Think about this from the animals' position...
David
raise many animals for the sole purpose of eating their flesh, you should
think of it from the animals' point of view, if you are going to get involved
with the situation in any way.
Their ancestors were taken from the wild by humans, and bred together
as humans chose to breed them (I've not gotten to the animals' point of
view yet...this is leading up to it), and since all animals are the product of
the _particular_ sperm and egg that joined to begin their development,
the lives which came about as a result of human intervention would not
otherwise have ever come into existence. So in that way, humans began
the races and families of animals that are now being bred for food (among
other things). Without the intervention of humans, these animals would
have never gotten to experience life at all. The millions of animals that are
raised for food would never get to experience life in any way, if it were not
for the fact that these things did occur.
(Now I get to the animals' point of view)
Each of these animals that is raised to be eaten is a particular individual,
whether it is a chicken, or a pig, or a cow... Each one of them enjoys the
life that it has, and does not want to die--but, they *DO NOT* know that
they are going to die, and they don't worry about the fact that they will!
They simply enjoy the only life that they will ever know, and if you show
some minimum interest in the animals themselves, you will see that they DO
enjoy their lives. They certainly would not want to be denied of it!
If people were to stop eating meat, all of these animals who are getting
to enjoy the experience of life (whether you think it is worth living that
way or not, THEY DO!) would never get the opportunity to do so. It's not
like they would just get to be born, and never be eaten, if people stopped
eating them--because no one would raise them for no reason--none of you
would, would you? If so...go ahead and do it :-)
It is more disgusting that people would go out of their way to try to
deny these animals of the only brief life they ever have a chance of
having, than it is that people raise animals for food.
It is truly inconsiderate to the point of being horrifying that some people
would want to exterminate the pleasant lives of the dairy cows who are
lucky enough to just be milked for a living.
Please take the time to ignore your own personal feelings as totally
as you are able to, and try to think about it from the animals' position.
Most of them have a short life to begin with...don't try to take it away
from the poor beings altogether :-(
Thank you for any reply.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
John Stuart-Clarke
lifespan 5 yrs (instead of 30), repeated impregnation and calving by
caesarean (sorry if spelling is pants) section (the reason for this being
that by our over stimulating milk production within a cow and the consequent
udder growth, most dairy cows are incapable of giving birth naturally as the
birth canal is simply too narrow), 30 litres of milk produced a day instead
of 5, mastitis for (average) one sixth of it's lifespan, the separation from
it's calf within days or weeks of the birth (and they do protest - I have
seen it), eating sheep & pig bits (sometimes even cow) when it is a natural
herbivore, hoof sores caused by urine and faeces which is left in the pen,
hoof deformities and infirmities caused by a lack of movement and
exercise... and lots more.
If cows are as ignorant as a lot of our detractors seem to like to think
they are, then how exactly can the sheer joy of life overcome this obvious
and undeniable physical pain?
John
David wrote in message <36c40174....@news.mindspring.com>...
Rare Hero
victims", and you'll see how sick and wrong what you wrote actually is. I
think if animals could rationalize life as people do, they'd rather NOT be born
than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
Greg
==========================================
"Tom Hanks can't act his way out of a nutsack!"
-Eric Cartman
==========================================
David
It sounds like the farmer you've been hanging around needs a visit from
the humane society, if the cows have that much problem with their feet.
The cows don't have any idea that they will only live 5 years, and so what
if it was only 5 months--that is better than nothing.
What you said about the birthing situation is not in the least bit true. So people
will even make up crap to support their lust to exterminate these poor animals
huh? That's gross!!!
It is sad that their calves get taken early, but that's life (only for those who are
lucky enough to get to have it). That is one of the prices they pay to survive.
It does not matter what they eat as long as it doesn't hurt them. Do you really
think that you could get them to understand what they are eating, even if you
spent the entire 5 years trying to get them to understand? Well you couldn't. They
don't know what they are eating, so it definitely does not bother them.
If your parents get arthritis (if you're lucky enough that they are still alive...or
maybe if _they_ are lucky enough to still be alive), do you intend to kill them so
that they don't have to live with the pain?
All things have pains and discomforts to deal with, and a dairy cow's are no
worse than those of a wild moose, etc. So why not just exterminate ALL animals?
You are living with more stress than the cows are, because their life is all that
they know--even if it is a poor one, they have no way of knowing that. And thank
God people are incapable of explaining it to them, because there's no doubt that
some folks would LOVE to do it :-(
You don't really think that the animals would thank you for the way you feel, do
you? You are living with more mental discomfort than they are, and you don't appear
to have killed yourself, so why would you exterminate them? And act like you are
doing them a favor while doing it....a favor you don't want for yourself though.
It really is sad that people think this way--it is almost unbelievable.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
David
>Just replace all references of animals with "black slaves" or "holocaust
>victims", and you'll see how sick and wrong what you wrote actually is. I
>think if animals could rationalize life as people do, they'd rather NOT be born
>than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>
That's right, IF they could it would be different. But they CAN'T! So it doesn't
matter if they could. THAT IDEA IS NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION!
But IF they could, they would not commit mass suicide any faster or more
thoroughly than the blacks, or the holocaust victims etc. did/do.
You can call them slaves, but you can't honestly say they live a life of torture.
And YOU people are the ones who are encouraging genocide--which is why I
bothered to stick my nose in here--because it is horrible! I'm sure that there
are more dairy cows, etc, alive at this time than in any other time in history, and
having an overall better and more healthy life than any cows since the first moo.
So why lie and say that they don't? And through it all pretending that you're
on the animals' side...or do you really believe it? NO! Just under the surface of
what you allow yourselves to think about, you know that you really don't care
a wit how the animals feel. It is disgusting (or whatever) to you that people eat
animals, for some personal reason of your own, and you'd rather see the genocide
of the poor beasts than have people continue to do it. That has NOTHING to do
with the rights of the animals, and it is an insult to them to say that it does.
