|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: How important is method of slaughter?
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
It seems that if we buy meat we can't know how it was slaughtered.
Does it matter to you whether:
a) the animal was killed by one method rather than another?
b) whether prayers were said as it was killed?
I hate the idea of cutthroat slaughter, but don't think much of other ways either. I'd like to think that the animal didn't suffer.
As for the prayers, I quite like the idea of thanking God for the animal, and like the idea of having respect for the meat we eat. It doesn't seem right to use it as a throwaway commodity.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
Theos think tank has an interesting article on this
here
I agree with the point that we should be concerned with the whole production cycle, including the welfare of the animal prior to slaughter.
A few weeks ago I noticed in a local 'big four' supermarket that they had started selling Halal chicken...legs, thighs, breasts etc. I also noted that the Halal chicken was cheaper per kg than 'ordinary' chicken across the products. I have asked the supermarket why this should be so, and I have not yet had a reply.
My concern is that although it is clear that the chicken is Halal, presumably relating to the slaughter process, there is no indication of welfare during the chicken's life. Is the low price reflective of poor husbandry (battery farming) and low quality (old, sick or damaged birds?)
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091
|
Posted
Very good article. Thank you Felafool.
I had a long and rather laborious argument with a friend of a friend on Facebook regarding this. All she kept coming back to was that it was "disgusting" and "inhumane", but as a meat eater herself couldn't or wouldn't acknowledge any aspect of the animal's welfare apart from the last few moments of its life.
It was all about 'choice', but she couldn't elaborate why the choice between a stunned animal who then had its throat cut and between an animal who was killed in other ways (e.g. a bolt gun) was a significant choice to make.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
AFAICT though, the vast majority of Halal meat in this country is stunned prior to slaughter.
[This isn't true of Kosher meat btw - where pre-stunning has been explicitly ruled out]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
AFAICT though, the vast majority of Halal meat in this country is stunned prior to slaughter.
[This isn't true of Kosher meat btw - where pre-stunning has been explicitly ruled out]
That is my understanding too. In fact, from a consumer information point of view ISTM "stunned" vs "non-stunned" would be a more useful distinction than halal vs haram, at least for non-Muslims.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Felafool:
Theos think tank has an interesting article on this
here
I agree with the point that we should be concerned with the whole production cycle, including the welfare of the animal prior to slaughter.
This has been where our family has come down on the issue. My belief is that, if you're going to eat meat, then some animal somewhere is going to have to have one bad day. But there is no reason why it needs to be any more than one bad day. So the life of the animal is important to us (as well as sustainability, but that's another issue).
Unfortunately, here in L.A. my experience has been the opposite of yours-- finding grass fed beef, free range chicken, etc. is difficult and expensive. For pork it's pretty much impossible so we've had to give up bacon (bacon!) all together.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
As long as the meat tastes good and isn't too gristly or fatty, I don't really care how it lived or died.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Unfortunately, here in L.A. my experience has been the opposite of yours-- finding grass fed beef, free range chicken, etc. is difficult and expensive. For pork it's pretty much impossible so we've had to give up bacon (bacon!) all together.
Where I live grass fed beef is twice the price of "regular." (I buy eggs directly from a farmer at about twice grocery store eggs. OTOH the grocery newly sells organic potatoes in 5 pound bags that are the same price per pound as non-organic potatoes of the same kind.)
There's also a "natural" beef (at a premium price) that promises no hormones and a vegetarian diet - vegetarian undoubtedly means GMO corn, cows were not made to live on corn instead of grass so that sounds to me like unhappy confined cow life. Grass fed is just a tad more expensive than "natural."
When I was a kid, food (all of it organic) was a much higher percentage of a household's budget than it is today. I suspect eating organic and grass fed and free range etc would cost the same percentage of the budget my parents spent on food, back before modern destructive farming methods and inhumane animal raising.
It's not that real food is more expensive but that factory foods are artificially less expensive.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lapsed heathen
Hurler on the ditch
# 4403
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
As long as the meat tastes good and isn't too gristly or fatty, I don't really care how it lived or died.
And most people don't Marvin. Thing is, how it tastes is a result of how it lived. A well tended animal that is slaughtered quickly and with as little pain as possible will taste better than a badly cared for and badly slaughtered animal.
I have reared animals for slaughter, I used to follow them through the line to check out the carcases (might have been making sure I got paid for what I sent in but that's another story)it important to know how an animal kills out compared to how it looks running round the field.
