Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
I Feel Bad About Eating Meat... But I Want To....  
User currently offlineAA7295 From Australia, joined Aug 2007, 620 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2703 times:

I have the most beautiful dog.. he just adores me and will be by my side at all times. He truly is the best companion.

In the past 18 months or so I have been having a real hard time eating meat. Like I eat meat and enjoy the taste, but I sometimes feel bad because I know my dog has a soul, how can I not know that a cow, or a chicken doesn't have a soul?

The crazy thing is... I fully realize that meat is part of the circle of life, and I do enjoy eating it.

I guess I'm wondering for a way to feel comfortable eating meat.

61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2060 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2691 times:

I think it important to think about how the animals you eat were raised and slaughtered. Looking for ethically raised meat may put your mind at ease now the cow at least had a good life and finished it easily just as you wish to provide a good life for your dog even though the chances are pretty high that one day you'll have to make the decision to end his life. The difference between your dog and that cow is that your dogs purpose comes while he's alive (to be a companion), while the cows comes after it dies.

Sounds almost like you're question the ethics of death in general though. I suggest you read The Omnivores Dilemma, it goes through nicely how it is possible (and perhaps moral) to eat meat. Read up on how the animals are killed, one of the biggest problems I think we have in the west is how detached we are from our food.


User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3065 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2687 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
one of the biggest problems I think we have in the west is how detached we are from our food.

Absolutely. Spend a lot of time around live cows and chickens and you'll feel considerably less bad about eating them.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2612 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2659 times:

I think the others are correct. Known where your food comes from is always good to know. It gives me peace of mind.

Here in the UK, 100% of British beef is farm raised, grazed on open fields. The cows have a good life and every need is tended to. We do not keep the cows in a shed confined to a cage barely big enough for them for their entire life.
When it comes to the slaughter, they are kept comfortable on the journey and led one by one in to an isolated room where death comes as instantly as is practical. (Bolt through a specific part of the brain generally). The cows next in line cannot see or hear anything of it due to doors.
As a result of this, I'm quite comfortable in eating British beef products and go out of my way to make sure the product I'm buying is 100% British beef.

Our milk comes from Cows who enjoy the same freedom as the meat herds.

I know there are still a few cage farms for poultry, I avoid products from these sources like the plague. I will not even buy eggs from caged hens. (UK Law stipulates the source MUST be clearly marked).

AFAIK, our Lamb and Pork comes from 100% free range too. So again, no issues there. The slaughter is exactly as described above for them too.

All in all, if you're at peace with the live your food led before it ended up on your plate, you should be comfortable in eating it.
If that doesn't, think of it this way: The animal will have been killed regardless if you eat it or not. Don't let it's sacrifice go to waste.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineAA7295 From Australia, joined Aug 2007, 620 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2654 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Read up on how the animals are killed, one of the biggest problems I think we have in the west is how detached we are from our food.

What do you mean? I'm assuming you mean how the animals are put down? That isn't always enforced, and certainly doesn't go on in all parts of the world.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Sounds almost like you're question the ethics of death in general though.

Maybe....

Quoting TSS (Reply 2):
Absolutely. Spend a lot of time around live cows and chickens and you'll feel considerably less bad about eating them.

How come? What do they do that's so bad?


User currently offlinekiwiinoz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2165 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2650 times:

I live in a part of the world where they eat dog. And, like you, I see no real ethical distinction between eating a dog or a cow. I certainly do not get on my moral high horse with the Chinese about their eating habits just because we n the west happen to have a history of making dogs our companions.

I a also an animal lover but do love eating meat, and doubt I would ever give up for ethical reasons. Either I am too shallow or too selfish.


User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10631 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2627 times:

Quoting TSS (Reply 2):
Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
one of the biggest problems I think we have in the west is how detached we are from our food.

Absolutely. Spend a lot of time around live cows and chickens and you'll feel considerably less bad about eating them.

I absolutely agree with that, having been raised on a farm. I grew up with their living conditions, I have been to slaughterhouses etc. Not nice, but thats part of the world and there´s basically nothing wrong with it if no unnecessary cruelty is involved. Humans, like many animals have eaten meat as long as they exist. Nothing wrong with that. Its the influence of the fineries of culture of the rich countries which is causing trouble now.

I am not a big meat eater btw, maybe twice a week.