PLEASE think about it open mindedly. For their sake!!! Someone needs to say
something in support of them, since they can't speak, so that's what I'm doing.
Think of it from their position, not yours. And certainly not from a "what if" stand
point. Be fair would ya'!
David
kll...@yahoo.com
David
can not. That idea is not bothering them at all, since they have no
thoughts or feelings about the concept...nor the concept of freedom
for that matter....what they live is all they know, and all they've got.
On 13 Feb 1999 07:22:04 GMT, rare...@aol.com (Rare Hero) wrote:
>Just replace all references of animals with "black slaves" or "holocaust
>victims", and you'll see how sick and wrong what you wrote actually is. I
>think if animals could rationalize life as people do, they'd rather NOT be born
>than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>
>
>Greg
>==========================================
>"Tom Hanks can't act his way out of a nutsack!"
> -Eric Cartman
>==========================================
David
kll...@yahoo.com
John Stuart-Clarke
>true. So people
>will even make up crap to support their lust to exterminate these >poor
animals
>huh? That's gross!!!
And how the hell would you know? You obviously have spent zero time
reading/researching the subject. I am talking about the dairy farming
situation in the UK and this is most assuredly the norm. Perhaps things are
different in North America - perhaps not. For you to simply dismiss a
comment a person makes as untrue because it conflicts with your argument is
pathetic.
The only person talking about extermination is your good self. Perhaps you
do not even know what a vegan is - the naivety of your rants indicate this
could well be the case.
>>think if animals could rationalise life as people do, they'd rather NOT be
born
>>than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>>
> That's right, IF they could it would be different. But they CAN'T! So it
doesn't
>matter if they could. THAT IDEA IS NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION!
You are making one hell of a lot of assumptions here. Your argument is
farcical. The final line is a clear indictment of your narrow and totally
closed mind. You cannot make extreme generalisations and not expect to get
shot down in flames.
> It does not matter what they eat as long as it doesn't hurt them. >Do
you really
>think that you could get them to understand what they are eating, >even if
you
>spent the entire 5 years trying to get them to understand? Well you
>couldn't. They
>don't know what they are eating, so it definitely does not bother >them.
It DOES matter what they eat because it DOES hurt them - I.e. BSE. Are you
actually bothering to read other peoples' posts? How on earth do you have
any understandings of the thought process' of a cow? I am happy to admit I
haven't got the faintest idea what a cow is thinking - why are you so sure
you do know? Again, you last line reinforces the weakness of your position
I.e. narrow minded
assumption.
>If your parents get arthritis (if you're lucky enough that they are still
>alive...or
>maybe if _they_ are lucky enough to still be alive), do you intend to >kill
them so
>that they don't have to live with the pain?
Have you ever heard of Euthanasia? Do you read or watch the news on TV?
There are a growing number of people who would favour an individual having
an element of choice in their own demise where they are terminally ill and
suffering unbearable pain.
> You don't really think that the animals would thank you for the >way
you feel, do
>you? You are living with more mental discomfort than they are, and >you
don't appear
Why on earth would I want thanks? I am eating a diet of my own (informed)
choice and living a lifestyle of my own (informed) choice. Having said that,
I can't imagine there ever being a queue of cows on your garden path with
bouquets of flowers and 'thank you' cards, can you?
> It really is sad that people think this way--it is almost
>unbelievable.
Clearly, an autobiographical statement.
If you want to attack veganism (and why you would want to is beyond me) then
at least have the courtesy to think about what you are saying before writing
it. After all, most vegans have chosen this lifestyle only after a great
deal of considered thought. You, clearly have not.
John
Michael S. Updike
>>lifespan 5 yrs (instead of 30),
Cows can no live that long? Where does that number come from? Even range
cattle that are not highly stressed to produce and who receive vacinations
will die linbg before this.
repeated impregnation and calving by
>>caesarean (sorry if spelling is pants) section (the reason for this being
>>that by our over stimulating milk production within a cow and the
consequent
>>udder growth, most dairy cows are incapable of giving birth naturally as
the
>>birth canal is simply too narrow), 30 litres of milk produced a day
instead
>>of 5, mastitis for (average) one sixth of it's lifespan, the separation
from
>>it's calf within days or weeks of the birth (and they do protest - I have
>>seen it),
Most animal proteins, e.g bone meal, blood meal, and feather meal go to the
non ruminant species of pigs and poultry. A cow can synthesize proteins
from non protein nitrogen thanks to the microbes in her rumen.
eating sheep & pig bits (sometimes even cow) when it is a natural
>>herbivore, hoof sores caused by urine and faeces which is left in the pen
We had a cow who had to have half of her hood removed. Do you know the
reason, it is because she got a rock in it from walking in the stream. She
had plenty of field to move around in.
,
>>hoof deformities and infirmities caused by a lack of movement and
>>exercise... and lots more.
>>
>>If cows are as ignorant as a lot of our detractors seem to like to think
>>they are, then how exactly can the sheer joy of life overcome this obvious
>>and undeniable physical pain?
>>
>>John
>>
Think of this from an evolutionary point of view. The purpose of one
generation is to insure that the next generation occurs. The passing on of
the genes. Farm animals have thsi assured. Isn't is entirely possibel that
they allowed themselves to eb doemsticated as an evolutionary precaution.
They traded themselves for their survival as a species.
Rich Young
> Please explain how a dairy cow (for example) gets to enjoy it's life -
> lifespan 5 yrs (instead of 30), repeated impregnation and calving by
> caesarean (sorry if spelling is pants) section (the reason for this being
> that by our over stimulating milk production within a cow and the consequent
> udder growth, most dairy cows are incapable of giving birth naturally as the
> birth canal is simply too narrow)....