I have seen both stunned and halal slaughter. It's much of a muchness between them other than the ick factor. The animal is dead just as fast either way. If the abattoir is set up properly the animal isn't any more stressed. If the abattoir is set up badly the animal is stressed by the blood.
AFAIK here in Ireland halal slaughtered meat should not be sold to non Muslim buyers, I'v no idea how that operates in practise now. At the time I was involved all halal slaughtered meat was for export.
--------------------
"We are the Easter people and our song is Alleluia"
Posts: 1361 | From: Marble county | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Unfortunately, here in L.A. my experience has been the opposite of yours-- finding grass fed beef, free range chicken, etc. is difficult and expensive. For pork it's pretty much impossible so we've had to give up bacon (bacon!) all together.
Where I live grass fed beef is twice the price of "regular." (I buy eggs directly from a farmer at about twice grocery store eggs. OTOH the grocery newly sells organic potatoes in 5 pound bags that are the same price per pound as non-organic potatoes of the same kind.)
There's also a "natural" beef (at a premium price) that promises no hormones and a vegetarian diet - vegetarian undoubtedly means GMO corn, cows were not made to live on corn instead of grass so that sounds to me like unhappy confined cow life. Grass fed is just a tad more expensive than "natural."
When I was a kid, food (all of it organic) was a much higher percentage of a household's budget than it is today. I suspect eating organic and grass fed and free range etc would cost the same percentage of the budget my parents spent on food, back before modern destructive farming methods and inhumane animal raising.
It's not that real food is more expensive but that factory foods are artificially less expensive.
Yes, true. And part of that shift in household budgets is the shift in our taxes going to support the overproduction of corn (virtually free to those big factory food producers) rather than investing in things like education and affordable housing. So yes, while we're paying far less for food, we're paying far more for things like housing and higher education. So the dilemma remains... wanting to do what's right but finding it hard to do so.
For our family, we've found free-range chicken to be a better bargain than grass fed beef, so that's become the staple of our diet. Eggs from free-range chickens are available at Trader Joe's at a pretty reasonable price. My husband never eats beef or pork, I rarely do. We're trying to increase our consumption of sustainable fish.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I'd be interested to know Temple Grandin's take on this, since she did a lot of work on reducing the fear felt by cattle on their way into slaughter.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Halal meat tastes better to me.
I also believe that throat-cutting without stunning is kinder because the animal is unconscious before pain reaches its brain.
I think you are probably right there, but I'd like to know for sure, if that's possible.
I care a great deal for animals and their welfare. I will eat anything (within reason!) that has had a happy life and humane death.
I have dispatched fish and chickens myself but would never want any animal to suffer for my food, I'd turn veggie first. I buy free range eggs and meat.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I'd be interested to know Temple Grandin's take on this, since she did a lot of work on reducing the fear felt by cattle on their way into slaughter.
Her ethic seems to be, if we are going to use animals as a food resource, we can at least demonstrate our gratitude to them by giving them a good life and a humane death.
I have often wondered myself if the origin of table-grace comes less from invoking deity and more from gratitude toward that animal you raised and cared for that was now on your plate.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
I found this.
Grandin research including ritual slaughter
It looks as though it can be done without pain or anxiety on the part of the animal, but it is not always so done. It's US research, not UK, anyway, but refers to New Zealand. I would want to know exactly how an animal was killed, I think. Perhaps our supermarkets could find that out.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Halal meat tastes better to me.
I also believe that throat-cutting without stunning is kinder because the animal is unconscious before pain reaches its brain.
I think you are probably right there, but I'd like to know for sure, if that's possible.
Well, going back to the original article that was linked, the fuss was specifically about Halal meat - with the underlying assumption that it was barbaric primarily because it *didn't* involve stunning.
Which in the UK at least turns out not to be the case - and conventional slaughter consists of much the same as Halal slaughter the way it is carried out here (apart from the ritual blessings performed at the same time).
So basically it's a non story that's being promoted due to prejudice against a particular segment of the population.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Halal meat tastes better to me.
I also believe that throat-cutting without stunning is kinder because the animal is unconscious before pain reaches its brain.
I've worked in an abattoir and can assure you that no death is pain free. The animals can smell the blood of the recently killed animals as they come into the slaughter hall - the method of killing is therefore immaterial there's pain and distress whatever.
