Got Milk? Got Ethics?

[Marfran]

The Ugly Side of Dairy:

abcnews.go.com/Blotter/animal-rights-us-dairy-industry/story?id=9658866

ABC Nightly News story that aired January, 27, 2010. Comments please.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The Ugly Side of Dairy:

abcnews.go.com/Blotter/animal-rights-us-dairy-industry/story?id=9658866

ABC Nightly News story that aired January, 27, 2010. Comments please.

Why didn’t you use the article title in the thread title?

“Got Milk? Animal Rights v. U.S. Dairy Industry”

Animal rights is an oxymoron. Animals have no rights. Though I do not condone mistreatment. The videos in this story only come from one producer of milk. Not all of the Dairy industry does so.

The article is also a bit out of date as it speaks of the “tail docking” using statistics from 2002.

I also do not really think this is a Social Justice issue in any way.

What are your comments?

 

[Marfran]

Why didn’t you use the article title in the thread title?

“Got Milk? Animal Rights v. U.S. Dairy Industry”

Yes, that is the title of the written piece. The title of the video is “The Ugly Side of Dairy.”

Animal rights is an oxymoron. Animals have no rights.

Semantics, word choices… I think the issue is that agri-animals are often subjected to cruelties that the general public is not aware of. The nature of factory farming is to treat animals as machines, and to optimize profits with total disregard for animal suffering ***and ***human health.

Though I do not condone mistreatment.

That is the focus of this article–the mistreatment of agri-animals.

The videos in this story only come from one producer of milk. Not all of the Dairy industry does so.

The vast majority of milk/milk products in the United States comes from large, corporate “factory” dairy farms where cows are kept exclusively indoors, never experiencing the light of day. Milk/milk products coming from smaller scale operations can be found at local farmer’s markets, community co-ops, and whole food grocers such as WHOLE FOODS, but the milk/milk products that you find in the majority of traditional grocers come from these large scale corporate farms.

The article is also a bit out of date as it speaks of the “tail docking” using statistics from 2002.

I believe California has outlawed tail docking, effective January 1, 2010. hsus.org/press_and_publications/press_releases/california_legislature_passes_bill_to_outlaw_tail_docking_of_cows.html New York is proposing a tail docking law. news10now.com/cny-news-1013-content/top_stories/494306/tail-docking-law-proposed Any info on the other states???

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Yes, that is the title of the written piece. The title of the video is “The Ugly Side of Dairy.”

Ok, but neither of them are found in your title, you chose to put Ethics in.

Semantics, word choices… I think the issue is that agri-animals are often subjected to cruelties that the general public is not aware of. The nature of factory farming is to treat animals as machines, and to optimize profits with total disregard for animal suffering ***and ***human health.

Still does not change the fact that animals have no rights.

That is the focus of this article–the mistreatment of agri-animals.

Yes, mistreatment of animals at one dairy producer where the video was made, this does not mean everyone of them is doing this or that it is still being done by this producer.

The vast majority of milk/milk products in the United States comes from large, corporate “factory” dairy farms where cows are kept exclusively indoors, never experiencing the light of day. Milk/milk products coming from smaller scale operations can be found at local farmer’s markets, community co-ops, and whole food grocers such as WHOLE FOODS, but the milk/milk products that you find in the majority of traditional grocers come from these large scale corporate farms.

But all this story is about is one producer. It is anecdotal, it only proves that this one producer was doing this when the videos were made. That does not equal that all producers do so or that this producer is still doing so.

This is the problem with these sorts of investigations being used to cover the whole industry, you can’t do that.

I believe California has outlawed tail docking. New York is proposing a tail docking law. news10now.com/cny-news-1013-content/top_stories/494306/tail-docking-law-proposed Any info on the other states???

This is what the article said but it also said that the dairy trade group has stated that tail docking is in decline among its member groups.

Still fail to see the social justice connection.

 

[agrange]

Everybody knows Milk is bad for you, unless it has Chocolate in it which counter balances the negative effects of the milk.

 

[SugarMagnolia]

Animal rights is an oxymoron. Animals have no rights.

Of course they do. Let’s consider what a “right” is. Rights are bestowed by one party onto another party. Animals have rights because we gave them rights; we just need to give them more rights.

There was a time when women had no rights. The Women’s Liberation movement changed that. For example, in the USA women gained the right to vote in 1920. Similarly the Civil Rights movement gave rights to people of color and children’s rights gave rights to children, Prior to the bestowal of rights upon all of the people, women, people of color, and children had no rights. Now, the animal rights movement is recognizing that animals deserve rights too. These may not be the exact same rights as humans have, but they are still rights. Consider, for example, the fact that children have rights, but they do not have the same rights as adults. For example, children do not have the right to vote.