Eh? Caesaran section??! 'Dairy cattle' as a class?
I don't THINK so!!!
When garbage like this is passed off as indisputable fact,
it merely degrades any arguments that follow.
[...]
--
-Rich Young
(Abusive e-mail will be publicly posted. Please take note.)
David
> repeated impregnation and calving by
>caesarean (sorry if spelling is pants) section (the reason for this being
>that by our over stimulating milk production within a cow and the consequent
>udder growth, most dairy cows are incapable of giving birth naturally as the
>birth canal is simply too narrow),
>
>> What you said about the birthing situation is not in the least bit true. So people
>>will even make up crap to support their lust to exterminate these poor animals
>>huh? That's gross!!!
>And how the hell would you know? You obviously have spent zero time
>reading/researching the subject. I am talking about the dairy farming
>situation in the UK and this is most assuredly the norm. Perhaps things are
>different in North America - perhaps not. For you to simply dismiss a
>comment a person makes as untrue because it conflicts with your argument is
>pathetic.
>
You are the one who said "most dairy cows are incapable of giving birth
naturally". So far I've had no reason to read about that, having spent enough
time on dairy farms to _know_ that it is not true of any of the ones I've been
on. You are the one who made the statement, so tell me where you got your
info. It is NOT true around here, that is a FACT! There is no reason for me to
believe that it is true in the UK either.
>The only person talking about extermination is your good self.
>
I said this in my first post, and it applies to dairy cows, and egg layers as
well as animals raised to be eaten... I will stand by this argument until someone
proves me wrong:
If people were to stop eating meat, all of these animals who are getting
to enjoy the experience of life (whether you think it is worth living that
way or not, THEY DO!) would never get the opportunity to do so. It's not
like they would just get to be born, and never be eaten, if people stopped
eating them--because no one would raise them for no reason--none of you
would, would you? If so...go ahead and do it :-)
> Perhaps you
>do not even know what a vegan is - the naivety of your rants indicate this
>could well be the case.
You are right about that! I imagine that there are all degrees of thinking
involved, but I know nothing about it.
I don't feel that there is anything wrong with being a vegetarian either.
But when people start to make up lies about dairy farming being cruel, etc,
and teaching that to people who don't have the chance to learn what
kind of gross lies they are being told, etc, that is what bothers me. And the
fact that people would make up these lies that could have some impact on
the lives of dairy animals (not to mention the lives of the people who devote
their life to caring for them, and working long hard hours _every_ day, 7 days
a week!!!! EVERY day of the year, many of them--probably most of them-- for
years without getting a vacation), and I'm sure that there are people who
are actually trying to do something to end dairy farming...That is what I'm
ranting about.
If I am in the wrong group to be posting these views, please tell me which
one to go to, if you know.
>>>think if animals could rationalise life as people do, they'd rather NOT be
>born
>>>than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>>>
>> That's right, IF they could it would be different. But they CAN'T! So it
>doesn't
>>matter if they could. THAT IDEA IS NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION!
>
>
>You are making one hell of a lot of assumptions here. Your argument is
>farcical. The final line is a clear indictment of your narrow and totally
>closed mind. You cannot make extreme generalisations and not expect to get
>shot down in flames.
>
Animals can NOT rationalize life as people do! That is NOT an assumption.
THAT IDEA IS NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION!
If you think that they can, any proof that you can provide would make you a
very famous person, so don't just keep it to yourself.
I am more open minded than you could even imagine--that is obvious by
your last line of thought.
>
>
>> It does not matter what they eat as long as it doesn't hurt them. >Do
>you really
>>think that you could get them to understand what they are eating, >even if
>you
>>spent the entire 5 years trying to get them to understand? Well you
>>couldn't. They
>>don't know what they are eating, so it definitely does not bother >them.
>
>It DOES matter what they eat because it DOES hurt them - I.e. BSE. Are you
>actually bothering to read other peoples' posts? How on earth do you have
>any understandings of the thought process' of a cow? I am happy to admit I
>haven't got the faintest idea what a cow is thinking - why are you so sure
>you do know? Again, you last line reinforces the weakness of your position
>I.e. narrow minded
>assumption.
>
You really don't know much about reality do you? Do you think that
"Charlotte's Web" is any true indication of how animals relate to each other?
Before you go saying that another living being's life is not worth living, you
owe it to the beast to spend a good bit of time finding out what life really is
like for them.
I have never been a cow, or even walked naked through a pasture,
but I know that they enjoy eating, and drinking, and being milked, and licking
each other, and the taste of their food, and sunshine on a cold day, and shade
on a hot day, and scratching an itch, and licking their babies, and whatever
time they get to spend with them--however short that may be. A person doesn't
have to be a mind reader to know that cows would not appreciate people who
would deny them of the pleasures that they only get to enjoy if they are born.
Once again, you are the narrow minded one, who can not even begin to
understand the animals point of view.
>>If your parents get arthritis (if you're lucky enough that they are still
>>alive...or
>>maybe if _they_ are lucky enough to still be alive), do you intend to >kill
>them so
>>that they don't have to live with the pain?
>
>Have you ever heard of Euthanasia? Do you read or watch the news on TV?
>There are a growing number of people who would favour an individual having
>an element of choice in their own demise where they are terminally ill and
>suffering unbearable pain.
>
You are living with more mental discomfort than they are, and you don't appear
to have killed yourself, so why would you exterminate them? And act like you are
doing them a favor while doing it....a favor you don't want for yourself though.
>
>> It really is sad that people think this way--it is almost
>>unbelievable.
>
>Clearly, an autobiographical statement.
>
>If you want to attack veganism (and why you would want to is beyond me) then
>at least have the courtesy to think about what you are saying before writing
>it. After all, most vegans have chosen this lifestyle only after a great
>deal of considered thought. You, clearly have not.