User currently offlineidealstandard From France, joined Apr 2009, 407 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2621 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 3):
Here in the UK, 100% of British beef is farm raised, grazed on open fields. The cows have a good life and every need is tended to. We do not keep the cows in a shed confined to a cage barely big enough for them for their entire life.
When it comes to the slaughter, they are kept comfortable on the journey and led one by one in to an isolated room where death comes as instantly as is practical.

Yeah, unless it's a horse...!

Pork is not always free range.


User currently onlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1587 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2603 times:

Quoting kiwiinoz (Reply 5):

I live in a part of the world where they eat dog. And, like you, I see no real ethical distinction between eating a dog or a cow.

That's in my opinion really bad, but even in Switzerland they eat sometimes dogs and a lot of horses.

What makes a dog or cat, horse different then a cow.... the reason this animals are friends of humans want to serve the humans and help.

Many dogs have saved in the past humans.

A dog or cat trust you totally, when harming them you are abusing their trust. And for me thats very cruel und honorless.

While i'm not totally a vegetarian i reduced my meat consumption to a minimum. Because i cannot support the meat industry and how the animals are treated.

If you want other reasoning, meat isn't as healthy as most people think. For example sausage or meat are really bad for health when grilled to much.

New study's show a decrease of lifespan when consuming to much grilled meat.

When you have cancer it's not favorable to eat meat.

Also a other reason to not eat meat, if you don't consume eat for a half year thats a saving in CO2 that you could drive 28000km with your car.

Also the majority of all global warming gases are attributed to the massive stocks of cows and pigs.

So to sum it up, neither meat is healthy for yourself nor for the enviroment and its ethically very questionable.


Some will say meat contains a lot of minerals and vitamines, all what meat offers can be found in other products.

As a person who has a massive shortcoming of iron in the blood, my doctors told me i could eat as much meat as i want i would never be capable to cover my deficit with meat.

[Edited 2013-06-12 04:58:24]


“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineDFWHeavy From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2589 times:

Sorry autothrust,

There is nothing in the least unethical or wrong about eating meat. If we didn't eat them, they would still be around grazing, passing gas and "hurting the environment"...so don't go there with this.

Animals eat meat, humans have eaten meat since the beginning of time. It didn't just become unethical, immoral or wrong all of a sudden.

People, eat as much meat as you want and do not feel bad about it.



Christopher W Slovacek
User currently offlineRabenschlag From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 1007 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2580 times:

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 9):
Animals eat meat, humans have eaten meat since the beginning of time. It didn't just become unethical, immoral or wrong all of a sudden.

That does not really convince me. "Humans have killed and raped humans since the beginning of time." Does that make it moral to kill and rape fellow humans? I do not think so. It is called the naturalistic fallacy - natural facts cannot be translated into moral oughts. And therefore I think it is 100% irrelevant what humans have done in the past or what animals do in terms of eating meat when it comes to the question whether eating meat is ethically defensible for humans.

My recommendation for the TO:

* Do some research in ethics. There are many ethical systems in philosophy with very different practical implications.
* Decide which one sounds most convincing to you
* Live by standards of the most convincing system (including eating meat/not eating meat)

Cheers, r.


User currently onlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1587 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2580 times:

The ethical side is the treatment and slaughtering not the eating. And btw the earth belongs not only to us, animals have also rights to graze or passing gas.

But without the massive breeding caused by humans to cover the demand of meat they would in no way hurt the enviroment.

Do you think if humans wouldn't have interfered with that animals there would be such a high number of stocks? (which go to the hundreds of millions of cows and other animals?



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2060 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

Quoting AA7295 (Reply 4):
What do you mean? I'm assuming you mean how the animals are put down? That isn't always enforced, and certainly doesn't go on in all parts of the world.

You're lucky enough to live in Australia where it is enforced, by both government and non-government organisations. I wouldn't know what to say to you if you base your decision on whether to eat Australian meat, slaughtered to Australian standards, on how animals are treated in Iran or Mozambique.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 11):
animals have also rights to graze or passing gas.
Quoting autothrust (Reply 8):
if you don't consume eat for a half year thats a saving in CO2 that you could drive 28000km with your car.

These two points are incoherent. You can't in one sentence say that I the meat eater am responsible for the environmental impact of animals I eat while also saying the animal has a right to graze and pass gas all it wants.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 8):
Also the majority of all global warming gases are attributed to the massive stocks of cows and pigs.

