The Energon Pub

Thu May 22, 2008 10:07 pm

Frankly, I just got in a fight over my parents over this issue, so this might be a bit of a hot-button topic, but we'll see.

We were arguing over laws against animal cruelty in society as compared to the use of animals for various forms of sustainence and goods.

I argued that, due to the fact that all nutritional needs could be provided by non-animal sources, as well as just about all item production, to an extent similar to if not greater than their living sources, that any choice to still support the penning and slaughtering of animals (and all other actions that entails) was a matter of shear pleasure, not of necessity, and is therefore "arbitrary to personal life."

Therefore, compared to general cruelty laws, which seem to protect against the killing and use of animals for merely the same reason, "arbitrary," that they were essentially the same, and that either all killing of animals (vertebrate I assume, as I could get 5,000 tickets for accidently killing bugs) should be banned, or that everything should be allowed.

Being a pleasure monger myself, I personally sided with the latter, since I simply love meat too much, though I acknowledge my personal distaste for the other practice.

Does my logic appear sound, and feelings are being put ahead of reason, or am I simply being a bit warped?

News Credits: 8 · Thu May 22, 2008 10:21 pm

Shut up and eat it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX03-TMExLU
well ballanced and yummy

News Credits: 2 · Thu May 22, 2008 10:22 pm

Banning all killing of animals is actually more cruel, specifically to deer. If we don't hunt deer, the deer starve to death. Which is the worse hell, a quick bullet to th head, or starving to death?

It'd also be a significant blow to any and all companies that sell meat, which is basically every restaurant chain, supermarket, and butcher shop on Earth. In fact, only vegetarian restaurants would survive. So that's an extremely large number of jobs that go out the window, significantly contributing to unemployment.

News Credits: 3 · Thu May 22, 2008 10:33 pm

I am not a lawyer or a philosopher, but from an evolutionary point of view, the domestication and slaughter of livestock has been brilliant for the species involved. (pretty much right up until some farmers started battery farming, ruining quality of life for said animals) Desirable domestic species are some of the most numerous and successful of animals, although most have changed enormously from their ancestors. As far as genetics goes, which was it better to be, an Auroch (Cattle ancestor) with millions of descendants or a Dodo?

News Credits: 1 · Fri May 23, 2008 3:41 am

Deer will rarely have the luxury of being shot in the head first time!

I'm not against eating meat, though I'm against battery farming. I only eat free range chicken and eggs. My girlfriend's a vegetarian, practically making me one too.

If people ate less meat the world would certainly be improved. Obesity, cancer rates, global warming- it'd all decrease somewhat.

Shadowman wrote:In fact, only vegetarian restaurants would survive.

Nuh-uh. Think about it- vegetables are a lot cheaper than meat, and any Chef worth his salt should be able to cook with vegetables. You're forgetting that a ban on meat would result in everyone having to have a vegetarian option anyway, so restaurants would remain in use.

News Credits: 3 · Fri May 23, 2008 4:54 am

I am against battery farming too. I am glad in NZ we only battery farm chickens and pigs to my knowledge, since I don't like pork and free range eggs aren't too hard to come by it is not hard to avoid battery farmed produce. That being said I have walked around NZ farms in drought, and seen starving cows walking parched fields, no grass, no food. The poor things will run up to any humans and cry out to be fed, I spent a week on that farm, not a pleasant experience.

News Credits: 6 · Fri May 23, 2008 7:50 am

I woulda thought globabl warming would accelerate, since cows are pretty big methane producers

But seriously, I'd starve without meat.

Can't abide vegetables (fruit's good), or any of that GM 'Quorn' crap.

News Credits: 2 · Fri May 23, 2008 7:58 am

Instead of banning meat I think we should ban candy instead.

News Credits: 6 · Fri May 23, 2008 8:09 am

Tekka wrote:Instead of banning meat I think we should ban candy instead.

What about rocks? Sweets? Gums? Chocolate? ;;)

We ain'ts in americaland Tek

But yeah, banning sweets and fags would be a very good idea.

But not alcohol. That'd break Jeep's heart

News Credits: 2 · Fri May 23, 2008 8:13 am

I'm using my international voice. Chips, cookies, fries, biscuits, lifts, elevators, candy, sweets. It's all too confusing for our clashing cultures.

On the animal cruelty issue however I am somewhat neutral. I feel for the ones who are treated poorly but I really have no intention of ever ceasing to eat them.

News Credits: 49 · Fri May 23, 2008 11:30 am

If only by animal cruelty you mean animals like chickens and such who are kept in pens for the sole reason of laying eggs and becoming my dinner.

That I can agree with.

However, hunting animals, such as deer, elk, duck, everything of that nature is a necessity to the environment.

You don't hunt the deer, the deer multiply exponentially, the deer multiply exponentially, the deers food sources thin, the food sources thin, the deer starve to death, the deer starve to death we get @#$%tards like Bono making infomercials about deer, we get @#$%tards like Bono making infomercials about deer, I get annoyed and Shoryuken Bono to death(I hate Bono.), I Shoryuken Bono to death, I go to prison, I go to prison, I can't hunt the Deer, I can't hunt the deer, the deer multiply.

It's a vicious cycle.

Plus with hunting animals, you get to try different types of burgers, jerky, etc. Deer is awesome, Alligator is pretty good, I need to try Bear.

News Credits: 8 · Fri May 23, 2008 7:14 pm

Matrix. wrote:Deer will rarely have the luxury of being shot in the head first time!

I'm not against eating meat, though I'm against battery farming. I only eat free range chicken and eggs. My girlfriend's a vegetarian, practically making me one too.

If people ate less meat the world would certainly be improved. Obesity, cancer rates, global warming- it'd all decrease somewhat.

Shadowman wrote:In fact, only vegetarian restaurants would survive.

Nuh-uh. Think about it- vegetables are a lot cheaper than meat, and any Chef worth his salt should be able to cook with vegetables. You're forgetting that a ban on meat would result in everyone having to have a vegetarian option anyway, so restaurants would remain in use.

Someone get this guy a funnel and some gravy before we lose him completely (:|

Fri May 23, 2008 9:57 pm

I haven't eaten meat in like 10 years, not because I'm oposed to eating it. But because everytime I see it I picture dead rotting animals, I guess I'm just wired that way. I do think humans eat way too much of it though. I hate going to restaurants because I have to choose between motzerella sticks or sugar packets, so they can go out of business for all I care.