Animal cruelty in the food industry

[Faanvolla]

The world will never stop eating meat overnight.
All the animals won't be a problem if we decrease the amount of meat eaten and produced over 50 or 100 years, rather than in a single day.

[Sev]

Let me clarify why I keep harping on about this:

It seems that a commonly held believe among attention hores, uh, I mean vegans, is that everyone suddenly giving up meat and becoming bunny huggers is some sort of panacea.

I'm just disproving that belief.

[Adagio]

Let me clarify why I keep harping on about this:

It seems that a commonly held believe among attention hores, uh, I mean vegans, is that everyone suddenly giving up meat and becoming bunny huggers is some sort of panacea.

I'm just disproving that belief.

And he's not alone...

[Leeward]

I'm pretty sure fanatical vegans aren't the best source of information on how to save the world. Fanatics are all about immediate action and zero regard for the consequences. Anyone with a shred of pragmatism would know that their ideas are wholly impractical and unrealistic. That's not what we're talking about anyway.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

See, Sev, this is why I get frustrated.

If we suddenly stopped eating meat or using animals for their raw materials, we would have a massive problem.

That is a textbook-perfect example of an appeal to consequences. I don't know how you've managed to convince yourself it's not. Your later post explicitly states you're talking about consequences.

Let me clarify why I keep harping on about this:

It seems that a commonly held believe among attention hores, uh, I mean vegans, is that everyone suddenly giving up meat and becoming bunny huggers is some sort of panacea.

I'm just disproving that belief.

I find it hard to believe this. A panacea is something that would cure all ills but I'm not sure if anyone would suggest that not eating meat would do so. Perhaps there are a small number of people but you would certainly need to provide some sort of evidence that that is "commonly held." At best it seems like you're misrepresenting your (perceived) opponents position (principle of charity?). Also, no one has said that in this thread so why would you even bring it up?

[Raven Song]

Sev, if you're going to insult a group of people, spell whores right.

And I'm sorry but just because a group of people have a differing opinion to you which happens to include wanting the best world for both mankind and the animals WE SHARE THE PLANET WITH, doesn't make them attention whores.

There are 608 registered vegans with the Vegan society in South Africa (yes... we have one...)
At the last Fur Free gathering, exactly forty people attended, of which five were VERY LOUDLY AND OPENLY VEGAN. They, are the ones you might call attention whores.
But considering Rakuen is one and I didn't know about that till this thread popped up, I'm going to go with he isn't an attention seeking vegan.
There were ten other people at that gathering/march who told me they were vegan/vegetarians after I asked them, part of my role at the meeting.

But that's off topic.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

Just to clarify, since Sev's initial mischaracterisation appears to be catching on, I'm not vegan; I'm vegetarian.

[Raven Song]

Apologies. I should have gone back and confirmed it.

[Sev]

So I'm not allowed to talk about consequences at all? Without consequences, things are pretty meaningless.

[Raven Song]

I found this and while it isn't 100% relevant we did discuss it a little earlier in this thread and I can't resist

[Sev]

Why is it that people are allowed to bring up the consequences of gun violence in the gun ownership thread, but I can't talk about the consequences of abandoning meat?

[Raven Song]

because your consequences assume meat will be given up all at once...

[Sev]

Because that's the only way there could be any debate.

A natural decline of meat intake spanning decades hardly makes for a riveting conversation.

[Raven Song]

Because that's the only way there could be any debate.

A natural decline of meat intake spanning decades hardly makes for a riveting conversation.

The option for safety of animals doesn't have to be "riveting conversation".

What is right and wrong (yes I'm being subjective, because with the right amount of evidence both could right) isn't necessarily riveting. But it is important.

[Sev]

The problem is that the right course of action is rarely controversial: animals should be treated better even if it means that the cost of meat increases slightly.

There is a reason that formal debates are supposed to have two mutually incompatible viewpoints.

[Raven Song]

I don't see how the right course of action being rarely controversial is a problem. I think that's a great thing.

But yeah, I failed miserably at formal debates at school because I didn't get the whole "mutually compatible viewpoint" thing. It was my way or the high way (I was a pain as a sixteen year old )

[Sev]

No, it's not a problem. However, two people agreeing with each other does not a debate make.

There's a reason that I prefer to discuss slightly absurd things, or at last things taken to an extreme.

[Raven Song]

But this isn't a debate.

this is a discussion.

[Sev]

I guess so, but most discussions on this forum tend to be short and uninteresting. Look at the thread about the Golden Wolf or Jackle or whatever.

[Raven Song]

I guess so, but most discussions on this forum tend to be short and uninteresting. Look at the thread about the Golden Wolf or Jackle or whatever.

That's only uninteresting to you. some of us found it really cool.

but none of that has anything to do with saving cows from being abused by mean farmers... which is technically what the original... original thread... was about...

[Sev]

I know for a fact that Leeward also found it completely banal.

[Raven Song]

So if one person finds something interesting does that mean it isn't worth talking about?

This has gone shockingly off track.
Again.

[Leeward]

I know for a fact that Leeward also found it completely banal.

Sorry, what? I said it was interesting yet inconsequential, not boring.

[Sev]

This has gone shockingly off track.
Again.

That tends to be the nature of unstructured environments.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

Why is it that people are allowed to bring up the consequences of gun violence in the gun ownership thread, but I can't talk about the consequences of abandoning meat?

Different threads and different questions. The consequences of abandoning meat are irrelevant to the ethics of it. They would only matter once a decision has been taken. Also, yours are so completely unrealistic as to be pointless. The question in the gun violence thread was about the consequences of guns; namely do they provide protection.

Also this isn't a formal debate. It's a real-world discussion on an issue that is important for the world. It shouldn't be stretched just to fit your desired idea of extremes vs extremes. That's part of the problem with the world, why politics gets nowhere and no one even tries to compromise.

[Sev]

But to any sane person, humane treatment of animals is a no brainer. However, in this profit obsessed world that we inhabit, the lives of both animals and humans are of secondary importance. Extreme unfettered capitalism is just as dangerous as fascism or communism.

[Raven Song]

So you agree that the way in which animals are handled etc. is inhumane, yet you feed the problem by keeping up the demand. that is what veggie lovers are trying to say to people. You can't call yourself an animal rights activist and eat a sausage at lunch. You're adding to the issue even though you accept that there is an issue.

[Leeward]

No no, the issue is not the fact that they are being slaughtered. It's the cruel and sadistic manner in which they are treated before that, which is totally unnecessary, but is done anyway for the sake of bigger profit.

[Raven Song]

yeah but how do you know the way that sausage was kept before it became a sausage was kind? if you want to stop a waterfall, you slow the source of the river (in Minecraft anyway).

I've started eating more and more vegetarian dishes. mostly because they're actually cheaper at Iceland... and I accidently bought Lamb Liver which makes me gag so when I went back to get other food they didn't have normal ones so I was left with the vegetarian foods. They're just as filling and delicious.

[GalacticCanine]

Isn't about the food industry, but it still has some relevance

This is a list of companies that still test their products on animals. I'm trying to boycott all of them (it may not make that big of a difference, but at least it's something)

That's why I buy mostly all of my products at Lush seeing as they promote anti animal testing and such.

As for the food industry, it's really tricky. You don't really know who to trust these days. I know fast food companies do things like inject their chickens with steroids and keep them in small enclosed spaces. So I try to avoid them the best as I can as well.[/color]