Completely and utterly false.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/sources.html
http://www.carbonneutral.com.au/clim...e-change/australian-emissions.html

I won't bother with your other claims related to many studies that a 17 year old science student could rip to shreds.


User currently offlineAyostoLeon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2556 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
one of the biggest problems I think we have in the west is how detached we are from our food.

I guess this is true of so many areas of life. Given that increasingly most people live in cities there is a separation between what we produce and what we consume.

Who really pays much attention to how the meat ends up in the butcher shop, supermarket or fast-food outlet? The same applies to fruit and vegetables. It may look nice laid out on the display counter. But is it really fresh? Does it come from cold-storage; was it irradiated; are the workers in the fields enjoying a lifestyle similar to our own? All we think about is there is food and we need to eat. In the same way, who asks about where or how an electronic device or an article of clothing is made? We convince ourselves of a need for the latest device or fashion-wear and are blissfully unaware of the conditions of labour under which it is made.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 8):
A dog or cat trust you totally,

Many animals that you feed on a regular basis will come to trust you, depending on how well you treat them the rest of the time. Pigs can make ideal pets, for example, and even when they are not pets they can be protective. I remember seeing a farmer striking a girl who had been tending to a boar, cleaning out its pen and scratching its back and the boar attacked the farmer.

I am puzzled by some of the ethical dilemmas that are sometimes raised. For example, people may protest against the Japanese catching whales yet happily eat cod or trout. Sure a whale is a mammal but all are animals and then the protester might head off to the Golden M and order a burger - made from another mammal.

But what will happen to animals that are no longer bred for slaughter? Sure people can switch their habits from eating meat to eating other nourishing foods and farmers, in areas of suitable soil and rainfall, can switch to different production. But the farmers will not let their land lie fallow, simply so that animals can graze. When that happens, the only place that most people will ever see non-milking cattle or pigs will be in a zoo.

I am not justifying eating a meat diet on that basis but pointing to a possible consequence. Food is a commodity and if a commodity doesn't sell (or doesn't sell at a profit) it doesn't get produced. We already see this with fruit being left to rot on the ground and wheat being ploughed back into the soil because the yield and/or price is too low to recover the cost of harvesting and distribution. At least with some breeds of sheep you can shear them for the wool so they might survive a general shift away from meat eating.


User currently onlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1587 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2549 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 12):
These two points are incoherent. You can't in one sentence say that I the meat eater am responsible for the environmental impact of animals I eat while also saying the animal has a right to graze and pass gas all it wants.

Its not incoherent. Because we the consumers do provoke demand supply. If we reduce the demand, there will be less stocks. Which translates to less emissions. Again the amount of stocks would be million times lower without human intervention.

There are also indirect CO2 sources coming from breeding cows and pigs. Like thausend of acres forest clearances are done each year, or the million tons of feed necessary to build up this massive stocks around the planet.

So you nice statistics tell only half of the story. And they don't count in nothing about methane.



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7094 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2540 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 3):
When it comes to the slaughter, they are kept comfortable on the journey and led one by one in to an isolated room where death comes as instantly as is practical. (Bolt through a specific part of the brain generally). The cows next in line cannot see or hear anything of it due to doors.
Quoting QFA380 (Reply 12):
You're lucky enough to live in Australia where it is enforced, by both government and non-government organisations. I wouldn't know what to say to you if you base your decision on whether to eat Australian meat, slaughtered to Australian standards, on how animals are treated in Iran or Mozambique.

To the above two posts all well and good if the animal isn't being butchered for halal or kosha consumption then the standards for quick and clean slaughter goes out the window.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 14):
Because we the consumers do provoke demand supply. If we reduce the demand, there will be less stocks. Which translates to less emissions. Again the amount of stocks would be million times lower without human intervention.

The real problem is the planet has about 2-3 billion more people then it needs. We're slowly killing ourselves by overpopulation.


User currently offlineAyostoLeon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2522 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 15):
halal or kosha consumption then the standards for quick and clean slaughter goes out the window.

It is one thing to adopt standards and another to enforce them. In many western countries it is a requirement that the animal be stunned before killing but that isn't always guaranteed because there is little oversight. A cow or sheep that is not stunned immediately will simply be given another "shot". Can we be assured that the animal is neither frightened or suffering at that stage?

