Quote by MnemethCruelty is one thing like
on the video mentioned but there is no problem in general with using animals for
meat or fur. Most of the people in organizations for the prevention of such
mistreatment are pretty middle of the road and do use products created from dead
animals. Its the wackos that believe animals are equal to or greater than people
that you have to watch out for.
At the risk of offending someone and not really caring. I am a Member of PETA
(People Eating Tasty Animals.)
hahaha the organisation's name does not sound right...lols...but pretty
cool...hehaha
anyway i love animals...to bad they cannot defend themselves and this is what
humans do best, trample on the weak and defenseless...
Gosh! I mostly hate the idea of animal cruelty. Speaking of which, Yeah I'm
Asian, and I have been joked about me eating dogs and cats and rats. I have a
puppy, and I swear people look at me funny everytime I walk her... OMG. OMG. NO
I DON'T EAT PETS. I eat cow, chicken, fish... That's it...
merged: 12-26-2006 ~ 01:49pm
I care alot for animals, they are fun and nice and furry. I
support.
I'm support for the action against the cruelty of animals. I don't like to see
the animals get hurt and beaten by the foolish human beings. Give the animals
the protection and love!
I believe that the mistreatment of animals is wrong too. But that doesn't mean
that we should all turn vegan and start taking public transportation! We should
all just stop using animals wastefully.
Hmm i was just watchin to discovery channel. and apparently we have a really
beautiful world. chances r were not gonna be able to enjoy it much longer, but
the way i see people treat it as a tourist attraction anyways. I guess what im
saying is that is it really necessary to progress to keep the wildlife goin. or
is it just domestic pets and stuff that ur talkin bout. i dont really kno ehat
this tread is about. I agree that animals shouldnt be tortured or nething. so
there.
I would collect some human skin (not any skin ...just from certain folks I
"like" hehehe) ...but the law is flawed ...pathetic humans and their
stupid weak laws
you buy fur clothes ...animal skin clothes ...and then you whine abut this ...it
came to this because of you, the one (many ones ...enough ones added together)
that bought and still do ...and now that you see the way it's done from the
beginning some of you stopped buying (SOME) ...and "some" is too
little of a number
it's not really the fault of the people that have the dirty job of killing the
unfortunate animal ...their dirty job is funded by your clean money
>__>
yeah, money ...you can have even innocent animal skin for some money ...some
hungry poor people would take even the dirtiest job ...your dirty job
Don't tell me you don't have at least one animal fur/skin cloth in your house
because it's a lie ....and if by chance you don't have don't tell me you never
HAD
I've seen some videos of the way the fur/skin is taken ...in one of them the new
born baby lamb was skinned alive (yes, alive ...it's skin wasn't even dry yet)
...why? ...because it's fur is softer that way, way softer and because of that
it's more expensive ...and we come to money again.
and after this there are the pets ...animal traffic and commercialization
...they get taken away from their environment just because a lot of humans like
to have an exotic animal in their house (parrots, snakes, lizards, monkeys,
...you name it)
WTF is wrong with you people?!?!?!
I agree, that we should stop killing animals for fur, rugs, hats, Stupid things.
AND The testing on animals for products, that shoud be stopped too.
I disagree, when it comes to food. Unless, it is an endangered animal. Then they
shouldn't be eaten at all. o.o But, if the cow is being killed for food already
that same cow - since the coat is fine.. then it guess it should be okay to use.
There are some interesting points made in this thread and I'd like to add my
thoughts.
Eating domesticated animals is practically necessary. Maybe in an ideal world
everyone will eat soybeans and take supplements but this isn't one. People
(especially in developing countries) require the protein from animals for
survival. Oh sure everyone can take the required steps in their diet to become
vegans but for the average person this inconveniences them just too
much.
For the most part I think that the switch to being a vegetarian or vegan is
avoided mostly for the sheer inconvenience of having to balance every meal you
have to make sure you get all the required amino acids and such. Not too many
people feel strongly enough to make the change. It simply doesn't affect them.
Animal cruelty is a relatively unimportant issue compared to the growing
national deficit, the Iraq War, homelessness, poverty, famine, social inequity,
education, etc. The way a cow is treated before being made into meat impacts my
life very little compared to something like affirmative action.
