A Challenging Article on Catholic Moral Theology

[tafan]

I would also add that when wild hogs eat meat, it is almost always carrion; another factor which should make you glad farm raised hogs do not eat “naturally”

 

[Calliso]

Not our local milk. Our local milk comes from across the country, not from our local dairies. And regardless of whether family farm milk is pasteurized or not, it’s still a better food than store-bought just by the virtue of its freshness.

And I’m sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with you about them doing nothing but pasteurize it. I pasteurize my milk too and it’s still completely different from what you buy in the store. Perhaps it takes on the taste of the plastic or carton, I don’t know. I did okay with Oberweiss, which is packaged in glass jars. But generally milk from the store is gross. It doesn’t even sour, but rots. Sorry…but that’s the truth… but hey, if you like it better from the store, more power to you. We can’t all be the same

Yeah I rarely drink milk anymore and instead use alternatives. When I do have real milk usually it tastes kinda bad to me now even if it is “fresh”

 

[Bluegoat]

With 300 plus million people to feed every day, I am not for small independent farmers only. Nor am I for factory farms only. But, Economies of scale are necessary to feed 300 million people a day. The same is true with housing; some live in stand alone homes, many live in apartment complexes.

This doesn’t really make sense though. Ten small farms on the same amount of land will produce as much as one large farm, possibly more. There are economic factors, but they have nothing to do with the number of people that can be fed by the farms.

What has been happening here in Canada is this: big companies come and buy up farms. Then they hire the farmers to take care of them. That is, instead of owning and controlling their own land and business, which they live on, in the community they are a part of, they are now wage earning employees with no capital that can sustain a living. The land itself is controlled by a company which has only limited ties to the community and land, doesn’t live there, and is mostly interested in satisfying shareholders - a situation we know leads to short-term thinking. They aren’t even interested in food security for the local community to the extent that the farmer would have been, and farmers have enough trouble with this already because of the way the food system is set up.

This is in the end not unlike the communist or socialist systems where the state owned the land and hires people to work it. Those farms were famous for poor production, in part because no one feels a real investment in the land and the land is no longer tied to the well-being of the community. A farmer hired to manage land owned by a corporation or absentee land-lord is no different.

 

[Bluegoat]

And the article you posted is certainly questionable. All hogs should be bled immediately upon killing them. Or at least that is the what my grandparents always said when they slaughtered their own (in those days when farmers were pure and good ). I would trust them, as it has been done that way for generations. If a hog is not bled immediately, the meat is not safe. As a boy I remember watching my grandfather and a neighbor kill and slaughter a hog. When it had been killed, they went into action very fast to slit the throat and get the carcus hoisted up so that it would drain of blood. They seemed to have the attitude that it could not be done fast enough.

The reason pork can be unsafe is because like many meats of omnivorous animals, they carry parasites that also live in humans. The remedy for that is cooking well, not bleeding immediately.

If you don’t bleed right away, it is hard to get all the blood out - that is why you need to do it fairly quickly, with any animal. If you don’t get it all out, it tastes bad, is sort of gross and messy, and doesn’t keep that well.

 

[John21652]

I take great offense to this tread and the idea that meat raised in modern production agriculture is cruelly raised. My wife and I are 5th generation family farmers in the Midwest. We own and operate 2 of these farms that you would label “Factory Farms”. Pig care and the best welfare of the animal is the highest priority of our farm and the pork industry. The animals are raised inside in climate controlled barns, individually cared for and fed the most nutritious feed possible.

There are many organizations such as PETA and the Humane Society of the United States (not your local dog & cat shelter) that want to see operations like ours closed down. The real reason is that they object to slaughtering animals for food. They would like to see you eat VEGAN.

The manure generated by our operation (and generally in the industry) is used as an organic fertilizer and spread on our farms to best utilize the nutrients in a sustainable way to grow next years crop of corn.

The truth of the matter is that today, in the US and the developed world we have the safest food supply in history, thanks to the farmers and the agricultural industry.

This so called “Factory Farm” we own has allowed us to remain on the farm, to become financially independent, to care for our family and to put two of our children through a Catholic college with one to go.