>
I'm not attacking veganism, and like you said, I don't know anything about
it. I'm attacking the idea that dairy farming is cruel, that I DO know about--it's a lie.
I have given it more open minded thought than you are likely to give, which is a
sad thing. Even if I thought that dairy farming was cruel I would still drink milk, but
I know that it's not from experience.
John TRY to see it from the animals perspective. They can't talk, and they
don't know what the future holds for them...so you'd have to start there. All that
they know and learn is through sounds (not words or concepts shared with each
other), and sights, and feelings, and tastes and smells. Try thinking of it like that,
and you'll be a lot closer than wherever you are so far.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
Christopher Loy
slaughter it is quite sick.
Even under the best conditions this is an inane statement.
Not to even consider the often deplorable conditions livestock are made to
bear.
If told look mate we re keeping you to fatten you up and then going to kill
you and eat you better not to live.
The raising of creatures as something to exploit says something about the
person who dose it.
David
>The argument that you are doing the animal a favour by raising it to
>slaughter it is quite sick.
>Even under the best conditions this is an inane statement.
>Not to even consider the often deplorable conditions livestock are made to
>bear.
That is what people who really cared about the animals would be most
concerned with--making their living situation better--not eliminating the
need for them to ever have a life to experience.
I'm not saying that YOU should eat meat if you don't want to, just that
people shouldn't do things to discourage people who do, thinking that it
is what's best for the animals.
>If told look mate we re keeping you to fatten you up and then going to kill
>you and eat you better not to live.
You people all watch too much "Lion King" or something... Animals DO
NOT think that way....so they ARE NOT WORRIED about their death
until the time comes. You could not explain their situation to them if you
devoted your life to it.....not to any one of them.....try it......let me know when
you explain to the first pig in history (I thought I'd give ya' a smart one to start
with, before moving on to chickens and turkeys :-) that in less than a year it
will be killed to be food for humans.
I have seen pigs killed several times. A person would think that when
the first pig is killed, the ones who are still waiting and standing right next to
the first one, would get scared at all the blood, etc. But the ones that I've seen
just sniffed the first one and didn't pay much more attention. So, since they
aren't even scared when a pig they grew up with gets shot right next to them,
that is proof to me that they aren't worried much about it any other time either.
If you people do care about these animals, think about what
I just said, and at least be relieved to know that they DO NOT worry about
their impending doom.
>The raising of creatures as something to exploit says something about the
>person who dose it.
>
The animals would get NO LIFE if it weren't for their job of feeding people.
I used to raise chickens. Some of the hens I didn't want to raise any chicks
from, and those hens ran loose. If I found a nest, I'd break it up so that the hen
wouldn't hatch any chicks. The following question always kept going through
my mind:
If I am NOT going to let any chicks grow and reproduce from a particular
hen, is it better for the CHICKS (this is the part that you guys have a problem
with) as individuals, to:
a) Just break up the nest and don't let them ever experience life to begin with.
b) Let the hen set and hatch them, and let them live a certain period of time,
even if it is only one week, so they will at least get to experience breathing,
and eating, and drinking, and snugglin' up under their mother, and running,
and goofing with their buddies, and taking a dust bath, and....
I am not proud to say that I never let a batch of chicks enjoy that week, because
I didn't want to kill them, so they got nothing instead. But why deny life to animals
that we want to kill and eat....it's not very nice to them.
Just think about it......they don't really have it that bad. Not bad enough to want
nothing instead.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
tris...@my-dejanews.com
kll...@yahoo.com (David) wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:01:38 +0800, "Christopher Loy" <nar...@westnet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >The argument that you are doing the animal a favour by raising it to
> >slaughter it is quite sick.
> >Even under the best conditions this is an inane statement.
> >Not to even consider the often deplorable conditions livestock are made to
> >bear.
>
> That is what people who really cared about the animals would be most
> concerned with--making their living situation better--not eliminating the
> need for them to ever have a life to experience.
>
If enough people stopped eating mass produced meat then the meat industry
might just wake up and think about the way the animals are treated.
Are you that naive to think the animals raised in mass production are
living the life you described above. These animals are treated like nothing
but a product for consumption. They are mass produced, stuffed in to small
living quarters, forced to drink dirty water and eat remains of ground up
animal parts. They have their testicles removed with a scalpel, are
detoothed, debeaked, etc. without anesthetic. They are torn away from their
mothers as soon as the fattening process can begin. And half of them never
see the light of day. This is what goes on under normal circumstances-
sometimes you have assholes that go on to torture the defenseless animals as
happened at belcross farm http://www.meatstinks.com/pigcase.html
> I am not proud to say that I never let a batch of chicks enjoy that week, because
> I didn't want to kill them, so they got nothing instead. But why deny life to animals
> that we want to kill and eat....it's not very nice to them.
>
> Just think about it......they don't really have it that bad. Not bad enough to want
> nothing instead.
They certainly do have it "that bad".
Mark M
>
> David
> kll...@yahoo.com
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
James Hepler
David wrote:
> It sounds like the farmer you've been hanging around needs a visit from
> the humane society, if the cows have that much problem with their feet.
> The cows don't have any idea that they will only live 5 years, and so what
> if it was only 5 months--that is better than nothing.
I'd like to see proof about the five year thing. It wouldn't be advantageous to the farmer
if his livestock lived for such a short period of time. My uncle had a cow, "Vee" who lived
to be at least ten.
> It is sad that their calves get taken early, but that's life (only for those who are
> lucky enough to get to have it). That is one of the prices they pay to survive.
It isn't that sad. You can't anthropomorphize like that. I'd like to see someoneshow proof
of seperation anxiety in cattle.
James Hepler
James Hepler
Christopher Loy wrote:
> The argument that you are doing the animal a favour by raising it to
> slaughter it is quite sick.