Likewise the same goes for the fur industry. If it were people being affected
negatively by all this I would feel differently simply because I emphasize with
them more. If humans were treated cruelly then I want to help. There is a lot
more apathy with animals which is an important point. You can't talk to a cow
and see what it thinks about being eaten. Likely it isn't even "aware"
in the same sense that a person would be in the same situation.
Fur is a luxury item. It's not something people need. However, leather is made
from cows. People use leather in clothes. Is using leather bad? Should we stop
using leather altogether and just eat the cow? Does eating the animal afterwards
justify its use as a fur animal? I think that it doesn't really matter. The
animal dies whether you use it for food or for fur. Anyone can just sell the
meat from fur animals and instantly it is on the level of a cow. As such I think
by default I have to condone the fur industry for now.
People who disagree with testing animals for medical reasons are just plain
crazy. What do you want us to test new drugs on, the homeless? Medical science
would grind to a halt and no new drugs would be made. No one is going to use a
drug that hasn't been well tested. Even before a drug reaches clinical trials in
humans there are dozens of rat, rabbit, pig, and monkey test phases.
The same goes for cosmetics, soap, lotions, etc. If I know human nature, most
people won't want to give up looking good or having smooth skin. I'd want to
know that it's safe before anyone uses it.
Of course at the end of the day I'm not condoning animal cruelty. There are some
things that make me sick. It's one thing to have a bunch of animals in a cage so
you can make food it's another thing entirely to skin it alive. At least put it
down quickly or use anesthetic.
Reading those comments above upsets me. How were you people that don't care
about animals brought up? Don't you ever have a pet in your life?
All the things that are done to these animals before they're killed for their
meat/fur/whatever is cruel. You say better help fellow humans first than animals
like we're higher or more important somehow. Take a biology class, humans ARE
animals. We have no right to treat animals badly.
And yes, you're supposed to scold/hit a child when they're mistreating animals.
That's how they learn not to be heartless when they grow up!
(these are for those extremists i recall reading...)
er... im okay with eating meat but i also think its wrong to hurt animals on
purpose. But would you animal-"lovers" consider starving a child to
save a calf?
anyway, if cruelty to animals is what you're fighting for, would you consider
eating animal meat knowing that the animal was given special care, treated
kindly but still sold as meat?
if a pig's main purpose is to be eaten ever since he was born, would you eat it
knowing that you are fulfilling his purpose?
I dont believe in violence on animals but let's just be rational here and pipe
down the adrenaline. Sure okay, Humans are classified as animals, but we are a
lot smarter than them (most of us, at least), somehow that makes it our
responsibility to take care of them. Actually, "Animal Rights" don't
exist since every "right" must have an equal
"responsibility". But animals can't protect themselves from us, can
they? Nah.. All there'll ever be is "Human Responsibility". But just
like any member of a herd, or a pride or pack, you look out for your companions
first rather than other species. Isn't that correct? In any ecosystem you find
that attachment.
That is why its only sensible to think of your fellow humans first. We're not
downsizing animal cruelty or justifying it. Just keep the perspectives in place.
Getting PETA emails myself and all...I understand their concerns. For the most
part, I agree with their ideas. Still...sometimes, I feel as though they're far
too liberal in their approach to the whole thing. Have any of you SEEN the stuff
they'd send kids in the form little cute comic books and whatnot? They try to
convince the kids that anything to do with eating meat is pure evil. I dunno,
but that can have its negative effects. I've seen vegetarians give disgusted
looks at meat eaters---you don't see them giving disgusted looks back at the
vegetarians for eating salad. In short, what they do is just plain rude.
Sometimes, PETA just vibrates with that negative attitude.
I follow one rule: Kill only to eat.
However, having a mini Zoo in my house, I follow another rule too, "Thou
shall not kill what you keep as pet".
i suppose I will still eat meat. However, I will choose my meat. No rare animals
will be in my diet. Neither will illegal meat be allowed (illegally caught
whales, bears and stufts).
As for the whole "Meat vs Vege" thing, I really do not want to care
about it. Everyone has their own belief and are free to express it, as long as
it is within the law, and mindful of social responsibility. Meat lovers who
laugh at Vegetable lovers are curel. likewise, Vegetarians who express disgust
OPENly at meat lover are plain rude. I have no grudge against both groups, but
only dislike their reaction if they display it openly. If they kept their
disgust to themselves, I believe that the world will be a better place. After
all, I respect the saying, "Live and let live".
