Chatbox
    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
Guest John.Napoleon.Darling

Should we stop eating game?

14 posts in this topic

Should we stop hunting and eating game just because it offends people? You have no idea how many times I've heard that already!

"Stop hunting!"

"Stop eating game!"

"That offends me!"

"What did those poor animals ever do to you, dammit!?"

"Stop killing them!"

"You ought to be horsewhipped!"

Share this post


Link to post

It doesn't offend me when people kill or eat game.  It does cause the animals in question a premature and often painful death though.  But, you know, they're just animals, so who cares, right? I heard they don't have nerves or anything because God put them here to be our food or something. Or even if they do, its not like they have souls, unless they're cute like dogs and cats which TOTALLY do.

emerge likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I think game is a better option than farm reared meat.

But..... only animals that are plentiful, like rabbits, pheasants, deer.

Share this post


Link to post

I think everyone who eats a hamburger should be forced to go out and kill a cow. Here's a sledgehammer, beat it in the head until it can't stand up and then slit its throat. Hope you have rubber boots on, blood stains don't look good on Gucci loafers. Well they didn't look THAT bad when OJ wore them.

Share this post


Link to post

My sister-law (vegan dietitian) told my (meat loving) son exactly the same thing, that he should get acquainted with killing his food and see if he still liked it.

In response he sent her a pic of a rabbit he and his (dumb-ass) teenage buddies killed, skinned and ate. Thanks god they did not get sick! We are still waiting for her response.

P.S. we live in the suburbs, they found a rabbit in the city!

BTW If people are anti-game, don't eat the godamm meat! (just don't impose your views on me).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that killing your own food is better than paying for the mass murdered animals at mcdonalds, but there's really no reason to in the first world unless you have some severe dietary issue.  Vegetables don't cry out in pain when you eat them.

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I agree that killing your own food is better than paying for the mass murdered animals at mcdonalds, but there's really no reason to in the first world unless you have some severe dietary issue.  Vegetables don't cry out in pain when you eat them.

So is it the act of hunting you object to or the industrial revolution? I'll concede that the latter has its vices in terms of the commoditisation of animals. Problem is living in western society, it's pretty hard not to benefit from the industrialisation of our food chain.

Interesting to see if the movement towards localvore survives the decline in the standard of living in North America.  

and P.S. Just cuz vegetables aren't cute or express themselves in an auditory fashion let's not assume they don't feel pain. My kids and I eat our vegetables solemnly mindful of their sacrifice.

Hawk   

Nix likes this

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/15/2017 at 9:20 AM, Hawklan said:

So is it the act of hunting you object to or the industrial revolution? I'll concede that the latter has its vices in terms of the commoditisation of animals. Problem is living in western society, it's pretty hard not to benefit from the industrialisation of our food chain.

Interesting to see if the movement towards localvore survives the decline in the standard of living in North America.  

and P.S. Just cuz vegetables aren't cute or express themselves in an auditory fashion let's not assume they don't feel pain. My kids and I eat our vegetables solemnly mindful of their sacrifice.

Hawk   

Im opposed, in an absolute sense, to neither.  Im just thinking in terms of utilitarian calculus, ie, what is physically/psychologically worse for the animal in question.  Its the difference between dying in battle and dying in a concentration camp.  Some slaughtering facilities are probably better than others, of course.  

The other aspect about hunting and cleaning your own food is that, in saner individuals, it would hopefully give you a deeper appreciation for what the animal goes through to provide you with nutrition.

And its not an assumption on the vegetable bit:  vegetables dont have brains or a central nervous system, so no, they dont feel pain or experience loss in the way that many emotionally evolved mammals do.

Padre J Roulston likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Clearly my sarcasm on the vegetable bit was too well disguised, lol.

However, If emotional evolution is the standard to gauge the relevance of pain, does it then follow, that if vegetables are less evolved emotionally than animals and animals are less emotionally evolved than humans, that animals deserve less consideration for their pain than humans do.  