Can we say that the animal would exist without man's insemination? Cows exist
free of most diseases, free of inclement weather, and free of predators. Once
again, we all die. How and when are bryond all of our control.
> If told look mate we re keeping you to fatten you up and then going to kill
> you and eat you better not to live.
Depends on what I get to do while alive and how I die.
> The raising of creatures as something to exploit says something about the
> person who dose it.
We all exploit all animals for our benefit. Meat eating is the tip of the
iceberg.
James Hepler
The Equalizer
are thinking to themselves,"What a bunch of losers! We stand around all
day, chewing our cuds, minding our own business on this big ol' farm.
All we do is eat and shit and get out tits squeezed a little everyday
and some assholes got to stick their noses up in our shit. Well, enjoy
it. I 'm happy and I don't know any better."
David wrote:
> One more thing: though _you_ can think of them as slaves, _they_
> can not. That idea is not bothering them at all, since they have no
> thoughts or feelings about the concept...nor the concept of freedom
> for that matter....what they live is all they know, and all they've
> got.
>
> On 13 Feb 1999 07:22:04 GMT, rare...@aol.com (Rare Hero) wrote:
>
> >Just replace all references of animals with "black slaves" or
> "holocaust
> >victims", and you'll see how sick and wrong what you wrote actually
> is. I
> >think if animals could rationalize life as people do, they'd rather
> NOT be born
> >than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>
> >
> >
James Hepler
karen lyn wrote:
> David, I think this is what people here are concerned about regarding
> dairy cattle Perhaps your opinions regarding non-human animals are
> not shared by all. IMHO it is rather like playing god to force animals
> to breed.
What about forcing them not to breed?
> Perhaps that decision is best left to the individuals themselves, as
> we can not determine if they enjoy their "chance" at life. It sounds
> as if the dairy farms you have known are vastly different from the
> commercial dairies in the US. Many of these have been publicly exposed
> for cruel treatment to cattle.
So who are we talking about? If you are criticizing MY meat
consumption, you are criticizing the family subsistence farm. Thats one
of the things that bug me about the AR movement. It bases it's entire
existence on generalizations. No AR I have spoken to distinguishes
between family farms and corporate ranches.
> If you care to test your theory that these animals have no concept of
> freedom, then perhaps it is not necassary to pen them. As they are, as
> you say, enjoying their lives so much, they will likely stick around.
> If you are prepared to test this I would love to know what you
> find. Karen
Been done. Fences on my families farm is to protect the corn and other
crops from the cattle, not to keep the cattle in. The land provided for
the cattle is at least a quarter mile in length (for a hundred cows).
But you know, at 3 PM, they always make that walk back to the barn. And
not just the milking cows. Also the lilvirgin cattle and everything.
Like clockwork. Is that ample testing? I've never seen a cow standing
near the fence longing for freedom. Just eyeing the cornfield.
James Hepler
David
>
>
>David wrote:
>
>> It sounds like the farmer you've been hanging around needs a visit from
>> the humane society, if the cows have that much problem with their feet.
>> The cows don't have any idea that they will only live 5 years, and so what
>> if it was only 5 months--that is better than nothing.
>
>I'd like to see proof about the five year thing. It wouldn't be advantageous to the farmer
>if his livestock lived for such a short period of time. My uncle had a cow, "Vee" who lived
>to be at least ten.
>
I'm not familiar with enough dairy farms to know what the average is, so I give a person
the benefit on the doubt if I don't feel that I'm sure about something. I know that laying hens
in industrial type laying houses are only kept for about 2-3 years, because though they are
still productive after that point, they aren't _as_ productive, so a more productive bunch is
brought in, and the first bunch is killed and sold as stewers, etc.
The dairy farm where I spent the most time sure kept cows more than 5 years--they kept
them as long as they could afford to, and sometimes longer if they were especially fond of
the cow. They had several gray haired ol' gals that they just kept around because of the
fact that they had been a good cow for a long time, even though they were not giving
enough milk to be financially worth feeding any more. They were proud that they had
several that were over 10 years old.
>> It is sad that their calves get taken early, but that's life (only for those who are
>> lucky enough to get to have it). That is one of the prices they pay to survive.
>
>It isn't that sad. You can't anthropomorphize like that. I'd like to see someoneshow proof
>of seperation anxiety in cattle.
>
That is usually easy enough. I've gone on farms that I had never been to before, and
could tell that a cow had recently had her calf taken, 'cause she was calling for it (as
cows do in that situation) and it was very annoying. If you go to a farm and hear a cow
bawling loudly over and over, there will be your proof. They do that for several days, or
a week or so--especially the younger ones who haven't been through it as much. After
a while they learn to accept it better.
I am on your side in that I feel (and I also know it for a fact) that dairy farming is not cruel.
But there are parts of it that are not pleasant, and I'm not going to pretend that there are not.
There are unpleasant things for all animals to deal with, and for all people too.
The people who feel that dairy farming should be eliminated have had life _too_ easy or
something though--I haven't figured it out. They MOST DEFINITELY are unwilling to think
things through in an open-minded way...and at the same time believe that they are being
more open-minded than people who have lived around the situation. Like a kid who in 10th
grade decides he knows it all, so he stops learning, and stays at about a 10th grade
mentality for the rest of his days, thinking that he is brilliant the whole time.
These people watch "cute" shows from Disney, etc, in which animals are really very
intelligent, and capable of rational thinking, complex communication between not only others
of their own species but also with _other_ species, and some people even believe that they
can understand what people are saying! Anyone who thinks that is true can prove it wrong
easily enough: take something that you know your dog or cat (or someone elses if you don't
have one) would like to eat, and hide it someplace where the animal doesn't normally go--
making sure the animal doesn't see you do it. Then go and tell the animal about it, in a regular
conversational tone, and see if it goes and gets it.
