Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
ElyBoy1984 wrote:
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
There is no difference at all to the animal (the important point) if you have a connection to the animal when you murder him/her or not.
As a civilised society we judge harm through the victims eyes, not the one that inflicts the violence. Whether you have formed a personal relationship with the animal doesn’t make the act any different at all. You would have no connection to my dog at all, yet no doubt would think it was a horrific act if I were to do it.
Or another example I bred dogs to throw into a cage to feed to my pet python, who crushes them and eats them alive... Again everyone would be up in arms (Rightly so). Yet I bred them for that so what’s the difference?
It’s an impossible question to answer for me regarding your first point because it already presumes that animals have to be murdered, when they don’t.
In this life you have 2 options. Harm animals, or don’t. The majority decide to harm them in their millions completely needlessly for their own pleasure, whether that is by inflicting the harm themselves or paying someone to do it for them (which is what most do). Whether they have an electric bolt through their head or not is of little consequence really, they are needlessly getting a knife slashed across their throat and bled to death.
Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
There is no difference at all to the animal (the important point) if you have a connection to the animal when you murder him/her or not.
As a civilised society we judge harm through the victims eyes, not the one that inflicts the violence. Whether you have formed a personal relationship with the animal doesn’t make the act any different at all. You would have no connection to my dog at all, yet no doubt would think it was a horrific act if I were to do it.
Or another example I bred dogs to throw into a cage to feed to my pet python, who crushes them and eats them alive... Again everyone would be up in arms (Rightly so). Yet I bred them for that so what’s the difference?
It’s an impossible question to answer for me regarding your first point because it already presumes that animals have to be murdered, when they don’t.
In this life you have 2 options. Harm animals, or don’t. The majority decide to harm them in their millions completely needlessly for their own pleasure, whether that is by inflicting the harm themselves or paying someone to do it for them (which is what most do). Whether they have an electric bolt through their head or not is of little consequence really, they are needlessly getting a knife slashed across their throat and bled to death.
It wasn't a hard question to answer even if you think people shouldn't eat animals at all. Should they have a horrific life or should any suffering be minimised as much as possible? You have got an opinion on everything else, you must have had an opinion on it before you turned vegan? Yes people have a choice but each choice also has its options based on opinion. This is why people choose to eat organic meat and free range eggs etc and why you have vegetarians and vegans.
There are people on here saying it doesnt matter how badly they are kept or killed and you have got an issue with me saying that they should be given the best life possible. Get a grip.
RV Casual wrote:Do Vegans/Vegetarians have pets?
I'm guessing not as that would obviously be an infringement on the Animals rights never mind what would they feed them.
That's a genuine question by the way, I have no idea, but would seem massively hypocritical if they did.
RV Casual wrote:Do Vegans/Vegetarians have pets?
I'm guessing not as that would obviously be an infringement on the Animals rights never mind what would they feed them.
That's a genuine question by the way, I have no idea, but would seem massively hypocritical if they did.
BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:RV Casual wrote:Do Vegans/Vegetarians have pets?
I'm guessing not as that would obviously be an infringement on the Animals rights never mind what would they feed them.
That's a genuine question by the way, I have no idea, but would seem massively hypocritical if they did.
RSPCA adoption. Humans can develop our own meat alternatives animals can’t so of course animals are fed meat.
The food chain bollocks about having to eat animals as we’re at the top is a load of rubbish as we’ve evolved beyond the need to hunt for our food
welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:Some of the comments on here are absolutely ridiculous. Just because an animal has been bred to be eaten doesn't mean it should live a horrific life before being brutally killed. The purpose of the animal is to benefit us, they should at least live a half decent life and be killed in a way to minimise any suffering.
The end result is the same and they face a scene from a horror movie in complete terror and agony.
Should we as a nation be starving and we needed to do it to survive, it would be a necessary evil.
However if I took my dog for nice walks and played with it before I decided to slit it’s throat and hang him upside down to bleed to death... but stuck her dead body in a stew after the ordeal, it still wouldn’t make it acceptable.
The above is what happens to billions of animals every year... just without the walks. Needless and brutal.
I always laugh at those that say they are animal lovers yet contribute to an industry that murder them in their billions for pleasure.
I’m not denying they don’t suffer. But even as a non meat eater you’d agree if animals are going to be bred to be eaten that suffering should at least be minimised and they should have a decent life leading up to it? There is a bit of a difference between eating an animal you have no emotional attachment to and eating your dog. So it’s pointless comparing them.
