PETA activist group or whacko brainwashing cult?

[hypatia]

molars may be

there using the word "may be"..which means they don't know for sure.

And for most of the world 2.5 million years of biological growth/adaptation..is biological.

Your correct, about the low caloric intake and long life. There is a village {arab} where reaching 100 or so years is common. They work hard, eat a balanced diet of meats, cheeses/yogurts, and grains.

 

[James R]

There are also the legendary Kobe cattle. Top notch diet(including beer!), exercise programs, and sometimes they even get massages.

This is part of the problem PETA are trying to raise awareness about, too.

It's all very comfortable to go around thinking that your meat comes from a happy cow which was raised on rolling grassland for a number of years before it got to your dinner plate, but cows who get massages are NOT the norm. In fact, they are a tiny, tiny percentage.

Chances are, your McDonalds hamburger comes from a factory farm, like the ones I described briefly above. The cows living there never get to see the outside world in their brief lives. They can't see the sun, they don't get to run around, and they aren't even necessarily fed good, healthy grass. Sometimes they're fed ground-up parts of other animals, despite being herbivores.

Before condemning organisations such as PETA, and then going off feeling good about yourself as a meat eater, at least take a few moments to look at their web site and see some of the practices they are protesting again. Like it or not, YOU are complicit in these practices, because you do nothing to stop them.

 

[hypatia]

Some of us, like me, buy only free range meat. I buy/get mine from the Amish who use part of my land for oats. And when I go for fast food, its salad or yogurt.
When PETA came to my state{late1980's?}, they screamed, they yelled, tossed bloody animal parts at people with children...thats a sure way to win over a crowd, by making them run in fear.

 

[Skyhunter]

Once again your argument is cultural not biological.

Chimp hunting and flesh-eating is rare ~1.4% of their diet, and not practiced among all adults, as would be required by a true nutritional need.

Interestingly enough chimpanzees use flesh as an offering to gain sexual favors. Similiar to the mating rituals of humans.

Perhaps you did not understand and i was hasty in my judgement.

Let me attempt to make it clearer.

"The way to a man's heart is through his stomach"

Isn't dinner a very popular dating ritual.


I am trying to differentiate the cultural argument from the biological one. My contention is that the only evidence to support meat-eating is cultural not biological. Both humans and chimps eat meat for cultural reasons not biological ones.

The biological ability in both humans and cimpanzees to eat and digest flesh exists. And in an environment of scarcity this ability allows us to adapt to many different conditions and environments, and acquire our nutrition from a multitude of different sources.

Now that we no longer exist in an environment of scarcity there is no biological reason to eat meat. Therefore it is a cultural behavior and I choose not to participate in. The animals we slaughter for food "660,000 per hour" have no such choice.

Can we rationalize away our compassion with economical land use arguments?

It isn't complicated.

Eating meat causes heart disease.

It is not required in our diet.

We can meet the human dietary needs more economically with a plant based diet than with an animal based one.

You can rationalize all you want but the evidence is clear and real.

 

[Townsend]

Now that we no longer exist in an environment of scarcity there is no biological reason to eat meat. Therefore it is a cultural behavior and I choose not to participate in. The animals we slaughter for food "660,000 per hour" have no such choice.

Yeah, thats why I like to hunt and fish and garden for as much of my food as I can. Its kind of hard for me right now because I am in school but as soon as I get a chance to buy some land I will try to get most of my food from it.

Eating fresh fish, venison, and fresh vegetables is very good for you. Not only that but you know that you are not contributing to the commercialized slaughter of animals.

 

[hypatia]

Just one more question, where would all these free animals go? Who would feed them? And where would they get the food for a ever growing population of animals? How would you keep there populations in check?

I come from many generations of meat eaters, who have lived very long and happy lifes, none of us are fat. We eat well balanced diets. When I look in the baskets of fat people at the store, I don't see piles of meat. I see chips,hoho's, prepackaged foods high in fat content, icecream,cookies and pop.

I do honestly understand what you are saying skyhunter, for those who have a history of heart problems, overweight or other illness, loosing red meat, fats from your diet is good. And your right, most of america would benefit.

lol, thanks for clearing up the meat/sex thing

It also occurs to me, that no matter what we eat, will still die, all of us. And one way of dieing is not any healthier then another way of dieing.

 

[Townsend]

one way of dieing is not any healthier then another way of dieing.

:rofl:
Do you think?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

This is part of the problem PETA are trying to raise awareness about, too.

It's all very comfortable to go around thinking that your meat comes from a happy cow which was raised on rolling grassland for a number of years before it got to your dinner plate, but cows who get massages are NOT the norm. In fact, they are a tiny, tiny percentage.