Both kosher and halal require respect for the animal. This means that the animal should be killed in a way that results in rapid death. The animal must be killed so it feels little pain. A sharp knife is used to cut the oesophagus, the trachea, carotid arteries and jugular veins in one action. Excessive pressure on the blade is forbidden. The animal is raised so blood flows out and this is then covered with dirt. Failure to do any of these acts correctly means the animal is unfit to eat. Why would you kill something and lose the ability to consume it or sell it?

A trained slaughterman can kill quickly but there are no doubt instances where things may not go according to plan. While in some countries, in the absence of enforcement, another "go" my be attempted, under strict laws the killing will be both rapid and clean. In countries like Australia, the animal must remain in an upright position with the head and body restrained. The animal must be stunned with a captive-bolt pistol immediately after the throat is cut (known as ‘sticking’). Two separate people must perform the sticking and stunning. If there are any problems restraining the animal while attempting to stick it, then it must be stunned immediately.

For religious slaughter of sheep, the guideline requires cutting both the carotid arteries and the jugular veins. This must be confirmed and if they are not completely severed, then the animal must be immediately stunned.

In other countries the legal standards may differ but the general prescription is one of respect for lack of it renders the animal unfit for consumption. Such is the ideal, even if it is not always carried out in practice, anymore than you can guarantee that a cow in Europe does not transmogrify into a horse once it has been killed.


User currently offlineaaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2492 times:

This is just one of those things that is best to think about as little as possible, if at all.

Kind of like how many people your partner has been with before you. Or why your birthday falls in September.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1830 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2442 times:

Quoting AA7295 (Thread starter):
I have the most beautiful dog.. he just adores me and will be by my side at all times. He truly is the best companion.

I, too, have a dog who I consider my best friend (a beagle named Copper). But never in the 10 years I've had her have I ever compared her to the animals I consume. I find that notion extremely confusing actually...

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Looking for ethically raised meat may put your mind at ease

We have a number of restaurants and fast-food joints around town that source locally and serve only organic. I tend to gravitate towards these places, not because of the ethical question, but I just find the food tastes better. Some of the best burgers I've ever had have come from a place by the university that gets all the ingredients they use from within an hour's drive. Helping the local economy is also a bonus.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 8):
A dog or cat trust you totally, when harming them you are abusing their trust. And for me thats very cruel und honorless.

Only if you have some sort of a relationship or bond with that particular animal.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 8):
Also a other reason to not eat meat, if you don't consume eat for a half year thats a saving in CO2 that you could drive 28000km with your car.

Can you post the source of that statistic to confirm? That number seems way too high.

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 13):
I am puzzled by some of the ethical dilemmas that are sometimes raised. For example, people may protest against the Japanese catching whales yet happily eat cod or trout. Sure a whale is a mammal but all are animals and then the protester might head off to the Golden M and order a burger - made from another mammal.

You're making the comparison between eating animal X and animal Y, when the real dilemma lies in how one kills animal X and how one kills animal Y. There's a notable difference between rounding fish up in a net for a painless death, and clobbering a seal to death with a club. I understand that sometimes undesirable slaughtering must occur, such as in cases of communities in the arctic who practice subsistence whaling, but in general people will protest the unnecessary suffering of an animal (mammal or not).

Quoting aaron747 (Reply 17):
Kind of like how many people your partner has been with before you. Or why your birthday falls in September.

My birthday is in September   



Flying refined.
User currently offlineAyostoLeon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 18):
You're making the comparison between eating animal X and animal Y,

Yes of course, because everyone else does. Some eat cows but are disgusted by eating cats. Others eat horse but are disgusted by eating pigs. Some eat snails but would not eat locusts. Who can understand human sensibilities?

I did not actually mention seals and do we know that the death of fish is painless? Having never been asphyxiated and snap frozen, I don't know. In the case of private anglers, rather than commercial fisheries, yanking it out of the water with a hook penetrating it seems acceptable to many, without any requirement to snap freeze it before it is dead. So the fish not only suffers the pain of the wound by hooking but also the agony and fear of suffocation. Even in the commercial sphere we see the oddity of tins of tuna boasting to be "dolphin free". Again it is acceptable to kill some animals but not others. Is there any reason to believe the death of the tuna will be less painful than the death of the dolphins?