I wonder why, some people see the act of humans killing animals for food a
disgusting act of cruelty, while they see predatory animals hunting other
animals a natural beauty..
and there are times when i felt like asking animal lovers who turn vegetarian
for the love of animals and keep pets... "are your pets vegetarian
too?"
Quote by xiaodickI wonder why, some
people see the act of humans killing animals for food a disgusting act of
cruelty, while they see predatory animals hunting other animals a natural
beauty..
and there are times when i felt like asking animal lovers who turn vegetarian
for the love of animals and keep pets... "are your pets vegetarian
too?"
Well said. Many of these animal loves are hypocrites.
And why is OK to kill plants? After all, they are living, breathing beings. Oh
right, to eat! Well, the rest of the population needs to eat too so leave them
alone.
What about these "vegans" who eat fish but no red meat or poultry. Or
eat dairy products and still claim to be vegans.
now after watching that read this:
"CORVALLIS - Why is it right to kill the mouse and not the cow?
This question is central to a study of bioethics that explores the moral
foundation of a strictly vegetarian, so-called vegan diet. The research, by
Steven Davis, a professor of animal science at Oregon State University, adds a
new perspective to a millennia-old debate: Is it right for people to kill
animals in order to feed themselves?
Davis turns that question on its head. How many animals must die, he asks, in
order for people to feed themselves?
To address the question, Davis applies a principle used by moral philosophers to
measure the least amount of harm an action might cause, called the Least Harm
Principle.
Davis's research focuses on the work of Tom Regan, a philosophy professor from
North Carolina State University and founder of the contemporary animal rights
movement. Regan argues that the least harm would be done to animals if people
were to adopt a vegan diet - that is, a diet based only on plants, with no meat,
eggs, or milk products.
What goes unaccounted for in Regan's vegan conclusion, according to Davis, is
the number of animals who are inadvertently killed during crop production and
harvest.
"Vegan diets are not bloodless diets," Davis said. "Millions of
animals die every year to provide products used in vegan diets."
Davis presented his research last fall at a meeting of the European Society for
Agriculture and Food Ethics, in Florence, Italy. There he questioned the
conclusions of animal rights proponents and offered alternatives using the Least
Harm Principle. Central to his argument is the unseen mortality that accompanies
the production of row crops and grains, staples of a vegan diet, in agricultural
systems large enough to sustain the human population.
"Over the years that I have been studying animal rights theories, I have
never found anyone who has considered the deaths of - or, the 'harm' to -
animals of the field," Davis said. "This, it seems to me, is a serious
omission."
Consequently, Davis asks what is the morally relevant difference between the
field mouse and the cow that makes it okay to kill one but not the other so that
humans may eat.
Few studies document the losses of rabbits, mice, pheasants, snakes and other
field animals in planting and harvesting crops. Said one researcher:
"Because most of these animals have been seen as expendable, or not seen at
all, few scientific studies have been done measuring agriculture's effects on
their populations."
Davis has found evidence that suggests that the unseen losses of field animals
are very high. One study documented that a single operation, mowing alfalfa,
caused a 50 percent reduction in the gray-tailed vole population. Mortality
rates increase with every pass of the tractor to plow, plant, and harvest.
Additions of herbicides and pesticides cause additional harm to animals of the
field.
In contrast, grazing ruminants such as cattle produce food and require fewer
entries into the fields with tractors and other equipment. In grazed pastures,
according to Davis, less wildlife is lost to the mower blades, and more find
stable habitat in untilled fields. And no-till agriculture also helps stabilize
soil and reduce run-off into streams.
"Pasture-forage production, with herbivores harvesting the forage, would be
the ultimate in 'no-till' agriculture," Davis said.
Davis proposes a ruminant-pasture model of food production, which would replace
all poultry, pig and lamb production with beef and dairy products. According to
his calculations, such a model would result in the deaths of 300 million fewer
animals annually (counting both field animals and cattle) than would a total
vegan model. This difference, according to Davis, is mainly the result of fewer
field animals killed in pasture and forage production than in the growing and
harvest of grain, beans, and corn.
Applying the Least Harm Principle, Davis argues that people may be morally
obliged to consume a diet based on plants and grazing ruminants in order to
cause the least harm to animals.
Davis's work goes beyond the vegan debate to grapple with issues of animal
cloning, genetic engineering, and ethical treatment of production animals.