There is no difference at all to the animal (the important point) if you have a connection to the animal when you murder him/her or not.
As a civilised society we judge harm through the victims eyes, not the one that inflicts the violence. Whether you have formed a personal relationship with the animal doesn’t make the act any different at all. You would have no connection to my dog at all, yet no doubt would think it was a horrific act if I were to do it.
Or another example I bred dogs to throw into a cage to feed to my pet python, who crushes them and eats them alive... Again everyone would be up in arms (Rightly so). Yet I bred them for that so what’s the difference?
It’s an impossible question to answer for me regarding your first point because it already presumes that animals have to be murdered, when they don’t.
In this life you have 2 options. Harm animals, or don’t. The majority decide to harm them in their millions completely needlessly for their own pleasure, whether that is by inflicting the harm themselves or paying someone to do it for them (which is what most do). Whether they have an electric bolt through their head or not is of little consequence really, they are needlessly getting a knife slashed across their throat and bled to death.
It wasn't a hard question to answer even if you think people shouldn't eat animals at all. Should they have a horrific life or should any suffering be minimised as much as possible? You have got an opinion on everything else, you must have had an opinion on it before you turned vegan? Yes people have a choice but each choice also has its options based on opinion. This is why people choose to eat organic meat and free range eggs etc and why you have vegetarians and vegans.
There are people on here saying it doesnt matter how badly they are kept or killed and you have got an issue with me saying that they should be given the best life possible. Get a grip.
Of course it is. If I asked which is better, me throwing a baby to it’s death out the window or suffocating it to death, I would hope you would find it similarly hard to answer. The correct answer is of course, why are you needlessly killing a living thing? I would prefer you did neither.
My opinion before I turned vegan was simply just to not think about it, the more detached I was from what I was paying for the animals to go through the less guilty I felt. I know people have opinions but they aren’t necessarily morally justifiable ones. Eating free range eggs means the animal that is exploited is allowed to move about a small amount. Organic meat means the animal wasn’t fed anything synthetic - but they end up in the same slaughter house and the same horrific process of murdering them needlessly.
The best life possible is one where they aren’t murdered, isn’t it?
I think you have misunderstood the thread. The thread isn’t about keeping animals in poor conditions, it’s about halal slaughter vs western slaughter. Halal slighter actually insists the animal be healthy at time of the killing, but it is sliced across the neck and bled to death. Western slaughter means it is usually attempted to have a bolt of electricity through its head (with terrible success rates) before being sliced across the neck and bled to death - I’m not seeing much preference there.
RV Casual wrote:BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:RV Casual wrote:Do Vegans/Vegetarians have pets?
I'm guessing not as that would obviously be an infringement on the Animals rights never mind what would they feed them.
That's a genuine question by the way, I have no idea, but would seem massively hypocritical if they did.
RSPCA adoption. Humans can develop our own meat alternatives animals can’t so of course animals are fed meat.
The food chain bollocks about having to eat animals as we’re at the top is a load of rubbish as we’ve evolved beyond the need to hunt for our food
It was a genuine question, I should have and have now googled it aswell, Vegans don't have pets as they don't believe in the domestication of animals and the reliance on humans.
For vegetarians it's obviously different and as you say some animals (Cats especialy) need meat to survive according to RSPCA
Escott1927 wrote:
Might have gone slightly off topic but you're still unable to answer a simple question. These animals have been bred to be eaten so we can assume they will be killed. There is no option not to kill them if that is what they are bred for.
Anyway, I am not interested in comparing things to killing babies so I think i'll leave you to it.
welsh-dragon-days wrote:Escott1927 wrote:
Might have gone slightly off topic but you're still unable to answer a simple question. These animals have been bred to be eaten so we can assume they will be killed. There is no option not to kill them if that is what they are bred for.
Anyway, I am not interested in comparing things to killing babies so I think i'll leave you to it.
It’s a simple question, but not a simple answer. I don’t believe any animals should be murdered so exactly how they are murdered is not something I would like to choose.
It doesn’t matter what they have been bred for. You would think it horrific If I bred kittens for live bait for my snake wouldn’t you? Or bred puppies so I can slice their throat because I liked them in a sandwich. Agree?