But if we accept killing some animals, on whatever grounds, then I can accept that we do it as humanely as possible. Would killing seals become more acceptable if they were stunned with an electric bolt first?


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20355 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 19):
Even in the commercial sphere we see the oddity of tins of tuna boasting to be "dolphin free". Again it is acceptable to kill some animals but not others. Is there any reason to believe the death of the tuna will be less painful than the death of the dolphins?

There is no oddity to the dolphin-safe label, it is quite logical. The dolphin-safe label only indicates that the by-catch contained no dolphins, as fishing methods were threatening the survival of entire species of dolphin, specifically in the Eastern Tropical Pacific.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAyostoLeon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 20):
There is no oddity to the dolphin-safe label

I see. Or rather, I don't.

We appear to be happy killing some stocks of fish to satisfy our dietary preferences but are against killing others (although dolphins are mammals). There have been arguments placed in favour of restrictions on fishing because it has been argued that current practices are not sustainable. So far the industry has been largely successful in limiting any controls. How far do you think that emotional arguments about dolphin species being mammalian and intelligent might have influenced listening to scientific data , free from emotional concerns, if at all?


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20355 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2357 times:

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 21):
We appear to be happy killing some stocks of fish to satisfy our dietary preferences but are against killing others

Again, the huge Pacific tuna fleets were killing off entire dolphin species. It has little if anything to do with what pain sea creatures feel during fishing expeditions.

Quoting AyostoLeon (Reply 21):
How far do you think that emotional arguments about dolphin species being mammalian and intelligent might have influenced listening to scientific data , free from emotional concerns, if at all?

A horse of a different color.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEOeTX1LqM



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8397 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2344 times:

Totally with you, OP. Actually not only for the animals.

For the people. Meat is very inefficient. Requires huge amounts of crops & energy to create it. Also generally bad for your health! A vegetarian diet is superior in almost every way.

But, meat is something we are evolved to enjoy eating. Tough one.


User currently offlineAyostoLeon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2332 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 22):
It has little if anything to do with what pain sea creatures feel during fishing expeditions.

That might suggest that the scientific data was paramount in determining farming practices, yet a lot of people are influenced more by emotional appeal than by scientific data.

What do you think of the following report?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...in-tuna-overfishing_n_2448967.html

The linked data suggests that current practices are not sustainable but there is no indication of either an effective international response or a general demand for change in current practices.