Through the OSU Agriculture Experiment Station and a regional project on animal
bioethics, Davis is part of a team of biological and social scientists from
throughout the West who are working to integrate ethics and moral reasoning into
the work and study of agriculture.
By Peg Herring, 541-737-9180
SOURCE: Steven Davis, 541-737-1892"
Let me make this clear: I don't support the radicals on either side of this
issue. I am a vegetarian, but I try to be fair.
Nutrition wise:
Yes, we do need the protein to survive. Don't forget- vegetables and grains
contain incomplete protein (asides from soy), but by combining certain veggies
together, we can make up a complete protein.
I think eating cheese, milk, eggs, butter, etc is fine, as long as the animals
who provide it are being treated fairly. Aka: no squishing dozens of animals to
a single tiny cage, no snapping their necks, being plunged into boiling water
when still alive, being frozen to death, being chained and not being able to
move, etc. And how many reasons can you come up with for eating meat, if animal
products I stated above can give you the same, if not more, benefits?
I'm against eating meat for the way the animals are treated and killed. If you
can live without meat, why not? Don't animals provide you with enough dairy
products to maintain your health? Would you eat your pet? No? Then if you had a
pet cow, chicken, pig, turkey, etc, would you want to eat it? Animals are
intelligent beings who are capable of feeling. I just think living things
deserve respect.
maverickmechanic- I'm afraid I do not support your views entirely. Yes, some
animals are accidentally killed during harvests. But don't forget, this isn't
intentional. We're just trying to prevent the intentional killing of
animals.
Quote by melikecookiesI believe
that the mistreatment of animals is wrong too. But that doesn't mean that we
should all turn vegan and start taking public transportation! We should all just
stop using animals wastefully.
Quote by foreverforgotten
maverickmechanic- I'm afraid I do not support your views entirely. Yes, some
animals are accidentally killed during harvests. But don't forget, this isn't
intentional. We're just trying to prevent the intentional killing of animals.
How is it not intentional if you KNOW that millions of animals die every year in
combines during harvest? I guess we should let drunk drivers off the hook too
since they don't kill intentionally either, right?
Don't you know PETA actually stands for People Eat Tasty Animals? It's
true.
Seriously, though. While I don't believe in animal cruelty, I don't see anything
wrong with eating meat or using animals to make clothes and stuff, just as long
as their life isn't wasted.
The least I could do for the animals stuck in cages and killed and frozen and
sold at supermarkets is eat them so what's left of them doesn't go to
waste.
Besides, animals eat animals too, and even lions kill hyenas for no apparent
reason.
U have my support. i ll make donations every now and then when ever i c a donation box.
hahaha the organisation's name does not sound right...lols...but pretty cool...hehaha
anyway i love animals...to bad they cannot defend themselves and this is what humans do best, trample on the weak and defenseless...
Gosh! I mostly hate the idea of animal cruelty. Speaking of which, Yeah I'm Asian, and I have been joked about me eating dogs and cats and rats. I have a puppy, and I swear people look at me funny everytime I walk her... OMG. OMG. NO I DON'T EAT PETS. I eat cow, chicken, fish... That's it...
merged: 12-26-2006 ~ 01:49pm
I
support.
I care alot for animals, they are fun and nice and furry.
I'm support for the action against the cruelty of animals. I don't like to see the animals get hurt and beaten by the foolish human beings. Give the animals the protection and love!
I believe that the mistreatment of animals is wrong too. But that doesn't mean that we should all turn vegan and start taking public transportation! We should all just stop using animals wastefully.
Hmm i was just watchin to discovery channel. and apparently we have a really beautiful world. chances r were not gonna be able to enjoy it much longer, but the way i see people treat it as a tourist attraction anyways. I guess what im saying is that is it really necessary to progress to keep the wildlife goin. or is it just domestic pets and stuff that ur talkin bout. i dont really kno ehat this tread is about. I agree that animals shouldnt be tortured or nething. so there.