It is refreshing to read what a real farmer writes for a change, rather than the emotive blubber written by those who read and watch the propoganda put out by activist groups like PETA. Until recently, I was a 4th generation Australian farmer, breeding and raising dairy cattle, beef cattle, and horses. Unlike the American farming industry, Australian agriculture is not subsidised, is mainlyly broadacre in nature and almost all animal farming is grass based. We have very few, if any, of the large scale 'factory farms" that you have in the United States. Consequently, we are not hit so much with media images of animals wallowing in mud, penned en masse into cages and pushed and shoved into and out of trucks, loading ramps and cruelly treated in slaughterhouses.

Despite this, groups like PETA bend over backwards to find and publish images of anything that can be percieved as “cruelty”. Recently, an animal activist group published on-line film of animals being slaughtered “cruelly” in some backyard Indonesian slaughterhouse. Those images went viral and caused such a hue and cry that Australia’s entire live beef exports to Indonesia were shut down for three months. It has come to light since that the fottage was set up by the animal activists. In the process, the emotions of city based viewers were played upon, politicians reacted and thousands of farmers had their livelihoods cut off. One wonders when people will begin to see through the rediculously emotive and staged media campaigns run by organisations of the ilk of PETA. They are anti-business and anti-capitalist and their supposed concern for animals is a front for a broader immorality. Recently, someone opened a thread here on CAF highlighting how PETA was opening a pornography web site that PETA says will draw attention to animal cruelty. The logic in that is utterly beyond me, because I cannot fathom how displaying people abusing and humiliating one another can ever have any bearing on preventing animal cruelty.

Geofarmer brought attention to just how real farmers must eat, sleep and breathe what they do. It is that total committment to what they do that has given the western world its food security and supplies of food the quality of which the human race has never before been given. The massive amounts of food produced, despite the claims of some that we would all be starving by now, is testament to the science behind modern agriculture. However, the science still has to be supported by good old fashioned animal husbandry and other good farming practices, or else the animals and the crops do not respond. Simple as that.

In the United States, where factory sized farms are common, it will always be easy for activists groups to obtain films and photos of so called ‘cruelty’. After all, the supply chain now consists of a whole bunch of people who are not trained specifically in animal husbandry and farming is not their occupation. What the public must do is see through the propoganda of activist groups and understand that farming is not the problem. The supply chain is. If people don’t like factory farming, then ask them, are they prepared to pay more for their food and to even pay for imported food, the quality of which is outside their control, because if you wind back the scale of operations, then you will wind up the price of the finished article.

 

[severus68]

It is refreshing to read what a real farmer writes for a change, rather than the emotive blubber written by those who read and watch the propoganda put out by activist groups like PETA. Until recently, I was a 4th generation Australian farmer, breeding and raising dairy cattle, beef cattle, and horses. Unlike the American farming industry, Australian agriculture is not subsidised, is mainlyly broadacre in nature and almost all animal farming is grass based. We have very few, if any, of the large scale 'factory farms" that you have in the United States. Consequently, we are not hit so much with media images of animals wallowing in mud, penned en masse into cages and pushed and shoved into and out of trucks, loading ramps and cruelly treated in slaughterhouses.

Despite this, groups like PETA bend over backwards to find and publish images of anything that can be percieved as “cruelty”. Recently, an animal activist group published on-line film of animals being slaughtered “cruelly” in some backyard Indonesian slaughterhouse. Those images went viral and caused such a hue and cry that Australia’s entire live beef exports to Indonesia were shut down for three months. It has come to light since that the fottage was set up by the animal activists. In the process, the emotions of city based viewers were played upon, politicians reacted and thousands of farmers had their livelihoods cut off. One wonders when people will begin to see through the rediculously emotive and staged media campaigns run by organisations of the ilk of PETA. They are anti-business and anti-capitalist and their supposed concern for animals is a front for a broader immorality. Recently, someone opened a thread here on CAF highlighting how PETA was opening a pornography web site that PETA says will draw attention to animal cruelty. The logic in that is utterly beyond me, because I cannot fathom how displaying people abusing and humiliating one another can ever have any bearing on preventing animal cruelty.

Geofarmer brought attention to just how real farmers must eat, sleep and breathe what they do. It is that total committment to what they do that has given the western world its food security and supplies of food the quality of which the human race has never before been given. The massive amounts of food produced, despite the claims of some that we would all be starving by now, is testament to the science behind modern agriculture. However, the science still has to be supported by good old fashioned animal husbandry and other good farming practices, or else the animals and the crops do not respond. Simple as that.