Chances are, your McDonalds hamburger comes from a factory farm, like the ones I described briefly above. The cows living there never get to see the outside world in their brief lives. They can't see the sun, they don't get to run around, and they aren't even necessarily fed good, healthy grass. Sometimes they're fed ground-up parts of other animals, despite being herbivores.

Before condemning organisations such as PETA, and then going off feeling good about yourself as a meat eater, at least take a few moments to look at their web site and see some of the practices they are protesting again. Like it or not, YOU are complicit in these practices, because you do nothing to stop them.

Oh serious?! And I thought all cows had a personal masseuse and drank beer after a good work out. :tongue:

I don't think pig farming is any less "ethical" than hunting. I think either can be practiced both ethically and unethically.

 

[Jelfish]

Oh serious?! And I thought all cows had a personal masseuse and drank beer after a good work out. :tongue:

There seems to be a discrepancy among what is generally consider ethical. What are some guidelines that you, personally, would require in order for, say, factory pig farming to be 'ethical'? Would you be in favor for reform if there were proof that your guidelines were not met? If you believe that ethics play any role in factory farming (and you seem to have confirmed this yourself) then I imagine you could potentially favor reform.

 

[loseyourname]

Once again your argument is cultural not biological.

Chimp hunting and flesh-eating is rare ~1.4% of their diet, and not practiced among all adults, as would be required by a true nutritional need.

Interestingly enough chimpanzees use flesh as an offering to gain sexual favors. Similiar to the mating rituals of humans.

I didn't make an argument. I just said that Chimpanzees eat meat. You asked for an example of an animal with seminal vesicles other than humans that eat meat, and I noted that all great apes, not just humans, eat meat. I never said it's a biological necessity that we do so. Last time I checked, however, we don't define 'omnivore' or even 'carnivore' by saying it is biologically necessary to eat meat. We define species as 'omnivorous,' 'carnivorous,' or 'herbivorous' based on what they actually eat. My dog eats a mostly vegetarian diet, proving it isn't biologically necessary for a dog to eat meat, yet no one is going to argue that canines are not carnivores.

About the long life thing, I'm actually in a unique position to discuss that. My father's side of the family (the Native American side - my mom is mostly Irish) has had many members live well into their 90s and even into their 100s. I actually had a great-grandmother live to 117 - she was born during the Civil War and still alive when I was born. They basically ate the diet that humans probably evolved eating, the same diet as our closest biological relatives - a lot of fruits, roots, and a moderate, not excessive, amount of meat. Virtually no grains. That's pretty much the same diet I eat and chances are I'll live a very long time, too. The meat I eat is mostly fish and chicken. That includes a lot of shrimp - are they okay to eat, since they don't even have brains (don't try to pass that tiny little cerebral ganglion off as a brain, either)?

 

[James R]

hypatia:

Just one more question, where would all these free animals go? Who would feed them? And where would they get the food for a ever growing population of animals? How would you keep there populations in check?

The great majority of food animals are, at present, neutered. So, they wouldn't cause an "ever growing population". They could be left to live out their lives naturally. There's enough space.

At the moment, the majority of farm animals are bred for no other reason than to be eaten. If we decided to stop that, it would be essentially a one generation "problem", and not a great one at that.

 

[mathwonk]

PETA?

this reminds of the time when i used to live with an indian yogi and i asked him about the hari krishna people. he seemed to pride himself on his practice of answering accurately every question asked no matter how dumb. he gritted his teeth and said: "they are a group of imbeciles, living together."

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

There seems to be a discrepancy among what is generally consider ethical.

Yes there is, and in quite a few areas of interest aside from the question of animal cruelty.

What are some guidelines that you, personally, would require in order for, say, factory pig farming to be 'ethical'? Would you be in favor for reform if there were proof that your guidelines were not met? If you believe that ethics play any role in factory farming (and you seem to have confirmed this yourself) then I imagine you could potentially favor reform.

I am not versed in the practice of animal farming so I couldn't really give you a detailed account of what I think should be done to run such an enterprise in an ethical fashion. I think that the animals should be able to have an at least comfortable if not natural experience while they are alive. I don't think that the animals living life in a way that would be completely natural for them is an utter necessity. Many cats and dogs live in a manner which is not natural for them but are definitely comfortable and well treated. What I have heard about chickens that are breed/genetically engineered lacking beaks and plummage and apearantly with unnatural musculature and the way I have heard they are raised I find rather disgusting.
As I stated earlier I'm not against PETA and I'm sure that they do some good. I would not have a problem with such an organization raising awareness of unethical practices and attempting to do something about it. I have though heard negative things about the organization and it's own practices. Regardless of whether or not I agree with any of the things they do I would support an investigation of their affiliation with the aforementioned eco-terrorist organizations and their own practices which they may be hiding, so long ofcourse as there is evidence enough to warrant such investigations.