People who REALLY do care about what's best for the animals would be relieved to learn
that they have been wrong about the way they viewed the situation, and that these animals
are really living a good life! which most of them are!!! But these people DO NOT care about
the animals themselves, and they don't seem to care about the truth, so they cling to the lies
and share them with each other. They appear to have no interest in the FACT that the animals
really have a pretty good life, and if it weren't for their role as a source of food, they would
have no life at all.
When I started hanging out at the farm down the road I was in about 4th grade. I spent
hours down there every day for the next 3 years, and learned a lot about dairy farming. I also
learned that a lot of the things I had believed about animals was wrong. Sometimes the farmers
would have reason to discuss "animal rights" people, and they told me things that these people
believed. At the time I thought that the farmers must misunderstand or something--no adults
would believe such things as that animals "know" they will eventually be killed for food! Or that
dairy farming is cruel! That one is so far from the truth that I didn't really believe any functional
adult human would buy such crap, until I found out that it is really true from this ng. I'm now
almost 40, and still constantly amazed at what people will believe.
If any of you people who think dairy farming is cruel grew up on one, I'd love to hear about it!
The people who don't know about a subject are the ones who feel they know all the "secrets"
or whatever, but they aren't always true. I've been in that same situation myself...I'm sure that
we all have at one time or another. Realizing it, and changing it is very hard though, since it
requires learning to think about a familiar subject in a totally different way. But again I ask these
people to PLEASE TRY to think of it from the animals point of view--which will be a totally new
perspective.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
David
>> The animals would get NO LIFE if it weren't for their job of feeding people.
>> I used to raise chickens. Some of the hens I didn't want to raise any chicks
>> from, and those hens ran loose. If I found a nest, I'd break it up so that the hen
>> wouldn't hatch any chicks. The following question always kept going through
>> my mind:
>>
>> If I am NOT going to let any chicks grow and reproduce from a particular
>> hen, is it better for the CHICKS (this is the part that you guys have a problem
>> with) as individuals, to:
>> a) Just break up the nest and don't let them ever experience life to begin with.
>> b) Let the hen set and hatch them, and let them live a certain period of time,
>> even if it is only one week, so they will at least get to experience breathing,
>> and eating, and drinking, and snugglin' up under their mother, and running,
>> and goofing with their buddies, and taking a dust bath, and....
>>
>
>
> Are you that naive to think the animals raised in mass production are
>living the life you described above. These animals are treated like nothing
>but a product for consumption. They are mass produced, stuffed in to small
>living quarters, forced to drink dirty water and eat remains of ground up
>animal parts. They have their testicles removed with a scalpel, are
>detoothed, debeaked, etc. without anesthetic. They are torn away from their
>mothers as soon as the fattening process can begin. And half of them never
>see the light of day. This is what goes on under normal circumstances-
>sometimes you have assholes that go on to torture the defenseless animals as
>happened at belcross farm http://www.meatstinks.com/pigcase.html
>
Only one of the things I mentioned in the b) section you quoted would not be
available to industrialy raised chicks--can you tell me which one?
>
>> I am not proud to say that I never let a batch of chicks enjoy that week, because
>> I didn't want to kill them, so they got nothing instead. But why deny life to animals
>> that we want to kill and eat....it's not very nice to them.
>>
>> Just think about it......they don't really have it that bad. Not bad enough to want
>> nothing instead.
>
>They certainly do have it "that bad".
>
They don't know that they have it "that bad" because that is ALL they get to know,
and only do they get that because of the food industry. They still like getting to have
life, and I'll believe they don't when you people prove it to me. Which you can't do because
they like being alive, and that's a fact. YOU could learn that if you would let yourself...but
if you are capable of believing the junk you now do, reality is probably beyond you. I urge
all of you to TRY though, for the sake of the animals and the people who devote their entire
lives to caring for them.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
Amber
will stop killing humans, of a time when there will be NO MORE Pedophiles on
this earth, when there will be no need for abortions, no threat of more
wars, and of a time where there is no racism, or religious intolerance, till
then I dont think people are to worried about a cows view point.
Sandy
> If people were to stop eating meat, all of these animals who are
getting
>to enjoy the experience of life (whether you think it is worth living that
>way or not, THEY DO!) would never get the opportunity to do so. It's not
>like they would just get to be born, and never be eaten, if people stopped
>eating them--because no one would raise them for no reason--none of you
>would, would you? If so...go ahead and do it :-)
>
David
>David keep dreaming of your utopia, just like I will of the time when humans
>will stop killing humans, of a time when there will be NO MORE Pedophiles on
>this earth, when there will be no need for abortions, no threat of more
>wars, and of a time where there is no racism, or religious intolerance, till
>then I dont think people are to worried about a cows view point.
>Sandy
>
I'm sure not going for any utopia, but it's nice to hear someone admit that
they don't care how the animals feel about things.
David
kll...@yahoo.com
James Hepler
and it screws with some readers. If you wanna throw in links, write
them in. This is a violation of some TOS's. Thank!
No illwill intended.
James Hepler
"Michael S. Updike" wrote:
>
>
> karen lyn wrote in message
> <36C75769...@uswest.net>...David, I think this is what
> people here are concerned about regarding dairy cattle
> Perhaps your opinions regarding non-human animals are not
> shared by all. IMHO it is rather like playing god to force
> animals to breed. Perhaps that decision is best left to the
> individuals themselves, as we can not determine if they
> enjoy their "chance" at life. It sounds as if the dairy
> farms you have known are vastly different from the
> commercial dairies in the US. Many of these have been
> publicly exposed for cruel treatment to cattle.
> If you care to test your theory that these animals have no
> concept of freedom, then perhaps it is not necassary to pen
> them. As they are, as you say, enjoying their lives so much,
> they will likely stick around. If you are prepared to test
> this I would love to know what you find. Karen
>
> Our cattle and sheep ahve gotten out through our fences.