In the United States, where factory sized farms are common, it will always be easy for activists groups to obtain films and photos of so called ‘cruelty’. After all, the supply chain now consists of a whole bunch of people who are not trained specifically in animal husbandry and farming is not their occupation. What the public must do is see through the propoganda of activist groups and understand that farming is not the problem. The supply chain is. If people don’t like factory farming, then ask them, are they prepared to pay more for their food and to even pay for imported food, the quality of which is outside their control, because if you wind back the scale of operations, then you will wind up the price of the finished article.

So animals for slaughter are all humanely kept, humanely moved hundreds sometimes thousands of miles and humanely killed? So it is just the animal tivists who are causing all the problems?

While I have nothing against farmers and certainly nothing against those who care for their animals, it is a fact that with “progress”, there are more ways to profit from the use of animals. Transport of live animals long distances should be banned.

That video of animal in Indonesia was not a set up. See news.com.au/national/games-over-indoensian-animal-cruelty-cost-animals-lives/story-e6frfkvr-1226076764673

 

[John21652]

So animals for slaughter are all humanely kept, humanely moved hundreds sometimes thousands of miles and humanely killed? So it is just the animal tivists who are causing all the problems?

While I have nothing against farmers and certainly nothing against those who care for their animals, it is a fact that with “progress”, there are more ways to profit from the use of animals. Transport of live animals long distances should be banned.

That video of animal in Indonesia was not a set up. See news.com.au/national/games-over-indoensian-animal-cruelty-cost-animals-lives/story-e6frfkvr-1226076764673

It’s interesting how you sidestep the issues by asking vague questions based on little more than supposition and dubious animal activits claims. It is the transport of live animals over long distances, amongst other things, that has enabled the consumer in big cities to enjoy affordable food products. From other threads, you know very well that meat is just one of the products that society enjoys the benefits of. Thanks to modern transport methods, these products are still affordable. The distance an animal is transported is moot, as you know full well.

As for the Indonesian abbotoir scandal that shut down Australia’s live export trade, a Senate enquiry has indeed been told that animal activists are behind the film footage. Even the Indonesian meat workers are saying what was filmed was not normal.
Read about it here and here.

Then how about you go over to this thread Radical animal rights group PETA launching x rated porn site, then come back and tell us all about the ethics behind animal rights movements. There are none.

 

[Speedypizza]

Just thought I would drop my .02 cents in here as well. My Grandfather was a milk cattle farmer/rancher and so I got to spend a few summers on a real dairy farm. The idea that the animals are in some way abused is just silly. The truth is an unhappy/stressed cow does not make as much milk. They do everything they can to keep the cows happy and content, even playing soothing music for them. If one of his cows got sick, he was up all night doing everything he could to help it. A dead dairy cow is worth peanuts, however a healthy one is worth a lot of money.

As far as the animals in some way being hurt by being milked, that has got to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You could tell if some of the cows had missed a milking for some reason because they were in pain, the cows want and need to be milked as much as we need to pee! As for the claim that cows were kept in unsanitary conditions, think about it for a second. Would you want to keep your cows clean and healthy all the while happily making milk, or dirty and sick, not making milk. Remember, you get paid per gallon of milk.

I know what Peta says, and 99% of it is nonsense. They have from time to time uncovered some story of real abuse, but almost all of it is made up. They want to ban not only meat, but all animal products and even things like honey.

If somebody does not believe me about dairy cows (and the same is true for all animals, just like people, if they are stressed out, they loose, not gain weight.) Just go check out message boards from dairy farmers, and you will read them trading tips on how to make the cows HAPPY. :extrahappy:

 

[Calliso]

I would certianly never argue that in “the old days” farms were a heavenly place for animals - people have always had an ability to be cruel, and life itself is harsh. And there have always been good and bad husbandmen. But I do think larger operations allow for a different kind of cruelty - a kind of institutional rather than just personal or circumstantial cruelty. When there isn’t much opportunity for real contact with the animals, or to develop the kind of natural sympathy men are meant to have with animals, you get bad results. On the one hand people can anthropomorphize animals in a way that isn’t really accurate and develop a sentimental attitude, and on the other we can reduce them to less than what they really are as creatures who have a natural law of their own that they are bound to. It is always easier to forget individuals, their human nature or their animal nature, in an institutional setting.