I am not comparing anything to killing babies. I am explaining why deciding on the horrendous fate of a living being is not something I want to do, I firmly believe all living things should be allowed to live. By taking it away from an area you are desensitised to and bringing it to an area where you presumably aren’t is showing that it matters little about how the death occurs, the fact that it is occurring at all is the problem.
Thankfully you seem to have had the desired reaction and you seem to understand the horrific nature of it, where as you didn’t seem to beforehand.
welsh-dragon-days wrote:mistaflux75 wrote:Although I'm not at all religious, I would prefer any animal to be killed humanely and not suffer at all.
You think slitting an animals neck and letting it bleed to death while hung upside down is humane and not suffering?
The disconnect between the slaughter house and the plate is staggering.
I repeat, there is no humane way to murder a living being, whether people like to think there is or not.
mistaflux75 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:mistaflux75 wrote:Although I'm not at all religious, I would prefer any animal to be killed humanely and not suffer at all.
You think slitting an animals neck and letting it bleed to death while hung upside down is humane and not suffering?
The disconnect between the slaughter house and the plate is staggering.
I repeat, there is no humane way to murder a living being, whether people like to think there is or not.
No I don't think that. I said I didn't want them to suffer. Durrrr!!!
RV Casual wrote:mistaflux75 wrote:welsh-dragon-days wrote:mistaflux75 wrote:Although I'm not at all religious, I would prefer any animal to be killed humanely and not suffer at all.
You think slitting an animals neck and letting it bleed to death while hung upside down is humane and not suffering?
The disconnect between the slaughter house and the plate is staggering.
I repeat, there is no humane way to murder a living being, whether people like to think there is or not.
No I don't think that. I said I didn't want them to suffer. Durrrr!!!
You can't kill something without it suffering mate
I eat meat but have seen the process, when I left school I had an interview at the meat factory in Merthyr and they took us to the slaughter hall, brutal doesn't touch it, you have to be pretty hard and cold to do that job I can tell you, I won't go in to graphic detail but it is horrific, trust me.
Escott1927 wrote:
I fully understand the nature of it and I am fully aware of where my food comes from. Which is why, amongst other reasons, I have massively cut down on the amount of meat I eat over the last few years to the point where I probably go at least 3 days a week without eating any. I still include meat in my diet though because I like it. Whatever your view, people eat meat so animals are bred to be eaten. It is far from a nice situation but they should be at least given the best life possible given the circumstances. I think that is the minimum any meat eater should expect and the minimum non-meat eaters should expect from people who eat meat. Really can't see why you can't agree with that. And before you say we shouldn't eat meat and give me another scenario of killing something, people eat meat!
mistaflux75 wrote:
That's fair enough mate but he suggested that I said that it was humane for them to have their throats slit. I was saying the opposite.
And yeah, thanks for sparing me the gory details to
BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:Changed my mind after reading some posts here. It is clear that they put Islam into halal meat in an attempt to make Muslim sleeper agents it makes so much sense thanks Nukes and Elyboy
ElyBoy1984 wrote:BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:Changed my mind after reading some posts here. It is clear that they put Islam into halal meat in an attempt to make Muslim sleeper agents it makes so much sense thanks Nukes and Elyboy
If you tackle this issue in isolation, you'll never see the bigger picture.
NuclearBlue is right. Wake up.
CCFCJosh75 wrote:ElyBoy1984 wrote:BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:Changed my mind after reading some posts here. It is clear that they put Islam into halal meat in an attempt to make Muslim sleeper agents it makes so much sense thanks Nukes and Elyboy
If you tackle this issue in isolation, you'll never see the bigger picture.
NuclearBlue is right. Wake up.
Go on then, enlighten us all.
CCFCJosh75 wrote:ElyBoy1984 wrote:BluebirdWhitchurch wrote:Changed my mind after reading some posts here. It is clear that they put Islam into halal meat in an attempt to make Muslim sleeper agents it makes so much sense thanks Nukes and Elyboy
If you tackle this issue in isolation, you'll never see the bigger picture.
NuclearBlue is right. Wake up.
Go on then, enlighten us all.
ElyBoy1984 wrote:When you all die, do you want a long, drawn out affair with suffering or a peaceful stress free situation?
Users browsing this forum: Bakedalasker, Bebbsyboy, cityone, DotBot [Bot], Facebook [Bot], Google [Bot], ias [Bot], Jock, Proximic [Bot] and 224 guests