> 99% of th etime we get them back in withoihn an hour or
> two. But sometimes they will eb goen for a week or so.
> When they come back adn they inevitably do, they are much
> worse off. they are starved for mineral and feed. they
> will eb skinny when tye come back. Cattle get into
> routines. they automaticly coem up to the feeding areas at
> teh right time. if we are late they let us know. they will
> stand and let us scratch their backs. they do enjoy life,
> as short as it may be for them
>
> Our cattle ans heep have escaped through
>
Sandy
change it back.
sandy,
r_noelle@ NOSPAM email.com
David wrote in message <36c91706....@news.mindspring.com>...
I do care about animals, I dont want them to suffer needlessly, But I dont
think that with all the more pressing problems going on right now that most
people are not worrying about a cows view on life.
And your view, to me is a utopia, because if you can get every single person
on this planet to think like you, that would be a miracle!!!!
Sandy
David
>OOPS....sorry for mix up on names, family member changed my name, forgot to
>change it back.
>sandy,
>r_noelle@ NOSPAM email.com
>
>
>David wrote in message <36c91706....@news.mindspring.com>...
>>On Mon, 15 Feb 1999 23:10:09 -0800, "Amber" <non...@yourbez.com> wrote:
>>
>>>David keep dreaming of your utopia, just like I will of the time when
>humans
>>>will stop killing humans, of a time when there will be NO MORE Pedophiles
>on
>>>this earth, when there will be no need for abortions, no threat of more
>>>wars, and of a time where there is no racism, or religious intolerance,
>till
>>>then I dont think people are to worried about a cows view point.
>>>Sandy
>>>
>> I'm sure not going for any utopia, but it's nice to hear someone admit
>that
>>they don't care how the animals feel about things.
>>
>> David
>> kll...@yahoo.com
>
> I do care about animals, I dont want them to suffer needlessly, But I dont
>think that with all the more pressing problems going on right now that most
>people are not worrying about a cows view on life.
People are not eating meat or dairy products because they think it is cruel
to the animals. How can people say it is cruel to the animals when they don't
even consider the situation from the position that the animals are in? Thinking
about it from the animals perspective has _nothing_ to do with "all the more
pressing problems going on right now", so why even bring that up???
>And your view, to me is a utopia, because if you can get every single person
>on this planet to think like you, that would be a miracle!!!!
And if they can get every single person on this planet to think that farming
animals is cruel, that would be a curse!!!!
David
kll...@yahoo.com
David
>Any chance we can get Karen to stop postin gin HTML? This is Usenet,
>and it screws with some readers. If you wanna throw in links, write
>them in. This is a violation of some TOS's. Thank!
>
>No illwill intended.
>
Maybe that is why I haven't seen any of her posts accept through other people's
replies...they just don't show up on my news reader, which is Free Agent. Do you
know if there is a way I can get it to view them?
What are TOS's?
David
kll...@yahoo.com
David
> <36C75769...@uswest.net>...David, I think this is what
> people here are concerned about regarding dairy cattle
> Perhaps your opinions regarding non-human animals are not
> shared by all. IMHO it is rather like playing god to force
> animals to breed. Perhaps that decision is best left to the
> individuals themselves, as we can not determine if they
> enjoy their "chance" at life.
I'm not trying to encourage a democracy for them, I'm saying that
they don't know they are going to be killed for food, so that idea is
not bothering them. And they DO enjoy being alive for the most part.
> It sounds as if the dairy
> farms you have known are vastly different from the
> commercial dairies in the US. Many of these have been
> publicly exposed for cruel treatment to cattle.
No doubt there are lame people in all professions! But the fact
that some of the people on some of the dairy farms have been cruel
to animals doesn't mean that dairy farming itself is cruel.
"Animal rights" (or whatever) people are saying that dairy farming
itself is cruel...which is a lie!...so who is going to have any respect
at all for their opinion about cruelty??? The idea of "animal rights"
is a good one, and I'm sure the whole thing started out to end cruel
treatment to animals, but by now people have taken it to the point
that it is absurd.
People make up lies about it, and share and believe them, and
teach them to their CHILDREN no doubt...how sad can it get?!!
I know that at this point I wouldn't believe anything that an "animal
rights" person told me, unless I heard it from a reliable source as well.
> If you care to test your theory that these animals have no
> concept of freedom, then perhaps it is not necassary to pen
> them. As they are, as you say, enjoying their lives so much,
> they will likely stick around. If you are prepared to test
> this I would love to know what you find. Karen
If they have never been free, then they don't know what freedom
is. They can imagine what it would be like to go eat the grass on the
other side of the fence, etc, but they aren't stressed out about the fact
that they are confined...having never known anything else. But I'll bet
if you checked around with farmers you would find that the animals
that get out of fences always show up again, or just hang around trying
to get back in. That's what our cows and pigs always did...they'd get
out of the fence somehow, and spend the rest of their period of
"freedom" trying to get back in. Pretty clever aren't they? And these
are animals that "know" they will be killed for food? I just don't think so!
In fact, I KNOW they don't!
David
kll...@yahoo.com
tris...@my-dejanews.com
The last four. Then factor in all the shit they do have to go through.
> >
> >> I am not proud to say that I never let a batch of chicks enjoy that week, because
> >> I didn't want to kill them, so they got nothing instead. But why deny life to animals
> >> that we want to kill and eat....it's not very nice to them.
> >>
> >> Just think about it......they don't really have it that bad. Not bad enough to want
> >> nothing instead.
> >
> >They certainly do have it "that bad".
> >
> They don't know that they have it "that bad" because that is ALL they get to know,
> and only do they get that because of the food industry. They still like getting to have
> life, and I'll believe they don't when you people prove it to me. Which you can't do because
> they like being alive, and that's a fact.