It's quite clear that the animals experience fear and pain.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Reading a note on humane slaughter from the Temple Grandin site, all factors contributing to animal stress need to be evaluated and tested. It is possible to design by the general guidelines but fail the intent.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Halal meat tastes better to me.
I also believe that throat-cutting without stunning is kinder because the animal is unconscious before pain reaches its brain.
I've worked in an abattoir and can assure you that no death is pain free. The animals can smell the blood of the recently killed animals as they come into the slaughter hall - the method of killing is therefore immaterial there's pain and distress whatever.
It's quite clear that the animals experience fear and pain.
That's why I've focused more on the way the animal was raised then the exact moment of dispatch. My assumption is that death is never going to be pretty. But again I see no reason why the animals we eat need to suffer a lifetime of misery, even if their final day isn't so hot.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ArachnidinElmet
Shipmate
# 17346
|
Posted
As far as I understand it, all meat sold in supermarkets in the UK is by law from stunned animals, the Halal meat being classed as such due to it being blessed. Meat sold in Halal butchers may or may not come from animals which have been stunned.
--------------------
'If a pleasant, straight-forward life is not possible then one must try to wriggle through by subtle manoeuvres' - Kafka
Posts: 1887 | From: the rhubarb triangle | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
According to Grandin, if the animals are not distressed, if they are calm, as they bleed, the blood does not distress following animals, which may even lick it! She postulates cortisol in the blood may have this effect.
I think a lot of the problems may lie in the numbers involved, ritual or no ritual. I might be going to go veggie. Or possibly investigate how the animals at the farm at the foot of the hill are slaughtered.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
So basically it's a non story that's being promoted due to prejudice against a particular segment of the population.
This is my main concern about this "story". It's grist to the mill for those who want to complain about the "islamisation" of our country.
--------------------
there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help.
Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Highfive
Shipmate
# 12937
|
Posted
A butcher once told me that if an animal is stressed before it is killed, it has a higher build-up of lactic acid in its muscle, which does effect the flavour of the meat. His professional view was that this had to be avoided to provide the best quality produce.
I asked him if this is what gives Halal meat it's distinctive taste. He immediately fell quiet.
Disclaimer: I'm tolerate of moderate Islam.
Disclaimer 2: Australian beef is slaughtered inside a clean enclosure with a pneumatic spike through the brain.
[ 10. May 2014, 05:19: Message edited by: Highfive ]
Posts: 111 | From: Brisbane | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Or possibly investigate how the animals at the farm at the foot of the hill are slaughtered.
All animals in the UK have to be slaughtered in an approved abattoir unless the animals is injured or diseased. (It can then be slaughtered on the farm but not used for food).
Gone are the days when small holders could have a travelling slaughterman kill an animal in a stress free environment on the farm. All animals are stressed by the journey and by the smell of death: all meat is affected.
My pigs travelled 4 miles to slaughter in a very small rural unit and the lower level of stress was clear in the subsequent quality of the meat.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Living where I do, with the ubiquity of hunting and fishing, and extant predators (bears, wolves, coyotes, cougars), there is little question that human killing of animals, and predeath care is much nicer than predation. Typically, for example, wolve will corner a moose or wapiti (elk) and slowly strangle it with 1 or 2 holding the neck. The rest disembowel the living animal, eating the intestines and organs etc. Kill sites are pretty nasty to come upon.
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do. As for taste depending on method of killing, is there any data from blind taste testing? Or is the taste difference one of perception?
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Felafool
Shipmate
# 270
|
Posted
Cliffdweller wrote
quote:
Unfortunately, here in L.A. my experience has been the opposite of yours-- finding grass fed beef, free range chicken, etc. is difficult and expensive. For pork it's pretty much impossible so we've had to give up bacon (bacon!) all together.
This is true where I am as well. My point was that Halal chicken was cheaper than the non-organic, non-free-range labelled product supplied for the supermarket's own brand. (i.e. the 'basic' non Halal chicken) This makes me concerned about the welfare of these chickens throughout their life.
--------------------
I don't care if the glass is half full or half empty - I ordered a cheeseburger.
Posts: 265 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I can't tell the difference between halal meat and none halal meat by taste. We have a number of halal outlets near me, so I have had the opportunity to compare.
I think conventional slaughter and halal slaughter are probably little different for the animal if they are done well.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Felafool:
Cliffdweller wrote
quote:
Unfortunately, here in L.A. my experience has been the opposite of yours-- finding grass fed beef, free range chicken, etc. is difficult and expensive. For pork it's pretty much impossible so we've had to give up bacon (bacon!) all together.
