This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
THE DUTCH parliament has voted overwhelmingly to ban the ritual slaughter of livestock. However, Jewish and Islamic groups which can prove animals do not suffer more during ritual killing than in an ordinary slaughterhouse will be able to apply for permits.
Of course, as a result, "ethical meat" becomes an option unless one realizes that killing when you don't need to is killing when you don't need to, no matter if it occurs in a slaughterhouse or in a mobile slaughter operation or in a backyard. If you want to reduce suffering, there are indeed ways to do that.
The e-mail continues: " ARFF contends that lobsters suffer tremendously when they are relegated to tiny tanks and subjected to loud noises, prodding and pulling by a mechanical claw, and prolonged starvation. In this game, the object is to pluck live lobsters out of the water with a joystick-controlled crane."
And managing means killing them, breeding them, and otherwise fiddling with their populations. This is irksome, as the premise is that we need to save the animals (and which ones is an interesting discussion) because we will suffer if they are gone. This is all very unveganly, but I went for it nevertheless.
Let's deconstruct: The interview reminds me of how the industry views us and how little they know about the community of people who care about the lives of the animals brought into this world for one reason only: to kill and eat them. Of course, Lobo is missing the point entirely. The HSUS isn't even anti-hunting !
The plea that animals might be killed painlessly is a very common one with flesh-eaters, but it must be pointed out that what-might-be can afford no exemption from moral responsibility for what-is. Henry S.
The argument for vegetarianism is not based on any claim about the wrongness of killing animals—although some careless reviewers read this claim into my book, no doubt because they assumed that any moral argument for vegetarianism must be based on the wrongness of killing.
Interests arise, Singer contends, from the capacity to feel pain, which he labels a 'prerequisite' for having interests at all; and animals can and do suffer, can and do feel pain.
There are two approaches a vegetarian might take in arguing that rearing and killing animals for food is morally offensive. He might argue that eating animals is morally bad because of the pain inflicted on animals in rearing and killing them to be eaten. Or he could object to the killing itself.
September 7, 2006, a bill banning the slaughter of horses for human consumption( H.R. The reason that the industry is losing the argument is quite simple: There is no ethical justification for causing an animal to suffer unnecessarily. There is no ethical justification for killing an animal for no good reason.
Neighbor B’s cats are constantly on neighbor A’s property, urinating and defecating all over her garden, spreading disease, maiming and killing the birds who flock to her feeders. Neighbor A’s private property and peace of mind are both suffering because of the cats, which are killing government-protected species.
Minus that role, the term implies, such an animal has no place; if they aren't some human's companion, or their companionship fails to please, they can be abandoned or killed" (8). Often it permanently disables or kills. In their publications, vivisectors virtually never state that they inflicted the harm suffered by their victims.
But no one who has ever cared for another creature – be it bird, animal, or human – can comprehend, much less cope with, this kind of brutal, pointless killing. Between the adults and their eggs, the three of them killed 32 live albatrosses. Who suffers for these crimes? If his lawyer succeeds, Gutierrez won’t, either.
Cain=farmer=evil murderer; Abel=slaughtered animals=victim/good son. In fact, I'd even permit them to not ever kill anyone, but rather to eat the kill of another that has been quietly decomposing for a day or two, as many carnivores do. We simply cannot survive without killing them! Net message? Now, who's a carnivore?
Now, any medication we take and surgical procedures we undergo also have a long line of breeding, enslavement, torture and killing of sentient nonhumans leading up to them, so objecting to "knockout animals" on those grounds is to stand on somewhat thin ice. Why kill and maim and waste taxpayer dollars--or any dollars--on such things?
Whenever the media report that someone has killed "an endangered animal" or "an endangered species," they too confuse an individual with a species. Hunters kill members of endangered species. residents believe that it's wrong to kill animals for their pelts, but the pelt industry is legal.
Nick Rahall and Raul Grijalva have introduced a bill that would protect healthy wild horses from being killed by the BLM. In a written statement, Rahall says the intent is to help spur alternatives to killing excess wild horses that are in holding facilities.
The meat industry is inherently destructive and inhumane, there is no way to make it otherwise, and much of the harm it does to ecosystems is by inflicting suffering and death on billions of nonhuman animals, farmed and free-living, each year. Another went out last Friday. Many say you can’t eat meat and be an environmentalist.
This says it all: "[T]he vision of sustainable farms that give animals a good life (a life as good as we give our dogs or cats) and an easy death (as easy as a death we give our suffering and terminally ill companion animals) has moved me" (242). But this plate also holds all of the animals that were killed for your serving of sushi.
It's impersonal and hideously ugly and the animals suffer greatly. Yes, I do think it's better to have lived a comfortable life and then be slaughtered than to have been tortured the entire time and then be slaughtered. It's cruel. There's no "compassion" in the process. No argument here. It's just not right.
22): PETA is proud to see that its hard work behind the scenes with Bell & Evans and other companies to encourage implementation of this new, less cruel form of slaughter is finally coming to fruition. To the Editor: Re “ New Way to Help Chickens Cross to Other Side ” (front page, Oct. McDonald’s, are you listening? 25, 2010
Animals raised for food suffer miserably. If human beings were confined, mutilated and killed, would we call it “humane” if the cages were a few inches bigger, the knife sharper, the death faster? Would we say these people were slaughtered in a “people friendly” manner? Animal agriculture is inherently inhumane.
Ethical vegetarianism is the thesis that killing and eating animals is morally wrong whenever equally nutritious plant-based alternatives are available. Virtually everyone agrees that: (1) It is wrong to cause a conscious sentient animal to suffer for no good reason. Nor ought we kill them without reason.
There are moral reasons to go vegetarian: recognition that it is wrong to contribute to unnecessary animal suffering the injustice of exploiting animals and killing them for no good reason If human have rights, then many nonhuman animals also have rights, and confining and killing these animals for food violates these rights.
To the Editor: Soon after I read Gary Steiner’s article, my wife asked me to kill a spider, which I did. We kill so many living creatures when we build a house, construct a road, drive down that road or just walk on a path. But even then if we were to survive we would have to kill some animals in self-defense.
The fact that geese mate for life, and that the mate of the poor goose that was slaughtered would step forward, was enough to make me swear off meat forever, if I hadn’t already. Since our food is delivered to us on a bun or in big bags of frozen parts, it’s easy to eat it and not think about what it was or how it was killed.
Meat, however, purchased at the supermarket, externally packaged and internally laced with petrochemicals, fattened in feed lots, slaughtered impersonally, and, in general, mechanically processed from artificial insemination to microwave roaster, is an affront not only to physical metabolism and bodily health but to conscience as well.
This one addresses the decreasing number of dogs and cats being experimented on and, without mentioning it, discusses speciesism and our affection for dogs--pet dogs particularly (and especially purebreds)--which leads to our revulsion with the idea of snatching, vivisecting and killing them. And for what?
He clearly thinks that it is wrong to cause animals to suffer unnecessarily, but he appears to be somewhat ambivalent about killing animals (provided the killing is carried out humanely). I suspect that underlying his thinking here is a common rationalization that many of my students initially embrace.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content