Let me make this simple for you- put yourself in the conditions they live in
and tell me they are happy to be alive.
>YOU could learn that if you would let yourself...but
> if you are capable of believing the junk you now do, reality is probably beyond >you.
That is reality, wake up.
>I urge
> all of you to TRY though, for the sake of the animals and the people who devote their entire
> lives to caring for them.
I'm sure some farmers actually do care for their animals, but these
manufacturing plants care only about efficiency and they don't give a damn
about the animals. Take a look at some of the trade magazines of the industry
and you'll see first hand what they're all about.
Nancy Magill
or would you think pain is part of everything and they must try to
survive...any life span they will have and any pain they will suffer...
think
Lil
David a écrit dans le message <36c52a67....@news.mindspring.com>...
> You don't really think that the animals would thank you for the way you
Nancy Magill
point of view! :) *laugh* sound to much stupid...
Lil
James Hepler a écrit dans le message <36C851FA...@email.unc.edu>...
>
>
>David wrote:
>
>> It sounds like the farmer you've been hanging around needs a visit
from
>> the humane society, if the cows have that much problem with their feet.
>> The cows don't have any idea that they will only live 5 years, and so
what
>> if it was only 5 months--that is better than nothing.
>
>I'd like to see proof about the five year thing. It wouldn't be
advantageous to the farmer
>if his livestock lived for such a short period of time. My uncle had a
cow, "Vee" who lived
>to be at least ten.
>
>> It is sad that their calves get taken early, but that's life (only
for those who are
>> lucky enough to get to have it). That is one of the prices they pay to
survive.
>
>It isn't that sad. You can't anthropomorphize like that. I'd like to see
someoneshow proof
>of seperation anxiety in cattle.
>
>James Hepler
>
Nancy Magill
compare ones from factory farming and ones from the old time with family
farming that the first are bigger and a lot different...and it's what i
found cruel..change a specie for our own need and taste. :( and a scientific
study has show some months ago that cow were able of thinking and was able
to make difference easily beetween bad and good treatments...so if they are,
they could feel the difference too no?
Lil
David a écrit dans le message <36c534fa....@news.mindspring.com>...
>On 13 Feb 1999 07:22:04 GMT, rare...@aol.com (Rare Hero) wrote:
>
>>Just replace all references of animals with "black slaves" or "holocaust
>>victims", and you'll see how sick and wrong what you wrote actually is. I
>>think if animals could rationalize life as people do, they'd rather NOT be
born
>>than to live a life of slavery, torture, and genocide as they do now.
>>
> That's right, IF they could it would be different. But they CAN'T! So it
doesn't
>matter if they could. THAT IDEA IS NOT EVEN A CONSIDERATION!
> But IF they could, they would not commit mass suicide any faster or more
>thoroughly than the blacks, or the holocaust victims etc. did/do.
> You can call them slaves, but you can't honestly say they live a life of
torture.
>And YOU people are the ones who are encouraging genocide--which is why I
>bothered to stick my nose in here--because it is horrible! I'm sure that
there
Nancy Magill
Why not? I dont live with animals for any other "reasons" than enjoying life
and pleasure with them. I have many sheeps, hen and bunny....and I will
never kill them or hurt them in any way. Why would I do such a thing like
that? A cow? why not? they are really intelligent and sensible animals..as
pigs are too..and even if they were not (sheeps are not the smartest I cant
denied that point) they are life being. They deserves life and more than
that..they deserses the best to enjoy life.
Lil
Nancy Magill
besides that...if they dont feel stressed thinking about freedom..they
certaintly are stressed by a too much small area..and it comes from all
scientific experiments about animals psychology.
Lil
David a écrit dans le message <36c9d104....@news.mindspring.com>...
>other side of the fence, etc, but they aren't stressed out about the fact
David
>Why not? I dont live with animals for any other "reasons" than enjoying life
>and pleasure with them. I have many sheeps, hen and bunny....and I will
>never kill them or hurt them in any way. Why would I do such a thing like
>that? A cow? why not? they are really intelligent and sensible animals..as
>pigs are too..and even if they were not (sheeps are not the smartest I cant
>denied that point) they are life being. They deserves life and more than
>that..they deserses the best to enjoy life.
That is all very cool for the animals that you have, but the millions who
are now getting to live thanks to the meat and dairy industry, would still get
no life if it were not for those industries.
>and HOW do YOU know they dont???
>
>besides that...if they dont feel stressed thinking about freedom..they
>certaintly are stressed by a too much small area..and it comes from all
>scientific experiments about animals psychology.
If they are being raised in areas that are too small for them, that is
what should be changed, not just stop raising them altogether. I KNOW
that they aren't stressed out thinking about freedom, because they don't
know about something they have never experienced. What animals are
kept in too small an area?
One day people will be able to grow meat in huge vats, or some such
thing. They will be able to just grow the flesh without the need of the
animals at all. When that time comes, the millions of animals that are now
raised for food will get nothing...which is what you people want.
If you people really cared about the animals involved, the LAST thing
you would want to do is deny them life entirely!!! You would instead be glad
for them that they have the chance to live at all, and also be glad for them
that they do not understand the situation that they are in. You would be
appreciative of the things that are good in their lives, and try to change the
things that are bad. But NOOOO! You people deny that there is anything
good in their lives, and even make up lies to make it seem worse than it
is! And then go on to try to deny them of life at all...you don't care about
giving them a better life...you just want to deny them of it entirely.
Do any of you care about the farms where the animals are well kept,
and praise the farmers who give their animals a good and healthy life?
Of course I don't know anything about it, but I'd bet "hell no". The last
thing you people would want is to see happy, healthy animals...or to
encourage people who work so hard to treat them well :-(
David
kll...@yahoo.com