I would collect some human skin (not any skin ...just from certain folks I "like" hehehe) ...but the law is flawed ...pathetic humans and their stupid weak laws
you buy fur clothes ...animal skin clothes ...and then you whine abut this ...it came to this because of you, the one (many ones ...enough ones added together) that bought and still do ...and now that you see the way it's done from the beginning some of you stopped buying (SOME) ...and "some" is too little of a number
it's not really the fault of the people that have the dirty job of killing the unfortunate animal ...their dirty job is funded by your clean money >__>
yeah, money ...you can have even innocent animal skin for some money ...some hungry poor people would take even the dirtiest job ...your dirty job
Don't tell me you don't have at least one animal fur/skin cloth in your house because it's a lie ....and if by chance you don't have don't tell me you never HAD
I've seen some videos of the way the fur/skin is taken ...in one of them the new born baby lamb was skinned alive (yes, alive ...it's skin wasn't even dry yet) ...why? ...because it's fur is softer that way, way softer and because of that it's more expensive ...and we come to money again.
and after this there are the pets ...animal traffic and commercialization ...they get taken away from their environment just because a lot of humans like to have an exotic animal in their house (parrots, snakes, lizards, monkeys, ...you name it)
WTF is wrong with you people?!?!?!
Thats too dispiteous!
How could they have the heart to ill-treat animals?
I hate human,include me!
I hate myself who cant do anything!
Oay, I disagree and agree on things.
I agree, that we should stop killing animals for fur, rugs, hats, Stupid things. AND The testing on animals for products, that shoud be stopped too.
I disagree, when it comes to food. Unless, it is an endangered animal. Then they shouldn't be eaten at all. o.o But, if the cow is being killed for food already that same cow - since the coat is fine.. then it guess it should be okay to use.
Erm. Yeah.
There are some interesting points made in this thread and I'd like to add my thoughts.
Eating domesticated animals is practically necessary. Maybe in an ideal world everyone will eat soybeans and take supplements but this isn't one. People (especially in developing countries) require the protein from animals for survival. Oh sure everyone can take the required steps in their diet to become vegans but for the average person this inconveniences them just too much.
For the most part I think that the switch to being a vegetarian or vegan is avoided mostly for the sheer inconvenience of having to balance every meal you have to make sure you get all the required amino acids and such. Not too many people feel strongly enough to make the change. It simply doesn't affect them. Animal cruelty is a relatively unimportant issue compared to the growing national deficit, the Iraq War, homelessness, poverty, famine, social inequity, education, etc. The way a cow is treated before being made into meat impacts my life very little compared to something like affirmative action.
Likewise the same goes for the fur industry. If it were people being affected negatively by all this I would feel differently simply because I emphasize with them more. If humans were treated cruelly then I want to help. There is a lot more apathy with animals which is an important point. You can't talk to a cow and see what it thinks about being eaten. Likely it isn't even "aware" in the same sense that a person would be in the same situation.
Fur is a luxury item. It's not something people need. However, leather is made from cows. People use leather in clothes. Is using leather bad? Should we stop using leather altogether and just eat the cow? Does eating the animal afterwards justify its use as a fur animal? I think that it doesn't really matter. The animal dies whether you use it for food or for fur. Anyone can just sell the meat from fur animals and instantly it is on the level of a cow. As such I think by default I have to condone the fur industry for now.
People who disagree with testing animals for medical reasons are just plain crazy. What do you want us to test new drugs on, the homeless? Medical science would grind to a halt and no new drugs would be made. No one is going to use a drug that hasn't been well tested. Even before a drug reaches clinical trials in humans there are dozens of rat, rabbit, pig, and monkey test phases.
The same goes for cosmetics, soap, lotions, etc. If I know human nature, most people won't want to give up looking good or having smooth skin. I'd want to know that it's safe before anyone uses it.
Of course at the end of the day I'm not condoning animal cruelty. There are some things that make me sick. It's one thing to have a bunch of animals in a cage so you can make food it's another thing entirely to skin it alive. At least put it down quickly or use anesthetic.
Your post is well thought out. BTW, welcome to MT.
Reading those comments above upsets me. How were you people that don't care about animals brought up? Don't you ever have a pet in your life?
All the things that are done to these animals before they're killed for their meat/fur/whatever is cruel. You say better help fellow humans first than animals like we're higher or more important somehow. Take a biology class, humans ARE animals. We have no right to treat animals badly.
And yes, you're supposed to scold/hit a child when they're mistreating animals. That's how they learn not to be heartless when they grow up!
I really hope those ppls wont hit or killed those lil one of an animals ...
Tht's really cruel of killing a seal like this ...