I disagree that factory farming is better than a good, human level farm as far as animal comfort goes, and I say that as someone who has kept livestock. Animals need pretty simple things, food and shelter and the ability to follow their natural instincts. That doesn’t mean the instincts have to have the same outlet they would in nature - a bored animal can play with toys rather than root for food and be very satisfied with that. And I know there are a few large scale farms that think of this stuff (and even find it profitable)… But the average factory farm does not. Comfort is more than a lack of mud (especially if your an animal that rather enjoys the mud) and a clean cement floor.

I don’t have an issue with the age of slaughtering animals. I don’t really get why it is an issue for people.

Yeah I totally agree that we shouldn;t romanticize the past it wasn;t all sunshine and rainbows back then either. But totally agree with the rest of what you said. I think in these industrial settings animals ultimately become to be seen as little more then machines/money not living beings. I think in situations like that you kinda have to distance yourself emotionally from the animals in order to be able to do your job. But at the same time I agree that we shouldn;t humanize animals too much and this too can have bad results.

Yeah comfort is much more then a clean cement floor especially when you consider that many of these animals barely have room to move for most of their lives. And may have absolutely no enrichment their entire lives.

I do agree that the age they are slaughtered shouldn;t really matter. I mean ultimately living longer just means more suffering in many cases.

 

[severus68]

It’s interesting how you sidestep the issues by asking vague questions based on little more than supposition and dubious animal activits claims. It is the transport of live animals over long distances, amongst other things, that has enabled the consumer in big cities to enjoy affordable food products. From other threads, you know very well that meat is just one of the products that society enjoys the benefits of. Thanks to modern transport methods, these products are still affordable. The distance an animal is transported is moot, as you know full well.

As for the Indonesian abbotoir scandal that shut down Australia’s live export trade, a Senate enquiry has indeed been told that animal activists are behind the film footage. Even the Indonesian meat workers are saying what was filmed was not normal.
Read about it here and here.

Then how about you go over to this thread Radical animal rights group PETA launching x rated porn site, then come back and tell us all about the ethics behind animal rights movements. There are none.

I am not side stepping anything. Transporting live animals long distances is cruel and unnecessary. It is not justified by an obscene demand for huge quantities of meat as part of the daily diet. Eating smaller quantities and/or having meat free days is good for the health and that is a fact.

All your article talks of is an allegation and an enquiry to be made. If it is found as a fact that it was a set up, then the people who did it need their heads seen to. That video itself is not needed to show how much long distance transport causes that much extra suffering all over the world.

PETA is not the end all and be all of animal activists/welfare groups. If they are setting up a porno site, I think that’s stupid and self defeating. However, what has that to do with this thread about factory farms, unnecessary cruelty etc?

 

[4elise]

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.

Well, a couple of questions come to mind:

1. Assuming the assumption of suffering being imposed on these animals is true: does the feeding of a large world population have any bearing on the word needlessly in the above quote from the CCC
2. As to cruelty and suffering: The article does not say exacly what is cruel about the so-called “factory farming”. 95% of hogs are raised in factory farms. Well, they are kept indoors. Certainly in a cleaner environment than many of the old pig pens that were common years agos on farms. Overcroweded? Maybe, but to the extent of cruelty? Well fed? certainlyl, they do not ever go hungry. Good bedding? yes, again probably better and more healthy than in the old-days. Disease treatments are prompt, their healt is monitored quite closely.

Just some questions.

The article does give some detailed information on the specifics of pigs raised in factory farms that I believe anyone would find disturbing.

 

[4elise]

catholicmoraltheology.com/are-we-all-michael-vick-our-addiction-to-animal-cruelty-a-call-to-conversion/

Excerpt:

"I want to be clear about my argument. The point is not to oppose meat-eating. My beef is not with Inuit eating seals. Nor with aboriginals hunting wild boars. Nor with those seriously engaged in what was once known as “animal husbandry.”

My objection IS to the factory farming in America that institutionalizes cruelty at an almost incomprehensible level. Factory farmed meat is, if we are honest, ‘cruelty meat.’
Let me be concrete and keep my argument narrow. If we object to cruelty to dogs, we should certainly object to it to pigs, who are friendly, loyal, and more intelligent than dogs. Yet, 95% of pigs are factory-farmed in America. Thus, unless you have very good reason to believe otherwise, it is almost certain that when you buy pork, bacon, or ham, you are supporting an industry that institutionalizes cruelty.