This is true where I am as well. My point was that Halal chicken was cheaper than the non-organic, non-free-range labelled product supplied for the supermarket's own brand. (i.e. the 'basic' non Halal chicken) This makes me concerned about the welfare of these chickens throughout their life.
I thought that part of the impact on price was because halal meat and kosher meat passed into the main food chain, it might be more expensive to be absolutely sure something is *not* ritually slaughtered ? I recall hearing that if they couldn't fully blood drain bits of beef carcarse, they just sold it as non-kosher - but I could be wrong about that.
Found a source.
[ 10. May 2014, 12:56: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
An die Freude
Shipmate
# 14794
|
Posted
As for Halal slaughtered meat, isn't it possible that prejudice and other factors mean the demand for such meat is quite simply lower than the demand for "regular" meat, meaning the prices need to be lower to sell it all? It could also be that households preferring such meat could constitute a subsection of the market with less money per household to spend, or just less interest in paying as much for meat. This is of course just looking at the possibilities offered by economic theories.
I don't know about the demographics of other countries, but I could imagine that should it be the case in Sweden that Halal slaughtered meat is cheaper, it would be because Muslim households tend to be of lower income.
--------------------
"I too am not a bit tamed, I too am untranslatable."
Walt Whitman
Formerly JFH
Posts: 851 | From: Proud Socialist Monarchy of Sweden | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
ExclamationMark wrote: quote:
My pigs travelled 4 miles to slaughter in a very small rural unit and the lower level of stress was clear in the subsequent quality of the meat.
I'm not surprised. Intensively reared pigs are stressed most of their lives and can be pretty aggressive. Field-reared pigs are friendly by comparison. The meat quality difference is quite dramatic and is not trivial.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
The farm has its own butchers. I've been looking at their website. Lots of video about machinery and sausages, not so much about the animals, guaranteed hormone and additive free. I've seen them in the fields, though.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
Bit of a tangent: I believe I would be a better person if I were vegetarian. But the flesh is weak. as it were.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Living where I do, with the ubiquity of hunting and fishing, and extant predators (bears, wolves, coyotes, cougars), there is little question that human killing of animals, and predeath care is much nicer than predation. Typically, for example, wolve will corner a moose or wapiti (elk) and slowly strangle it with 1 or 2 holding the neck. The rest disembowel the living animal, eating the intestines and organs etc. Kill sites are pretty nasty to come upon.
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do. As for taste depending on method of killing, is there any data from blind taste testing? Or is the taste difference one of perception?
Grandin points out the vicious nature of wild kills as well. Yeah, a cow on a well tended farm is going to live longer and happier than a cow on a veldt-- even if they do manage to avoid predators.
And I think the key word is "swift killing", but here in the US we have institutionalized system that amounts to "keeping them barely alive and fully miserable until you kill them," which negates whatever swiftness the actual dispatch might have.
[ 12. May 2014, 17:40: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do.
Exactly. Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation. Humans are omnivores, the evidence is in our teeth. We need to eat meat, less of it than we do in the West these days, but a sufficient amount is a necessity in our biology. Sorry veggies, but it's so.
That said, as uniquely moral beings, we mostly try to slaughter our prey as painlessly as possible. Which is more than could be said for the cats in my neighbourhood.
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by argona:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do.
Exactly. Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation. Humans are omnivores, the evidence is in our teeth. We need to eat meat, less of it than we do in the West these days, but a sufficient amount is a necessity in our biology. Sorry veggies, but it's so.
That said, as uniquely moral beings, we mostly try to slaughter our prey as painlessly as possible. Which is more than could be said for the cats in my neighbourhood.
But, conversely, animals in the wild seem to live fairly happy lives (at least if they're fortunate enough to live in an area free from encroaching human developments): free to roam, reproduce, eat at will (at least as resources allow). Whereas animals raised for human consumption all too often live lives of horrible suffering and confinement. Which, again, is why I choose to focus more on the quality of the animal's life (free range chickens, grass fed beef) rather than the method of slaughter.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
animals in the wild seem to live fairly happy lives
I think there is a fair bit of idealisation and anthropomorphism going on here. Though I would agree that factory farming induces a level of stress, and potentially harm, not found in wild creatures.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
animals in the wild seem to live fairly happy lives
I think there is a fair bit of idealisation and anthropomorphism going on here. Though I would agree that factory farming induces a level of stress, and potentially harm, not found in wild creatures.