(these are for those extremists i recall reading...)
er... im okay with eating meat but i also think its wrong to hurt animals on purpose. But would you animal-"lovers" consider starving a child to save a calf?
anyway, if cruelty to animals is what you're fighting for, would you consider eating animal meat knowing that the animal was given special care, treated kindly but still sold as meat?
if a pig's main purpose is to be eaten ever since he was born, would you eat it knowing that you are fulfilling his purpose?
I dont believe in violence on animals but let's just be rational here and pipe down the adrenaline. Sure okay, Humans are classified as animals, but we are a lot smarter than them (most of us, at least), somehow that makes it our responsibility to take care of them. Actually, "Animal Rights" don't exist since every "right" must have an equal "responsibility". But animals can't protect themselves from us, can they? Nah.. All there'll ever be is "Human Responsibility". But just like any member of a herd, or a pride or pack, you look out for your companions first rather than other species. Isn't that correct? In any ecosystem you find that attachment.
That is why its only sensible to think of your fellow humans first. We're not downsizing animal cruelty or justifying it. Just keep the perspectives in place.
Getting PETA emails myself and all...I understand their concerns. For the most part, I agree with their ideas. Still...sometimes, I feel as though they're far too liberal in their approach to the whole thing. Have any of you SEEN the stuff they'd send kids in the form little cute comic books and whatnot? They try to convince the kids that anything to do with eating meat is pure evil. I dunno, but that can have its negative effects. I've seen vegetarians give disgusted looks at meat eaters---you don't see them giving disgusted looks back at the vegetarians for eating salad. In short, what they do is just plain rude. Sometimes, PETA just vibrates with that negative attitude.
I follow one rule: Kill only to eat.
However, having a mini Zoo in my house, I follow another rule too, "Thou shall not kill what you keep as pet".
i suppose I will still eat meat. However, I will choose my meat. No rare animals will be in my diet. Neither will illegal meat be allowed (illegally caught whales, bears and stufts).
As for the whole "Meat vs Vege" thing, I really do not want to care about it. Everyone has their own belief and are free to express it, as long as it is within the law, and mindful of social responsibility. Meat lovers who laugh at Vegetable lovers are curel. likewise, Vegetarians who express disgust OPENly at meat lover are plain rude. I have no grudge against both groups, but only dislike their reaction if they display it openly. If they kept their disgust to themselves, I believe that the world will be a better place. After all, I respect the saying, "Live and let live".
I wonder why, some people see the act of humans killing animals for food a disgusting act of cruelty, while they see predatory animals hunting other animals a natural beauty..
and there are times when i felt like asking animal lovers who turn vegetarian for the love of animals and keep pets... "are your pets vegetarian too?"
Well said. Many of these animal loves are hypocrites.
And why is OK to kill plants? After all, they are living, breathing beings. Oh right, to eat! Well, the rest of the population needs to eat too so leave them alone.
What about these "vegans" who eat fish but no red meat or poultry. Or eat dairy products and still claim to be vegans.
i will NEVER support PETA. those Eco-Terrorists can go to hell. if you think I'm full of crap watch this: *Note: Language*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ijLulwUTY
now after watching that read this:
"CORVALLIS - Why is it right to kill the mouse and not the cow?
This question is central to a study of bioethics that explores the moral foundation of a strictly vegetarian, so-called vegan diet. The research, by Steven Davis, a professor of animal science at Oregon State University, adds a new perspective to a millennia-old debate: Is it right for people to kill animals in order to feed themselves?
Davis turns that question on its head. How many animals must die, he asks, in order for people to feed themselves?
To address the question, Davis applies a principle used by moral philosophers to measure the least amount of harm an action might cause, called the Least Harm Principle.
Davis's research focuses on the work of Tom Regan, a philosophy professor from North Carolina State University and founder of the contemporary animal rights movement. Regan argues that the least harm would be done to animals if people were to adopt a vegan diet - that is, a diet based only on plants, with no meat, eggs, or milk products.
What goes unaccounted for in Regan's vegan conclusion, according to Davis, is the number of animals who are inadvertently killed during crop production and harvest.
"Vegan diets are not bloodless diets," Davis said. "Millions of animals die every year to provide products used in vegan diets."
Davis presented his research last fall at a meeting of the European Society for Agriculture and Food Ethics, in Florence, Italy. There he questioned the conclusions of animal rights proponents and offered alternatives using the Least Harm Principle. Central to his argument is the unseen mortality that accompanies the production of row crops and grains, staples of a vegan diet, in agricultural systems large enough to sustain the human population.
