Sounds like a good idea, and, in fact, there are coop farms in my area where local farms will partners with x-number of families or individuals for x-number of dollars a month. In return the members receive x-number of chickens, eggs, beef, etc. each month.

    They work out well around here, but it is expensive... in the neighborhood of 65-120$ a month.
    Dan Trabue said...
    My thought would be that that is the actual cost of buying that sort of food (getting back to one of my points over at the other place).

    If we were paying something more like actual costs, then there would be market incentives to not eat as much meat, to not have these industrial chicken factories, etc.
    Marshal Art said...
    One can discuss the benefits or advantages of eating some things over others. Such a discussion revolves around opinions as to which is healthier.

    As regards this video, I have two points:

    First, I look upon animals as natural resources, such as timber or metals or oil, that are renewable. They exist for our benefit to be used as we see fit. That they are living, breathing creatures means that they are likely to experience pain. Whether by the millions, as in the video, or by smaller numbers, as suggested by the both of you, the same "cruelty" is being perpetrated. It cannot be helped without adding additional costs. Perhaps Dan might consider anesthesia to be part of "actual costs". In this area, the concept is nonsense. The video shows the actual measures of providing food for the most people. The costs are accurate for the benefits provided for the most people.

    Secondly, as long as millions of human babies are being aborted, and millions more abused after birth, I don't give a flyin' rat's ass about any animals.

    It is coicidental that I've come across this thread at this time, having just seen a weepy PSA for animal abuse on TV. I want to say that I don't think animals should be treated cruelly for the sake of being cruel and abusive. If a neighbor was lighting squirrels on fire, I'd likely call the police. But I will not give one red cent to any cause concerned with abused animals while millions of innocent children, born and unborn, are murdered and abused, and in the case of abortion, supported by so many, including many of those weeping over the plight of animals. How freaking sick.
    Eric said...
    Your second point has some merit Art, but please note, I am quite vocal in my opposition to abortion. I figure, if we can get the industry to see the heinous nature of destroying animal life... fresh from the egg shell... NEWborn life... perhaps we can get these same people to see the heinousness of destroying unborn HUMAN life.

    But then, perhaps not.

    And I would caution you that the LORD hasn't asked us to focus on only one moral issue at a time. He expects us to be multi-taskers.
    Marshal Art said...
    But would the lives of chicks, or other animals for that matter, be considered a moral issue in the eyes of the Lord? Other than to say that we be good stewards of His Creation, I can't think of any Scripture that might cover this. Even then, this doesn't denote being BAD stewards. I think only we humans attach such sentiments to animals.

    Again, cruelty to animals for the fun of being cruel is a problem, but in my mind, it's a problem with the person being cruel more than for the suffering of the animal, as sad as that might be and feel to any of us. What is wrong with the person who mistreats an animal? What does it tell us about him and what should be done for him? The focus should be on the person and not the animal being abused.

    As to the chicks, or other animals in other processing plants, I have experienced the benefits of a vegan lifestyle and would only consider it again for what it could do for my health, not what it would do for the health of any cow, sheep, pig or chicken (or fish). Yet, at the same time, one health source reminds me that there has never been a culture discovered to have subsisted without meat as a part of their diet. At this point, I'm am not sure vegan is indeed the healthiest way to go.
    Edwin Drood said...
    I don't think any slaughter house is a comforting sight. But you can't impose the same intrinsic value on an animal that you would a person. Would it be more humane for a chicken to die at the hands of a small farmer than a assemblyman?

    I'm all for small business maybe taking a more personal approach, but chicken is a very volatile food. It can get infected very easily, the legal risk of running a small chicken house just doesn't make sense. Only a large corporation can withstand the risk of a lawsuit.

Post a Comment