Well, at the very least we can say that animals in the wild live the lives they were meant/created for. Being confined all your days in a small crate is not.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But, conversely, animals in the wild seem to live fairly happy lives
Watch any predator chasing down and killing its prey and try to tell me that the prey is happy. Watch a wasp laying its eggs inside a still-living caterpillar so that when they hatch the grubs can eat their way out and try to tell me that the caterpillar is happy. Watch a fly caught in a spider's web and try to tell me that it's happy.
Life for animals in the wild - especially prey animals like cows - is a constant struggle for survival where each day might be the last.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clint Boggis
Shipmate
# 633
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by argona:
Exactly. Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation. Humans are omnivores, the evidence is in our teeth. We need to eat meat, less of it than we do in the West these days, but a sufficient amount is a necessity in our biology. Sorry veggies, but it's so.
That said, as uniquely moral beings, we mostly try to slaughter our prey as painlessly as possible. Which is more than could be said for the cats in my neighbourhood.
Are you telling veggies they're dead?
Posts: 1505 | From: south coast | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by argona:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do.
Exactly. Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation. Humans are omnivores, the evidence is in our teeth. We need to eat meat, less of it than we do in the West these days, but a sufficient amount is a necessity in our biology. Sorry veggies, but it's so.
Wonder why my sister's still alive after about 30 years of being a vegan...
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by argona:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
It wld seem to me that any manner of swift killing by people is 'nicer' than anything animals do.
Exactly. Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation. Humans are omnivores, the evidence is in our teeth. We need to eat meat, less of it than we do in the West these days, but a sufficient amount is a necessity in our biology. Sorry veggies, but it's so.
Wonder why my sister's still alive after about 30 years of being a vegan...
Fair point, 'necessity' does overstate the case. But moderate meat-eaters do seem to be healthier than vegetarians. Something was published recently to that effect, wish I could remember details.
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Winstonian
Apprentice
# 14801
|
Posted
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian: quote:
As long as the meat tastes good and isn't too gristly or fatty, I don't really care how it lived or died.
I find this troubling. How do you theologically justify disregarding the suffering of sentient creatures?
Originally posted by Argona: quote:
Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation.
This may (or may not - I don't know) be true, but most wild animals are at least free to roam and engage in natural behaviors, something the animals most of us eat are deprived of. Indeed, many are virtually immobilized for their entire lives. Factory farming is not a pretty thing. Also, the sheer number of animals killed for food should give us pause: more than 9 billion each year in the US alone. Moreover, the fact that nature can sometimes be cruel does not seem to me to be a justification for humans to join in.
Originally posted by Argona: quote:
But moderate meat-eaters do seem to be healthier than vegetarians
Not true. A properly planned vegan diet is extremely healthy, with more of the things we need and less of the things we don't. Professional (American) football players, ironman triathletes, and others with extreme demands on their bodies have said they function better on a vegan diet. Several studies have shown vegetarians and vegans tend to be healthier than most meat eaters.
I think whether or not we eat meat, and if so, how much and where that meat comes from, is a serious theological decision. One that impacts not only our own health and the well-being of other creatures loved by God, but has significant impacts on the planet. billion
--------------------
Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!
Posts: 20 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Winstonian
Apprentice
# 14801
|
Posted
Oops! Didn't mean to include that extra "billion" at the end of my post. One day I'll figure out how to work these computer-thingies. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!
Posts: 20 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Winstonian:
Originally posted by Argona: quote:
Few wild critters die gently from old age. Most die horribly from disease or predation.
This may (or may not - I don't know) be true, but most wild animals are at least free to roam and engage in natural behaviors, something the animals most of us eat are deprived of. Indeed, many are virtually immobilized for their entire lives. Factory farming is not a pretty thing. Also, the sheer number of animals killed for food should give us pause: more than 9 billion each year in the US alone. Moreover, the fact that nature can sometimes be cruel does not seem to me to be a justification for humans to join in.
...I think whether or not we eat meat, and if so, how much and where that meat comes from, is a serious theological decision. One that impacts not only our own health and the well-being of other creatures loved by God, but has significant impacts on the planet. billion
Well said-- spot on.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Some very good points made.