"Over the years that I have been studying animal rights theories, I have never found anyone who has considered the deaths of - or, the 'harm' to - animals of the field," Davis said. "This, it seems to me, is a serious omission."
Consequently, Davis asks what is the morally relevant difference between the field mouse and the cow that makes it okay to kill one but not the other so that humans may eat.
Few studies document the losses of rabbits, mice, pheasants, snakes and other field animals in planting and harvesting crops. Said one researcher: "Because most of these animals have been seen as expendable, or not seen at all, few scientific studies have been done measuring agriculture's effects on their populations."
Davis has found evidence that suggests that the unseen losses of field animals are very high. One study documented that a single operation, mowing alfalfa, caused a 50 percent reduction in the gray-tailed vole population. Mortality rates increase with every pass of the tractor to plow, plant, and harvest. Additions of herbicides and pesticides cause additional harm to animals of the field.
In contrast, grazing ruminants such as cattle produce food and require fewer entries into the fields with tractors and other equipment. In grazed pastures, according to Davis, less wildlife is lost to the mower blades, and more find stable habitat in untilled fields. And no-till agriculture also helps stabilize soil and reduce run-off into streams.
"Pasture-forage production, with herbivores harvesting the forage, would be the ultimate in 'no-till' agriculture," Davis said.
Davis proposes a ruminant-pasture model of food production, which would replace all poultry, pig and lamb production with beef and dairy products. According to his calculations, such a model would result in the deaths of 300 million fewer animals annually (counting both field animals and cattle) than would a total vegan model. This difference, according to Davis, is mainly the result of fewer field animals killed in pasture and forage production than in the growing and harvest of grain, beans, and corn.
Applying the Least Harm Principle, Davis argues that people may be morally obliged to consume a diet based on plants and grazing ruminants in order to cause the least harm to animals.
Davis's work goes beyond the vegan debate to grapple with issues of animal cloning, genetic engineering, and ethical treatment of production animals. Through the OSU Agriculture Experiment Station and a regional project on animal bioethics, Davis is part of a team of biological and social scientists from throughout the West who are working to integrate ethics and moral reasoning into the work and study of agriculture.
By Peg Herring, 541-737-9180
SOURCE: Steven Davis, 541-737-1892"
woah wtf are they doing to the animals.....If they really want to kill, kill them without them feeling the pain.
Let me make this clear: I don't support the radicals on either side of this issue. I am a vegetarian, but I try to be fair.
Nutrition wise:
Yes, we do need the protein to survive. Don't forget- vegetables and grains contain incomplete protein (asides from soy), but by combining certain veggies together, we can make up a complete protein.
I think eating cheese, milk, eggs, butter, etc is fine, as long as the animals who provide it are being treated fairly. Aka: no squishing dozens of animals to a single tiny cage, no snapping their necks, being plunged into boiling water when still alive, being frozen to death, being chained and not being able to move, etc. And how many reasons can you come up with for eating meat, if animal products I stated above can give you the same, if not more, benefits?
I'm against eating meat for the way the animals are treated and killed. If you can live without meat, why not? Don't animals provide you with enough dairy products to maintain your health? Would you eat your pet? No? Then if you had a pet cow, chicken, pig, turkey, etc, would you want to eat it? Animals are intelligent beings who are capable of feeling. I just think living things deserve respect.
maverickmechanic- I'm afraid I do not support your views entirely. Yes, some animals are accidentally killed during harvests. But don't forget, this isn't intentional. We're just trying to prevent the intentional killing of animals.
I'm with you. Well spoken.
How is it not intentional if you KNOW that millions of animals die every year in combines during harvest? I guess we should let drunk drivers off the hook too since they don't kill intentionally either, right?
Don't you know PETA actually stands for People Eat Tasty Animals?
It's
true.
Seriously, though. While I don't believe in animal cruelty, I don't see anything wrong with eating meat or using animals to make clothes and stuff, just as long as their life isn't wasted.
The least I could do for the animals stuck in cages and killed and frozen and sold at supermarkets is eat them so what's left of them doesn't go to waste.
Besides, animals eat animals too, and even lions kill hyenas for no apparent reason.
merged: 07-04-2007 ~ 10:08am
...damn. Someone already mentioned People Eating Tasty Animals...
i'll not donate on the net..
what else i can do to help?
=)