25 Post contains links WestJet747 : I'm aware you didn't mention seals, as I was using an example that I found particularly barbaric in order to make my point. But yes, I would much rat
26 AeroWesty : No one should eat bluefin tuna until stocks have had a chance to recover, with a sustainable fishing plan put forward when they're ready to be fished
27 cptkrell : I was helping hook up a hay bailer for a young lady that lives over in the next holler this morning. I asked her "Hey, Jenny-Fer (I call her that inst
28 Bongodog1964 : So far from the truth: Much of our beef is dairy cross, milking cows bearing a calf to a beed bull, the calf is taken from its mother at birth, fed o
29 Post contains links and images zkojq : My parents own a beef farm. The cows and bulls there have it pretty good. Nearly their entire lives are spent outside, there is plenty of space for th
30 zckls04 : I advise eating meat because it's extremely tasty, with the following conditions: - Know your butcher. Know where he gets his meat from. If he doesn't
31 kiwirob : Or NZ lamb which is superior to pretty much anything else and is available in the UK, but sadly not in Norway, where we have to eat local which is to
32 Aesma : I have a cat, I love it and would probably not buy cat meat if I found it at the shop, but if visiting a place where they eat it I'd probably try. I d
33 greasespot : Sorry I have no ethical qualms about meat. I grew up on a large industrial scale cattle farm. I care about animals but care about people more. Plus an
34 jetblueguy22 : While I don't personally own a dog, I adore my best friends' dachshund and shitzu. But the thing is I separate the animals. A dog or a cat is a compa
35 Pellegrine : Yes like someone else said look for ethically raised and slaughtered meat. Yeah it is more expensive. I've been pescetarian, sometimes vegetarian and
36 Aesma : It doesn't really work that way, many African countries import food when they could produce it themselves, because we (US and EU at least) flood thei
37 KiwiRob : Or maybe there are simply to many of us for this planet to sustain and losing a couple billion will make it better for the rest of us.
38 cptkrell : I think I'll go with KiwiRob's comment (his Rep 37). Whereas some peoples would consider it anywhere between disgusting and soul-less, one must consid
39 RomeoBravo : If an animal could eat you (and serveral can and will) it would do so without hesitation. You can always buy free range if you care about the animal's
40 photopilot : Put a piece of meat down on a plate in front of your dog. Does the dog have any ethical issues with eating it? No.... good, then neither should you.
41 ImperialEagle : I try to eat only KOSHER meat whenever I can. I know the standards are very high and the animal has not been mistreated or allowed to feel fear or suf
42 Rabenschlag : Not a valid conclusion. Here's why. Take this example that follows the same logic as your dog-and-meat example: "Put a baby-lion in front of the new
43 AM744 : Eat meat moderately, drink moderately, burn fuel moderately. If it's legal, it's good to go in moderation. Lots of other stuff to worry about in heal
44 AyostoLeon : Look at history and you will find many examples. The Ottoman Empire used to see a number of killings and incarcerations to stabilise the transition f
45 KiwiRob : The Chinese had the good sense to start working on it, by 2100 there will be 500m less Chinese than there is today, if only India and Africa would ge
46 Post contains images AyostoLeon : Do you have a specific example? It would save a lot of trawling. Certainly in western countries like Norway and other EU countries killing of animals
47 Post contains links KiwiRob : http://kb.rspca.org.au/What-is-kosher-slaughter-in-Australia_117.html Do a quick trawl through the net and you will come across many examples. Whilst
48 Superfly : How do you feel when you eat a hot dog? Seriously are you serious? Plants have a soul as well. Do vegetarians have issues eating plants? Or smoking p
49 Post contains images idealstandard : Amen!
50 AeroWesty : I wonder how passengers flying QF, which just went halal on their meal service due to their hookup with EK, would react to this news.
51 KiwiRob : Social media have been giving QF a real hard time over this decision, google it, there are plenty of articles.
52 AeroWesty : Hmm, what I've read, including most of a thread at AFF, centers more on the pork and bacon ban than recognizing the cruelty to animals part.
53 KiwiRob : Look at the Australian RSPCA site.
54 Post contains links AeroWesty : The most I could find there was this: http://www.rspca.org.au/campaigns/un-stunned-slaughter Searching the site for Qantas returned no results.
55 rwy04lga : Some two-word descriptions......prime rib, bone in, end portion, medium rare, au jus...oh my!
56 Post contains images zckls04 : Why would veal producers be interested in lambs? I think you might have your animals confused. Unless you see it with your own eyes I wouldn't be too
57 Post contains links AyostoLeon : You can always rely on the Guardian to bring an article related to a topic of discussion on A.net. Here we are discussing eating meat and loving dogs
58 L410Turbolet : Does it mean their meal service netwrok-wide is now halal?
59 AeroWesty : Just their flights via DXB. Rather than make muslim meals a special-order, all meals on those flights are halal. A problem for those who'd like prote
60 Post contains images fraspotter : I love meat. Beef, Pork, chicken, venison, fish etc. In my opinion I can understand why people stop eating this food for health reasons, but those who
61 Aesma : This came up during the presidential elections here in 2012. EU law says that animals must be stunned, but some clerics say this is not allowed for h
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Places You'll Never Get To Visit But Want To. posted Mon Oct 31 2005 09:33:40 by DaddiesSecret
Gay But Want To Marry A Girl? posted Thu Dec 2 2004 06:19:05 by Ual747
I Dont Want To Go To Graduation But Oma Is Coming. posted Wed Dec 3 2008 11:06:46 by KLM672
I Want To Get Out On My Own But I Am Trapped. posted Sat Aug 30 2008 05:34:22 by KLM672
I Want To Know Where The Bad Parts Of Berlin Are? posted Wed Jul 18 2007 05:19:36 by PWM2TXLHopper
Do You Want To Know About Your Ancestry? posted Thu Feb 23 2006 20:59:57 by Emirates773ER
All You Want To Know About Hotels And More.. posted Sat Feb 4 2006 00:36:12 by Airlinelover
So What Do I Want To Write About? posted Tue Jun 28 2005 18:54:02 by CaptOveur
Want To Know About Surfing. posted Tue Oct 21 2003 04:01:51 by Mirrodie
Want To Buy Some T-shirts, But Were? posted Tue Jul 1 2003 22:16:39 by Gr325