How should Catholics think about this? Well, we might begin with the Catechism of the Catholic Church

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.197 Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals. …
2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.

However, God have mercy on us if we only know that cruelty to animals is wrong after consulting the Catechism.

How does the Catholic tradition speak about the wrongness of eating animals that have been factory farmed? One way it thinks about it is to name it as a form of cooperation with wrongdoing. More specifically, it is what the tradition calls formal cooperation with wrongdoing, which is always considered wrong. Some may argue that eating factory-farmed or cruelty meat is a form of material cooperation with wrongdoing, which, if one does not condone the cruelty in eating the cruelty meat, and does it for other reasons e.g. part of one’s typical breakfast or part of a convivial barbeque, then it could be morally acceptable. But it is not.

In American factory-farming, cruelty is not a mere evil side-effect or by-product. Cruelty is an essential and necessary part of the logic of factory farming. For in factory farming, the welfare of the animals is of NO accord. It is entirely a matter of raising the animals in a way that maximizes profits. Any care or consideration given to the animals in the logic of factory farming is ordered to future maximization of profit. That is why we should call it not merely meat, but ‘cruelty meat.’"

Thank you so much for sharing this post.
For all the reasons listed - the cruelty, the impact on the environment, issues of resources - we adopted a vegan diet about 6 years ago now - and believe that this choice is very much influenced by our Catholic faith - I think the comments that follow the article are also very good - and reinforce something I’ve always felt — once we learned about these issues it was just not possible, for us, in good conscious to continue to consume meat, dairy, eggs, use leather, etc… Thanks again for posting this!

 

[4elise]

CCC 2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

this section of the CCC can not be taken without the other that is referenced in the article:

Respect for the integrity of creation

2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.195 Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.196

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory.197 Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image.198 Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

 

[4elise]

Good questions. I don’t think we can take for granted that factory farming is evil and cruel solely because some article says so. Further, even if some factory farming is evil and cruel, does that mean all factory farming is evil and cruel? Maybe it’s just one particular place that exercises bad practices.

From a moral standpoint, I would say that, even if it could be established that all factory farming is morally evil, the majority of Catholics have absolutely no idea of what is involved in factory farming (myself included). So any cooperation would not be intentional.

This issue of knowledge is discussed in the comments that follow the article that I think are well addressed -

Do you believe we have an obligation to try to learn more about this issue?

 

[4elise]

You should really watch “Food Incorporated” when you get a chance. The factory farming does not provided healthy or friendly environments for the animals and this does affect you. The animals are being treated poorly and we our paying the price for it with our health.

I believe it is our moral obligation to fight against this injustice that is not only harming animals but also human beings. This is why I only buy from local farmers and never form the big factory farms: which in reality there are only 4 of them that supply the majority of the meat. I also have been trying to stay away from fast food since fast food is not only bad for you but also the main driving force behind this factory farming.

Here is a link that will let you watch a preview of the movie. Please watch the full movie. If you have netflix you can find it there.

veoh.com/watch/v20368182MnDqr98W

You are fortunate that you have access not non factory farmed meat - and good for you for making this effort! Blessings!

 

[4elise]

Few people are as close to the land and nature and “the cycle of life” as farmers are. They are very concerned about the crops they grow and the animals they raise. They do not want them to be stressed and they care about their health - that’s just good business.

Family farms are not the same thing as factory farms - and the food that one finds in most supermarkets and fast food sadly do not come from family farms but factory farms. The article notes that 95% of pigs are raised on factory farms - and also shares a rather graphic description of what that means - there are many of other resources on the web related to how factory farmed chickens, turkeys, egg layers, dairy cows are treated that - if one feels like looking into it - they too may feel moved to consider moving to a plant based diet, as we did.
Blessings,

 

[4elise]

I do find it very hard to justify the treatment of animals in the large factory farms, especially since having cheap meat with every meal is not what I would call a need.

Exactly! We’ve got some great recipes over on the group Catholic Vegetarians and Vegans… drop by!

Blessings,

 

[4elise]

We do understand that these animals are a food supply, right? I mean, we are going to kill them in order to feed millions of people. I think using the limited definition applied by the OP, killing them would certainly be cruelty but how else do you intend to eat them?

