It is stunning that despite the fact that 90% of dairy cows end up as hamburger, many vegetarians continue to eat dairy products thinking that they are not supporting a cruel and unnecessary industry. In addition to the almost total population being sent to slaughter once their milking days are over, it is now becoming clear that cows have their own personalities (see this link for to a recent study in the Netherlands) and experience a variety of feelings, including joy (see the video below of cows going out to pasture after a long winter indoors). For an in-depth look at why there is more suffering in a pound of cheese than in a pound of beef see this link: http://freefromharm.org/animal-cruelty-investigation/new-expose-shows-why-there-is-more-suffering-in-a-pound-of-cheese-than-a-pound-of-meat/
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Reply to a Christian (@wdeaver) Reply to Eating Animals
I think it's pretty ironic that a Christian would write an article about how judgmental vegans are.
I mean, seriously, what are you trying to prove? That the living will of an all-powerful, all-good, supernatural being is possibly debatable by us mere mortals?
God forbid! I mean, how can I ever dispute the infinite wisdom of the Bible - yes, the very same bible that provides us with an infinite variety of rules of behavior. Thou shalt do this, and don't do that. Yes, I get it. The Bible knows all.
Which is why science and reason have no place in determining the health or well-being of anything, let alone the animals that God supposedly told someone that belong to us to dominate and subject to our every will. Lord knows humans are good at determining what is just and right when it comes to killing.
Okay, okay, I digress. But you see what I'm getting at? Ethics and morals don't come from the Bible or from God.
Far be it from me to say exactly where values come from - that's territory rational people know that they can't claim. But that's something you should know already, right? You have a minor in philosophy after all.
We can have debates about this and that, but at the end of the day there's still such a thing as empiricism. Ignoring science you risk living with blinders on, just as you say I might live with blinders on as an atheist. But that is my choice, and you cannot choose to refute science and ethics. I mean, you can, but you do so at the risk of writing really stupid things in newspapers owned by the billionaire founder of the Unification Church.
The bottom line is that even if your Bible-based arguments weren't ridiculous enough by themselves, you went a step further into fake journalism by suggesting animal rights has been on 'the radar' for 'a few years.' Do you live in a cave?
Link: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/deaver-drive/2012/mar/22/christian-reply-animal-rights/
I mean, seriously, what are you trying to prove? That the living will of an all-powerful, all-good, supernatural being is possibly debatable by us mere mortals?
God forbid! I mean, how can I ever dispute the infinite wisdom of the Bible - yes, the very same bible that provides us with an infinite variety of rules of behavior. Thou shalt do this, and don't do that. Yes, I get it. The Bible knows all.
Which is why science and reason have no place in determining the health or well-being of anything, let alone the animals that God supposedly told someone that belong to us to dominate and subject to our every will. Lord knows humans are good at determining what is just and right when it comes to killing.
Okay, okay, I digress. But you see what I'm getting at? Ethics and morals don't come from the Bible or from God.
Far be it from me to say exactly where values come from - that's territory rational people know that they can't claim. But that's something you should know already, right? You have a minor in philosophy after all.
We can have debates about this and that, but at the end of the day there's still such a thing as empiricism. Ignoring science you risk living with blinders on, just as you say I might live with blinders on as an atheist. But that is my choice, and you cannot choose to refute science and ethics. I mean, you can, but you do so at the risk of writing really stupid things in newspapers owned by the billionaire founder of the Unification Church.
The bottom line is that even if your Bible-based arguments weren't ridiculous enough by themselves, you went a step further into fake journalism by suggesting animal rights has been on 'the radar' for 'a few years.' Do you live in a cave?
Link: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/deaver-drive/2012/mar/22/christian-reply-animal-rights/
Monday, March 12, 2012
Red Meat Linked to Heart Disease and Cancer: Duh!
A large study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine journal shows a substantial relationship between the consumption of red meat and incidence of heart disease and cancer. I propose an immediate cessation of serving this food to children and food stamp recipients, among others, plus increased taxes and regulation on its production and sale.
Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/mar/12/red-meat-death-heart-cancer
Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/mar/12/red-meat-death-heart-cancer
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Hooray! U.S. Meat Consumption In Decline
This is good news for animals - beef, poultry, and pork consumption has been in decline for several years. It is still too high, but at least the trend is heading downward.
Link: http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2012/highlights25
Link: http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2012/highlights25
70% of Ground Beef in U.S. Contains Pink Slime
Up to 70% of ground beef in the United States contains 'pink slime' a beef by-product which includes fat and other animal trimmings that are not technically meat treated with ammonia. McDonald's has already indicated a willingness to stop using beef treated in this way, and I expect other food service providers to follow. The Apparently a US Department of Agriculture official named JoAnne Smith received kick-backs in the form of a high-paying board position with BPI, the producer of pink slime. The USDA has refused to stop using the product in the the United States' nationwide school lunch program. Bottom line, if meat was not already gross, it now has a great new name to describe it.
Link: http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/03/05/030512-news-pink-slime-1-3/
Link: http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/03/05/030512-news-pink-slime-1-3/
Friday, March 2, 2012
Iowa to Pass Nation's First Ag Gag Bill
Under the new law, Iowa's House and Senate have indicated that they will not tolerate exposure of abuses or other offenses in its agricultural industries including animal and crop facilities. The industry has been vulnerable to several undercover and investigative stories primarily related to the treatment and protection of animals by agricultural workers. These investigations have led to several lawsuits, criminal charges, and other sanctions against agricultural entities from around the United States. The Iowa law is intended to have a chilling effect on the investigations. Similar so-called 'ag gag' laws have been defeated in Florida and Minnesota primarily on first amendment grounds. It is not clear how soon Iowa's law, once signed, will be tested on constitutional grounds. The law is greatly flawed, and is sure to meet extensive opposition not only from the animal rights community, but also from food safety, environmental, and civil rights advocates. While the law precludes the entry to agricultural facilities under false pretenses, it does not prevent currently employed people from becoming whistle-blowers or from documenting crimes and sharing them with the public.
Link: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/iowa-approves-nations-first-ag-gag-law/
Link: http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/iowa-approves-nations-first-ag-gag-law/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)