I agree with the anthropomorphism. Deer for example, are highly stressed animals in their natural environment. They must look for food, here, more often than not, either under snow or poor nutritional quality twigs from trees, watch out for predators, and when the weather gets nicer, deal with swarms of mosquitos, ticks and also parasites. They always have bugs, which is why hunting is better in the fall after some good heavy frosts. The ground is frozen so the hunters are dry, and the external bugs are dead. If I was a deer, I would rather be shot by a hunter than eaten by wolves.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Winstonian
Apprentice
# 14801
|
Posted
I'm not sure where the anthropomorphism comes in in what I said above, but I appreciate that you agree with at least some of what I said.
I don't think the whole comparison to wild animals is valid.
First, as I noted above, the fact that nature can be hard is no justification for human cruelty.
Second, it would work better if we were talking about whether or not it is appropriate to hunt deer or other wild animals for food. The question whether it is less painful and frightening to die by a gunshot rather than to be killed by another animal would then be a valid comparison. Here, however, we're talking about animals bred in captivity to be eaten. There is no question of them being either killed quickly by humans or slowly by wild animals. The only question is how humans will treat them. The answer is almost always with extreme cruelty, since almost all animals we eat are now bred on factory farms, where not only are their living conditions cramped and filthy, and they are mutilated (debeaked, dehorned, tails cut off) without anesthesia, they are fed unnatural food, and they are bred and given hormones to grow unnaturally. Broilers, for example, grow so big so fast that their bones often break or fracture, causing them great pain. Commercial turkeys can no longer mate naturally because their breasts are so big. And that doesn't even consider the brutality with which their handlers often treat them (as repeatedly revealed by undercover investigations) or the misery of long, overcrowded transport, often without food or water, to slaughter. Finally, the slaughter process is so fast, that it is regularly done wrong, with the result that great suffering ensues. In the US, chickens speed by at more than 2 chickens per second (with proposals pending to increase that speed) and are often not hung properly in restraints before their necks are cut, with the result that they are plunged alive into scalding water, sometimes with broken legs because they are slammed into the restraints so fast. I'm not sure attack by a wild animal looks bad by comparison.
Wild animals kill because they need to survive. Humans kill (like this) because we want a "dollar value meal."
Also, while life in the wild has its challenges, as you point out, it is also full of rewards. Ethologists like Jane Goodall, Frans de Waal, Marc Bekoff, and Jonathan Balcombe have made great strides in understanding the intellectual and emotional lives of wild and domestic animals. They form meaningful relationships, they mourn the loss of a companion, they play with one another, and more. Jonathan Balcombe in particular has done extensive work on animal pleasure. As Balcombe said in one of his writings, "Animals aren't just alive, they have lives."
Sorry to go on like this, but our need as a species, and especially as Christians, to be honest with ourselves about what we are doing when we eat meat is a subject I feel rather passionate about.
--------------------
Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!
Posts: 20 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Your post is a much more thorough version at what I touched on here:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
And I think the key word is "swift killing", but here in the US we have institutionalized system that amounts to "keeping them barely alive and fully miserable until you kill them," which negates whatever swiftness the actual dispatch might have.
I need to add, I only say "here in the US" because I have only read about conditions in the US, not to suggest it is only a US problem. I just figure it is more polite to let y'all inform me about the status of your own country.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Originally posted by Winstonian:
quote:
First, as I noted above, the fact that nature can be hard is no justification for human cruelty.
This.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Some very good points made.
I agree with the anthropomorphism. Deer for example, are highly stressed animals in their natural environment. They must look for food, here, more often than not, either under snow or poor nutritional quality twigs from trees, watch out for predators, and when the weather gets nicer, deal with swarms of mosquitos, ticks and also parasites. They always have bugs, which is why hunting is better in the fall after some good heavy frosts. The ground is frozen so the hunters are dry, and the external bugs are dead. If I was a deer, I would rather be shot by a hunter than eaten by wolves.
But that's a false equivalence. No one here is speaking against hunting-- it seems not that different from the animal's pov than most other predators. We're comparing factory farming with life in the wild-- quite a different comparison.
I don't know that my assumption that the deer is relatively content even as searching for food, etc. is any less anthropomorphic than your assumption that that process is "stressful". Both of us are transferring our own experience/ feelings to that of a far different species. But we can see that most animals seem to show some signs of stress when their natural behaviors are inhibited. Foraging for food and running from predators are natural for deer, just as grazing in open fields are natural for cattle. Being confined 24/7 in a small box is not. My assumption remains that such confinement is more stressful than life in the wild, with all it's challenges.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