I am not saying you can’t go too far, but we need to make sure we understand what cruelty is. If we are purposefully killing them in such a way as to inflict maximum pain instead of trying to kill them quickly, that would be cruelty. Obviously the industry is not doing this because of the tremendous inefficiency of using slower, more painful, methods of killing. Too many pigs in a cage? That is not cruelty. Fatty foods or any modified foods meant to improve meat yield? That is not cruelty. Killing them? That is not cruelty.

I cannot watch this video because I am at work, but maybe you could mention a specific practice that is conducted by all of these “factory farming” companies that is cruelty.

You say " Too many pigs in a cage? That is not cruelty." - would you apply the same to dogs or cats? Or is it because someone plans to eat them we can treat them differently?

This is our Catechism:

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.

The article gives a very graphic description of the way these pigs live and are killed - and I would be surprised if you did not find this cruel. If you think it is justified because it is food I find it difficult to make this distinction.

The article further touches on the issues of environmental damage and resources which are tremendous issues with these large scale factory farms.

There are more effective ways to feed millions - a plant based diet provides all the protein, calories, and is less expensive - especially in ‘Western’ settings - I hope that Catholics will lead the effort to restore animal farming to a way that is more in keeping with our teachings.

 

[4elise]

Yes, pigs in factory farms are overcrowded. No they are not given bedding. Yes, they are living in unhealthy conditions. Yes, they cut off their tails so they don’t bite them as a stress response. No they are not able to engage in their normal, instinctual behaviors. Yes, many barns are so nasty the workers have to wear respirators. Yes, they feed them foods that are not natural for pigs to eat. Yes, they give them low level antibiotics in their feed to keep them healthy which is a serious risk to human health; yes, they store the waste from thousands of pigs in ‘tailings’ ponds that are an environmental hazard and sometimes spray it on the land; yes, the mother pigs are immobilized so they do not crush the babies in the small pens without nest building materials.

We could say very similar things about factory chicken farms and beef feed-lots. They are cruel, and they are a health hazard for humans and the environment. Factory farms for vegetables are not very healthy either, for that matter.

Great post - and certainly the ‘factory farming’ for veggies does not cause vegetables to suffer - unless you add the diminished nutritional value, damage to land and ground water with over use of chem fertilizers.

 

[4elise]

CredoInDeum, I suppose the documentary is very unobjective. I have quite a bit of first hand experience with feed lots for cattle. I honestly don’t see that much that is cruel or causes undue suffering. Note: I was raised on a farm and ranch, so things such as castration and branding do seem quite normal to me.

I have never visited any large scale poultry farm, so I cannot say about those. I have seen large scale hog farms, again I don’t see anything that cruel and in many ways the hogs are treated better than they were when raised on a small scale on our family farm when I was a kid.

As to dairies, again I have been to those, and perhaps this is one of the worse, as cows have to put up with a lot of milking these days. But they are fed well and kept in a clean, dry environment.

The issue of the health effect on us is a completely seperate issue that cruelty to animals. In some ways, there are legitimate concerns here. But it seems to be not on subject with the thread, so I will leave it at that.

This is good point. When I read criticisms of modern day agriculture, and how it is so abusive of the land, and not sustainable; I almost laugh out loud. It normally comes from people who have little first hand experience with farming, and must have little respect for the intelligence of farmers and ranchers.

OTH, lets not kid ourselves about livestock production in this day and age being a quaint family business. Poultry is done almost exclusively by large corporations. Pork is done by large private corporations, often "large family businesses. Ironically, it is beef, which catches the most criticism at times, which seems to deserve the lease. A lot of beef, until it is ready to go into the feelot for finishing, is raised on small family operations. And feedlots are often owned by large family businesses, and rarely by large corporations. But the nice distributionism of American agriculture of the 19th and 20th century is largely gone. Chesterton would not be happy with the result. Again thread drift. Sorry.

I appreciate you first hand comments - and sharing your own experience - as you note the cows for beef only ‘finish’ their lives on confined animal feed lots - an effective way to produce beef. Those of us who don’t have access to family raised meat, eggs, dairy - (the majority of Americans - and food purchased in fast food places) only have access to factory farmed meat - and my choice has been to make a complete change to a plant based diet. It is working for us, and this article shared many of the reasons that caused us to make this change…