If however, less evolved animals' pain is as significant as a humans, then perhaps plants/vegetables while not having a central nervous system experience their own form of loss. I know I will be thinking of my plants leaning toward the sun the next time I bite off a piece of a vegetable.

Hawk

Share this post


Link to post

Well, the thing is many people will seriously say "eating vegetables is the same thing as eating animals."  I was just trying to be respectful of your opinions.  I've even had people try to convince me that animals just don't feel pain, which is ridiculous.  That being said, I'm gonna assume Hawklan's last paragraph was also sarcastic.  

In any case, the kinds of animals that humans eat, cows, chickens, pigs, deer, etc: They are, to varying degrees, social animals.  So while you might assume (and in this case it really is a an assumption because we don't know that much about animal brains to say for sure) that these animals emotions aren't as complex as humans, they definitely do have some emotive capacity.  They feel things like fear and concern for their young.  They get stressed.  We can know this because they exhibit the physical signs and behaviors associated with such emotions.  It's not a leap, I would say, to also assume that they experience things like sadness and something like satisfaction and happiness.  

And, again, even despite that, why is it that lack of emotional capacity makes physical pain irrelevant?  If I couldn't feel emotions, I still wouldn't want to be in a state of constant physical pain or discomfort.  Why would I not feel bad about putting a creature through physical torture just because it couldn't feel sad about it afterward? 

 

20 hours ago, Hawklan said:

Clearly my sarcasm on the vegetable bit was too well disguised, lol.

However, If emotional evolution is the standard to gauge the relevance of pain, does it then follow, that if vegetables are less evolved emotionally than animals and animals are less emotionally evolved than humans, that animals deserve less consideration for their pain than humans do.  

If however, less evolved animals' pain is as significant as a humans, then perhaps plants/vegetables while not having a central nervous system experience their own form of loss. I know I will be thinking of my plants leaning toward the sun the next time I bite off a piece of a vegetable.

Hawk

 

Share this post


Link to post

I think I've reached my sarcasm quota on this thread, lol.

Being honest for a minute here, let's face it we live on planet where the apex predator is humanity. We use resources, materials  and all species any way we see fit with very little regard, beyond their usefulness to us. It may ultimately be our downfall, only time will tell.

Moreover, the only species we show regard for are those, in the ultimate act of vanity, we anthropomorphize. The cute and cuddly creatures get more attention as we imbue them with human traits.

Animals and plants are clearly different, but they are the same where it counts, they are a) not human and b ) subservient to our needs.

Nobody wants to say it, but we treat this planet like we own it. Anyone objecting to our eating animals, needs to take a hard look at what humanity really is.

Hawk

Padre J Roulston likes this

Share this post


Link to post

"What humanity really is" is a philosophical question that has no clear cut answer, and, admittedly, the response to which has a big impact on person's ethical standpoints.

If you think, for whatever reason, that animals are somehow MEANT to be food, whether for religious or evolutionary reasons, then okay, Fair enough.  Then you can justify that it's okay, despite the fact that they are suffering creatures, that their suffering just doesn't matter.  I mean, it's the same type of justification lots of Nazis used for violence against people they considered Non-Aryan, but hey, maybe the two issues aren't comparable.  I mean, animals aren't people, clearly the people that the Nazis tortured and killed were people.  

In any case, philosophical musing aside, I think the question as to whether we should or shouldn't be cruel to animals is pretty immediate and doesn't require much thought.  I think we all, deep down, know that killing and torturing animals is...exactly what it is: Killing and torturing something that can feel sadness and pain.  It's not something you can honestly deny to yourself when you actually have to look at a creature and break its bones and puncture its organs with your own hands.  And I think if many of the full blooded carnivores today actually had to kill their burgers themselves, burgers would be less popular.  In my opinion the whole "animals are meant to be food" thing is convenient rationalization to avoid taking hard look at what humanity is doing to animals. I wouldn't normally phrase it that way, of course, cus it might come off as a bit patronizing, but hey, whatever.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...