I fail to see the moral difference between a small, organic farmer killing an animal for you to eat, and a āfactory farmā killing an animal for you to eat. Both profit from the death of the animal. If, in your words, a boycott is only āpartā of āthe solutionā, then just what is your goal?
animals on factory farms are treated as production units. they are kept in conditions that deprive them of everything that is natural to them, fed antibiotics and pesticides, and food that is not appropriate for them. they live in intensive confinement and very stressful conditions.
large farms also create lots of manure. the manure goes out, untreated into large pits, where it often ends up in the rivers and streams, air, soil, and groundwater. seriously look at what this does
factoryfarm.org/?page_id=19
wages are notoriously low on these factory farms and they often exploit undocumented immigrants too.
a boycott of farming that we feel is unethical is part of the solutionā¦ the other part is to get regulatory agencies off their duffs and enforcing laws that protect the community and shared resources.
But, it is your unknown definitions of āsustainableā and āethicalā which drive this debate. Give me a reason to doubt that you would ban the eating of meat were it under your power.
well sustainable -i like this definition: āthe attempt to provide the best outcomes for both human and natural environments both now and in the indefinite future.ā obviously, enormous, festering sewer lagoons filled and spilling into water supplies donāt fit that bill.
ethicalā¦ well there was a time when animals were raised in environments that provided for at least most their natural needs. nesting materials, straw to lay on, room to spread their wings or turn around, adequate exercise and grazing/proper food. industrial farming denies them all of this, and because of cramped quarters, they have to be āmodifiedā without anesthetic, and fed antibiotics to keep them in reasonable health. chickens have been genetically modified in harmful ways too - they grow so large so fast, that their little legs canāt support them, and their internal organs fail. turkeys have to be artificially inseminated because they carry too much breast meat to reproduce naturally.
now if youāre caring properly for your animals, they are healthy and donāt need antibiotics or hormones to make them grow or produce. youāll also need more workers, and you need to keep them aroundā¦ so you pay them a fair wage. since youāre not putting 10,000 animals into a single shed, you donāt have to pump out tons of raw sewage into open pits for the rest of the community to deal with.
you will probably note, the vegetarian/vegan movement did not take off until factory farms took over family farms and the truth about them started come out. that is because most people are satisfied with humane treatment of farmed animals in settings that arenāt toxic to the public, and donāt exploit workers. the longer factory farming goes on, the more momentum is gained by the veg movement - and incidents like this latest flu epidemic and continued destruction of the environment are fueling the trend.
ultimately what i see is that the meat eaters will cause their own meat eating demise by keeping these places open and profiting. there will be a deadly flu, or lots of deaths from antibiotic resistant e. coli, or contaminated water. and when that happens, it will be a crisis, and there will suddenly be a host of new laws and regulations, most of them probably pretty stupid, in an attempt to correct the situation. the excess we live in right now canāt end in any other way if people donāt start curbing their appetites for animal based foods.
would do somethingā¦
Your not serious, right? That is hilariously inane! You have a sharp whit!
:aok: