Death, Lies, & Videotape

[Drawmack]

It’s all there. You posted before I was finished copying. I have an old, richety computer. Sorry!

Yeah, I got it – sorry for jumping the gun.

 

[redhen]

My honest, core reaction to this film is nothing. I really don’t care. Those cows are food and nothing more. I feel no sympathy for an animal that feeds a human.

So when the aliens land on earth and start raising homo sapiens for food, you’ll be ok with that?

 

[Marfran]

The freaking miners didn’t even get a break. I live in Scranton, this city was built on coal and I’m a history buff, so I’m fairly familiar with what is being talked about here. Those miners worked 14 - 16 hours days 6 days a week for a couple dollars a week. They had to pay for their own supplies (picks, blasting buckets, a fee for each load they sent up the shoot, etc). They did all of their shopping at stores owned by the company, no other stores existed. They lived in houses owned by the company, no other houses existed. The company intentionally charged them more than they made. This way every week that someone worked in the mines they became more indebted to the company. The only way out of this debt was to have a bunch of children and send them into the mines, which the company loved because there were jobs that the full grown man was too big to do adequately like operating the separators – which exposed children as young as 8 to coal dust you couldn’t see your hand in front of your face for 14 - 16 hours a day six days a week.

You’re talking about how horrible the mules had it when the people did not have it any better, and arguably had it worse. This is what people have talked about in this thread with holding the welfare of animals above the welfare of men.

I don’t believe you read the entirety of the passage. Scully acknowledges that animals helped us to achieve our current position in the world. He acknowledges the toil of animals and man. He nowhere in this passage belittles man.

 

[Drawmack]

Now, in the more developed world, the mule is free at least of that assignment. His services are no longer needed.

And, how many mules are there today compared to when they were beasts of burden?

So too have many other animals served us well over the ages. It was the use of livestock that first freed us from the chase, allowed man to settle and civilize himself, slowly rendering the hunter a useless and ever more ridiculous figure engaged in what the name itself “game,” implies. Meat and dairy products undeniably furnished a wide array of protein sources, like the soybean today as we discover its many uses and superior protein value.

Which is why most ground meat bought in the store is fortified with soy products. However, the land that it takes to grow soy bean is actually put to better use as pasture for animals because the same land produces more food as a pasture for feed stock. Additionally, the soy beans are eaten by wild animals. I know many farmers who stopped growing soy bean because the dear and other animals eat up to half their crop. Soy grows close to the ground so animals of all sizes can eat it, and they like it because – as you pointed out – it is a phenomenal source of protein. So, these farmers grow feed corn which the wild animals do not, so readily, consume. This is the problem with this type of literature that only shows one side of the story.

It was the labor of the mule and the horse and the ox and the elephant that allowed man to turn his energies to greater work, building his earthly life over the ages up from savage squalor to the world we live in today. It was the fur-bearer whose pelt shielded us from the elements, the oil of the whale that lighted our lamps, the ivory of the elephant and bones and antlers of other animals that gave us tools and adornments. And so on through the story of civilization, leaving today, in many cases, only customs and habits and industries surviving on the momentum of varnished necessity. For ages people needed furs to survive in the severe elements we faced. Women who today keep the fur industry thriving, in order to be seen swathed in mink on a 60-degree December evening in Beverly Hills, or in Manhattan making the harsh winter trek from Saks to Tiffany’s, do not have the same excuse.

This paragraph is a stance against animals as a luxury item as opposed to animals as food. Here the author is mingling the luxury item market and the food markets in his arguments. This is done to engage an emotional response in the reader and then this emotional response will be used to make the argument against meat as food based on something other than the livestock industry. This is a logical fallacy called the straw man argument.

When substitute products are found, with each creature in turn, responsible dominion calls for a reprieve. The warrant expires. The divine mandate is used up. What were once “necessary evils” becomes just evils.

Is the author implying that eating meat is evil? And, is he doing this based on animal labor? Gee, that is a really cogent argument.

Laws protecting animals from mistreatment, abuse, and exploitation are not a moral luxury or sentimental afterthought to be shrugged off.

No one here is saying they are. We are saying three things. First, human rights come first. Second, raising animals for food is not an abuse of animal rights. Third, the videos you’re showing do not depict the average corporate animal farms. You have yet to provide any evidence to oppose this statement, you simply keep making emotional appeals.

They are a serious moral obligation, only clearer in the more developed parts of the world where we can not plead poverty.

Show me one single freaking country that doesn’t have children going to be hungry. Show me one single freaking country that doesn’t have children starving to death. Just one and I’ll shut up, but until you can this guy needs to shut up.

Man, guided by the very light of reason and ethics that was his claim to dominion in the first place, should in the generations to come have the good grace to repay his debts, step back wherever possible and leave the creatures be, off to live out the lives designed for them, with all the beauty and sights and smells and warm winds, and all the natural hardships, dangers, and violence too.

So, the author is appealing to “Man, guided by the very light of reason and ethics” while himself writing an emotional appeal against the consumption of meat. I’ve already shown two logical fallacies in this small snippet and this is the third. He is claiming that anyone who disagrees with him is either unreasonable or unethical. If you’re going to call your opposition unreasonable or unethical you need to provide evidence to this effect. If you’re going to call me unreasonable for eating meat then you had better be prepared to explain why an animal that is a predator. Our eyes are forward facing, animals of prey have eyes placed on the sides of their heads. Our teeth include the types needed for chewing meat and grains, prey animals only have the types of teeth needed for chewing grains. So, if I am unreasonable for eating meat, why is it reasonable to ignore the fact that man, by design, is a predatory animal? If you’re going to call me unethical then you had better be ready to explain why denying your instincts and your nature is ethical. Why is it ethical to assume God made a mistake when he made man a predator?

 

[Drawmack]

So when the aliens land on earth and start raising homo sapiens for food, you’ll be ok with that?

This is the logical fallacy known as taking an argument beyond it’s natural parameters.

We have no proof that aliens exist, and they haven’t landed on earth.

Please present cogent arguments if you would like me to dialogue with you logically.

 

[Drawmack]

I don’t believe you read the entirety of the passage. Scully acknowledges that animals helped us to achieve our current position in the world. He acknowledges the toil of animals and man. He nowhere in this passage belittles man.

It’s not my fault the original poster did not type their entire post before clicking submit and instead submitted it in pieces.

 

[kristina40]

Sorry, I couldn’t make it through all the posts…this argument will continue on and on and no one’s opinions will change…the vegans/vegetarians will not suddenly say “you know you’re right, I think I’ll run out and get me a nice juicy hamburger - THANK YOU for enlightening me”…nor will the meat eaters say “you’re right if they can’t kill my beef by some humane method (which no one can come up with) that I have just spit out the bite of steak I just took and pledge an oath to never eat animals or animal by-products (milk, eggs, cheese, etc.) again”…to each their own!

My only (name removed by moderator)ut is would some of you vegans/vegetarians who feel so badly for these poor abused animals send me some pictures of your pet 3 year old bull tied up in the backyard? Since some have compared cows and horses to dogs and cats, I imagine some of you must certainly have either a 2000 pound bull/steer/cow or a 1700 pound horse tied in your back yard, waiting for you to take them for a stroll around the block…

If this sounds ridicules to you…then tell me why God made these creatures…if they are not for human consumption, then what are they for?

 

[redhen]

This is the logical fallacy known as taking an argument beyond it’s natural parameters.

We have no proof that aliens exist, and they haven’t landed on earth.

Please present cogent arguments if you would like me to dialogue with you logically.

No, this is not a case of reductio ad absurdum. I used an analogy to show that your claim is based on the unstated premise of “might makes right”. We’re clever tool using mammals, so we have the right to control and harvest other species.

 

[Marfran]

If you’re going to call me unreasonable for eating meat then you had better be prepared to explain why an animal that is a predator. Our eyes are forward facing, animals of prey have eyes placed on the sides of their heads. Our teeth include the types needed for chewing meat and grains, prey animals only have the types of teeth needed for chewing grains. So, if I am unreasonable for eating meat, why is it reasonable to ignore the fact that man, by design, is a predatory animal? If you’re going to call me unethical then you had better be ready to explain why denying your instincts and your nature is ethical. Why is it ethical to assume God made a mistake when he made man a predator?

God **did not **make us predators. Please read Genesis. Our eyes are forward facing (binocular vision), as are other primates, for grasping branches and picking fruit from trees. Our teeth **are not **designed to eat meat. All animals by design have all their equipment attached to their bodies. Humans would have a difficult time **killing ** or hunting any animal without the use of tools, guns, arrows, snares, traps, etc. When is the last time you ate a steak without a knife and a fork? Ground beef is ground by machinery, not our teeth. Animals eat their meat raw. If we were designed to eat meat why do we cook it? (Hint: E-coli, etc.) Vultures can eat all kinds of even rotting meat without getting sick because they have special enzymes in their stomachs. They were designed to eat meat.

I think that most people realize that we were** not designed **to eat meat. And anyone who follows the Bible would not use this argument. We, as in the passsage quoted from Scully, have used animals to survive in harsh conditions. This use granted to us by God after the Fall. But now, as we have evolved to not need animals as in the past, do we not have an obligation to God to be good stewards of the animals that He put us in charge of? If our use for them now only serves our vanity and luxury tastes is it still OK to use them?

 

[Marfran]

If this sounds ridicules to you…then tell me why God made these creatures…if they are not for human consumption, then what are they for?

Humans make these creatures. We purposefully breed them, by the billions, to suffer and to be killed, and for no other purpose. We do not find them prancing about in the fields because God put them there–WE are manufacturing them.

 

[Marfran]

Show me one single freaking country that doesn’t have children going to be hungry. Show me one single freaking country that doesn’t have children starving to death. Just one and I’ll shut up, but until you can this guy needs to shut up.

I don’t understand how this advances your argument that you should continue to eat meat. How about standing in solidarity with the poor and giving up the luxury meat that they can not afford to eat?

There is a very good article in the June, 2009, National Geographic, called The End of Plenty: The Global Food Crisis. It is a must read if you would like to understand how meat consumption affects the world globally, how resources that could go directly to people go to meat animals instead, and how even less food ends up in the mouths of human hungry because the affluent peoples just have to have that luxury meat.

 

[kristina40]

Humans make these creatures. We purposefully breed them, by the billions, to suffer and to be killed, and for no other purpose. We do not find them prancing about in the fields because God put them there–WE are manufacturing them.

I guess I’m mistaken - WE HUMANS CREATED COWS??? Who was the original breeder??? Wow - I thought GOD was responsible for all creation - color me confused!

Sorry, this subject is really a touchy one for me. My family is in the horse business and because of scare tactic videos such as the one being discussed in this thread…my family is barely holding on financially. I wonder would any of you like to donate to my cause? I have a multitude of truly beautiful well bred horses that are no longer worth the price of a bullet to kill them (NOT THAT I WOULD) I truly love my horses and it kills me to think what will happen to them when I can no longer afford to feed them, as the price of grain & hay sky rockets and we can no longer sell any horses as the horse market has plummeted!!!

What would you do if your main source of income was suddenly “black balled” but you had to continue to maintain the source anyway…with no hope of ever selling your “product” but unable to quit “feeding” it? This all based on some fancy organization that has never owned, cared for, or even seen an animal “up close and personal” - just going on their emotions from watching one or two (or even a dozen) sensationalized video(s)?

My animals are my “friends” and it brings me great joy to care for them, but would I choose their life over my own - probably NOT!

 

[Marfran]

I find it ironic that** heart disease **is linked to animal product consumption. If we are supposed to eat meat, or drink cow’s milk, or eat cheese and eggs, then why does the fat build up in our arteries, often resulting in a fatal heart attack? Why are people who have survived this heart attack caused by plaque (from animal fat), told to change their diets?

For the posters who say* think with your head, and not your heart*…I say perhaps there is some God-given wisdom in your heart. Both your physical heart and the heart that you feel life with. And it is God who gave you both of your hearts.

 

[Marfran]

I guess I’m mistaken - WE HUMANS CREATED COWS??? Who was the original breeder??? Wow - I thought GOD was responsible for all creation - color me confused!

God created the original cow, obviously yes. The domestic ones whose genes we manipulate, and artificially inseminate to produce billions of for our dinner tables are our creations. God made the prototype and we ran off with the plans to twist and manipulate, and play mad scientist with.

 

[redhen]

God created the original cow, obviously yes. The domestic ones whose genes we manipulate, and artificially inseminate to produce billions of for our dinner tables are our creations. God made the prototype and we ran off with the plans to twist and manipulate, and play mad scientist with.

Exactly. And not just with the animals we alter for food production, but also our pets that we love so much; cats and dogs bred for their pug faces that can barely breathe, German shepherds with obscene back curvatures, etc.

 

[Marfran]

Exactly. And not just with the animals we alter for food production, but also our pets that we love so much; cats and dogs bred for their pug faces that can barely breathe, German shepherds with obscene back curvatures, etc.

Absolutely, yes.

 

[kristina40]

Generalizations are what get people in trouble - not all animal breeders genetically “alter” nor AI their livestock; nor feed them steroids or inject them with all sorts of nasty stuff (like antibiotics). Nor do all breeders inbreed their domesticated pets (hip issues with German Shepards, etc.) But those who choose to make generalized statements, don’t consider the other breeders when they try to bring about change in the entire industry, lumping all small independent producers in with the commercial facilities. So many problems in our country and our world are based on generalizations, stereotypes and people who live by emotion rather than people who choose to “walk a mile” in the other man’s shoes.

Thank you for clarifying that you believe God created the “original” cows though, you had me scared there for a minute…I almost accepted that sensationalized response as FACT!

 

[4elise]

The thing you’ll notice about animal rights activists is that they rely on emotion and culture. To give you an example of what I mean, let’s fly back to the Roman Empire!

ZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

Okay, here we are! Now, as you’ll notice, the Roman Empire, because of the morals it is based on, has a very homosexual enviornment to it. Homosexual acts (which I sometimes mistake for homosexuality, and visa-versa) are allowed in the Empire, and a lot of people do them. It’s a cultural thing. And it grew into an enviornment. Because of this, many of the Emperors practiced homosexual acts. This is similar how animal rights activism works.

If a person grows up in a culture that teaches eating meat is wrong, that person will more likely than not stick to vegetables. If asked why, he’ll give an emotional answer, such as “animals have feelings” and “animals are sacred.” He could get himself out of the emotional and cultural impact on his view of animals and eating meat by doing research on the benefits of meat and animals, though. Watching a video of a slaughtered animal, however, will gross him out, and he might plunge even deeper into his belief that killing animals will wrong.

This type of respect toward animals can quickly evovle into animals being loved above humans - or even being regarded as gods in flesh. This is why people must keep themselves in check.

This is an extremely offensive post. There are people of faith who have chosen not to eat meat because the find they do not believe that it is necessary to kill animals for them to live. You have ascribed motive that has no place in this discussion. :tsktsk:

 

[Marfran]

So many problems in our country and our world are based on generalizations, stereotypes and people who live by emotion rather than people who choose to “walk a mile” in the other man’s shoes.

Have you ever walked in a pair of horse shoes??? Yikes!!! And what would you do with the two extra ones?

 

[Drawmack]

Sorry, I couldn’t make it through all the posts…this argument will continue on and on and no one’s opinions will change…the vegans/vegetarians will not suddenly say “you know you’re right, I think I’ll run out and get me a nice juicy hamburger - THANK YOU for enlightening me”…nor will the meat eaters say “you’re right if they can’t kill my beef by some humane method (which no one can come up with) that I have just spit out the bite of steak I just took and pledge an oath to never eat animals or animal by-products (milk, eggs, cheese, etc.) again”…to each their own!

My only (name removed by moderator)ut is would some of you vegans/vegetarians who feel so badly for these poor abused animals send me some pictures of your pet 3 year old bull tied up in the backyard? Since some have compared cows and horses to dogs and cats, I imagine some of you must certainly have either a 2000 pound bull/steer/cow or a 1700 pound horse tied in your back yard, waiting for you to take them for a stroll around the block…

If this sounds ridicules to you…then tell me why God made these creatures…if they are not for human consumption, then what are they for?

I don’t want anyone to change their mind. I just want people to stop attacking my morality, ethics, and reasonableness because I eat meat. It’s just plain silly and not very respectful.