How many animal rights nutbags go to the extent of not giving their children worm tablets because it will kill the animals inside them?

How many will let a mosquito suck on their neck until it is too full to fly away rather than slap it?

How many would share their house with poisonous spiders rather than get it sprayed?

They are dim hypocrites for the most part.

There isn’t much evidence to suggest a cow is a great deal more intelligent than a mosquito.

And yes the abbatoir argument is ridiculous. They’ve thrown this at me on my old blog site time and time again.

I’ve slaughtered animals myself (sheep, fish, chickens, rabbits) and it never once made me think twice about eating them. (after it was washed and cooked of course).

I’ve pulled a mackeral out of the water and cut a strip off it and eaten it on the spot. Doesn’t worry me in the slightest.

I think deep down most animal rights nuts are just afraid of blood and probably just cowards in general.

I have been to an abatoir and have seen animals slaughtered. I attended an agricultural school and it was a standard part of school excursions to be taken along to an abatoir. Its not pleasant, but nor do I feel so incredibly confronted by it that it would change my eating habits. Nor did any others I know of who visited. I feel that the argument about “if abatoirs were made with glass walls then no-one would eat meat” specious in the extreme, and a clear sign of the disconnect between segments of the animal liberation movement and the average person. From what I saw I have confidence that the animals (cattle and pigs) were being slaughtered humanely.

I find the argument that just because we wouldn’t kill someone so handicapped that they are of equivalent intellect to say a cow unconvincing as well. Firstly in the case of fetuses we do, even though they have the potential to grow into sentient beings, and secondly because of a basic precautionary principle. I am 100% certain that the cow I am going to kill is not much more intelligent than I think it might be. This is virtually never the case with another human so it is better to be cautious and have this as an absolute rule against this kind of thing.

I realise that this makes me “speciecist”. This doesn’t concern me. Unlike differences between sexes or races where the discrimination is unjustified because differences are so small that it is irrelevant, and difference is much smaller than the typical range within a group – ie group behaviour is a poor marker for any individuals this is not the case when taling about the differences between a cow and a human. All but the most severely incapacitated humans are more capable than the smartest cow. It is a perfectly acceptable way of dealing with them. I am also happy to asign more value to say apes on this basis than I do to cows.

As I have said. I disagree with some practices that are carried out in agriculture such as the small battery cages for layers, and avoid buying these eggs. I am not concerned that the cattle I eat (who are virtually all free range), or the sheep (all free range) or even the meat chickens are a problem by and large. Animals live happy lives for the most part and don’t anticipate their slaughter until very shortly beforehand. Tens of millions of creatures that have happy lives that would never occur if we were all vegetarians. If I get murdered tomorrow then my life overall will have been a positive. I think the same is true for cattle. However their death at this particular time I think is of more value in the pleasure it gives me than in the loss it causes to them. Keeping in mind that I eat on average a cow every 5 years or so.

Finally as to environmental degredation. It can be a problem, but hardly an insurmountable one, but I think that the evidence that the system causes unavoidable degradation is not good. Many of the issues discussed in the book, are the result of bad practice on particular farms not problems that are unavoidably part of the industry. Good laws enforcing polluters to pay for their damage, will stop most of this.

By the way environmental degredation is hardly the sole responsibility of animals. There are huge numbers of problems with how many crops are raised, the pesticide and fertilizer run off. Think about this the next time you wear cotton or eat sugar.

Personally I am amazed that people can read about thekind of cruelty that is imposed upon non-human animals and think without any empathy that their suffering is not sufficient to consider at least some changes in food choices.

Furthermore the scientific community is becoming more aware of how intensive animal farming is unsustainable. Detrimental environmental effects upon the planet in terms of water useage, soil erosion, deforestation, fossil fuel useage, pesticide usesage etc etc is due to the amount of meat eaten by the world. This is due to the way meat is processed by intensive farmings.

The world will have to consider in the future not only the ethics of considering humans ’superior’ to non-human animals but also whether it is sustainable.

My question to you is: if you were a chicken who was living in a cage, with another chicken above you having to defacate on you as it has no where esle to go, with your beak cut off, your feathers pulled out by the chicken next to you, then stunned, throat cut and still alive thrown into boiling water would you not feel pain? Would you not feel fear?

My second question is : If this were a human animal with a brain the age of 1 day to 100 years would you not be appaled and disgusted? Would you then eat the human without feelign replusion how excelent the taste of the meat

My third question is if by eating meat and knowing you are contributing to long term, possibly irreversible environmental degradation would you still, without a care about human needs in the future still continue?

If you are inable to feel revulsion, sympathy or concern in answering any of these questions then you are probably disengaged from even thinking about the reality of the situation. Go to an abatoir and see the reality, read the dreaded comparision by marjorie spiegel, go to a part of the world where man-made environmental degredation affects other humans

If you don’t consider no-human animals worth a thought but do care about fellow humans, you shoudl still consider what Singer and Mason say as industrialised farming affects all humans and we are reaping the problems caused by the systme now and will continue to do so in the future.

It’s not just the taste that is affected by castration though, the texture of the meat also improves due to lower muscle-fat ratio in a castrated animal.

A fully grown ram is a quite dangerous animal and could easily kill a grown man if cornered. A boar even more so. I shouldn’t have to point how dangerous a bull or stallion is.

Of course the main reason we castrate sheep is that whethers (sheep equivalent of a gelding) produce better wool than Rams. But with other animals it is mainly for safety reasons.

Dogs are castrated because male dogs more frequently kill lifestock – castrating them tends to dampen their hunting instinct.

I think people sometimes forget that many of the domesticated breeds are not far removed from their wild counterparts, some of the “cruelty” involved in keeping them domesticated is to ensure they don’t injure themselves, other animals or the farmer.