Currently, there are laws against animal abuse. These laws give animals the right to be free from cruelty and impose penalties on humans who violate these rights. The laws against animal cruelty are not merely laws against harming a person’s pet, which may be considered property. These laws also protect stray animals, which are no one’s property.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Of course they do. Let’s consider what a “right” is. Rights are bestowed by one party onto another party. Animals have rights because we gave them rights; we just need to give them more rights.

There was a time when women had no rights. The Women’s Liberation movement changed that. For example, in the USA women gained the right to vote in 1920. Similarly the Civil Rights movement gave rights to people of color and children’s rights gave rights to children, Prior to the bestowal of rights upon all of the people, women, people of color, and children had no rights. Now, the animal rights movement is recognizing that animals deserve rights too. These may not be the exact same rights as humans have, but they are still rights. Consider, for example, the fact that children have rights, but they do not have the same rights as adults. For example, children do not have the right to vote.

Currently, there are laws against animal abuse. These laws give animals the right to be free from cruelty and impose penalties on humans who violate these rights. The laws against animal cruelty are not merely laws against harming a person’s pet, which may be considered property. These laws also protect stray animals, which are no one’s property.

Laws do not grant rights. Rights are there whether or not there are laws for them.

Women always had rights, it was the law that did not recognize this, that does not mean their rights did not exist.

The Civil Rights movement gave no rights, it got the State to recognize the rights that always existed.

Animals do not have rights, but there are laws protecting them, as there should be.

We should care for God’s creation, but as unrational beings without souls animals do not have any rights.

 

[Marfran]

Ok, but neither of them are found in your title, you chose to put Ethics in.

Look again. The title of the written piece is: ***Got Milk? Got Ethics? Animal Rights v. U.S. Dairy Industry ***

And the point of arguing about the title of this thread, or the title of the ABC news story, or the title of the video is???

 

[Marfran]

Everybody knows Milk is bad for you, unless it has Chocolate in it which counter balances the negative effects of the milk.

Every thread needs a comedian!!! Thanks for the comedic relief, Conan. I hope you find a job soon!!!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Look again. The title of the written piece is: ***Got Milk? Got Ethics? Animal Rights v. U.S. Dairy Industry ***

And the point of arguing about the title of this thread, or the title of the ABC news story, or the title of the video is???

Just pointing out the use of the word Ethics in your title when it is not in either of the other two.

But I just pointed that out. What about the other issues I have raised?

Just a quick list to remind you.
Animals do not have rights.

1. 
   *]Maltreatment is wrong.
   *]Video from one producer only proves that this one producer is doing such a thing and only at the time the video was taken.
   *]The statistics on tail docking are taken from a report 8 years ago.
   *]The dairy trade group says that the practice of tail docking is in decline among their member groups.
   
   I think that covers most of what I brought up.

 

[SugarMagnolia]

Laws do not grant rights. Rights are there whether or not there are laws for them.

Women always had rights, it was the law that did not recognize this, that does not mean their rights did not exist.

The Civil Rights movement gave no rights, it got the State to recognize the rights that always existed.

Animals do not have rights, but there are laws protecting them, as there should be.

We should care for God’s creation, but as unrational beings without souls animals do not have any rights.

Animals have souls; they just don’t have immortal souls.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=53700

We often use the word “rights” in two different senses. I believe you are using it in the sense of natural rights. For example, women had a God-given right to equal treatment that the gov’t failed to recognize before 1920. In the sense of political rights, however, women didn’t have this right until the gov’t granted it. I see no reason why we shouldn’t consider animals as having natural (i.e. God-given) rights that we are only recently acknowledging.

 

[Marfran]

Just pointing out the use of the word Ethics in your title when it is not in either of the other two.

Yes it is.

But I just pointed that out. What about the other issues I have raised?

Just a quick list to remind you.
Animals do not have rights.

Animals have the right to run if they have legs, fly if they have wings, and swim if they have fins. God created them this way. It is abhorrent that we treat animals as cash machines and deny them their God given right to move about freely, experience land under their feet, and to live outdoors under the sky.

1. 
   *]Maltreatment is wrong.

1. 
   Yes, and we have industrialized maltreatment. It is called mass scale “factory farming.”
   

   *]Video from one producer only proves that this one producer is doing such a thing and only at the time the video was taken.

   If you do some research you will easily be able to unearth video from numerous, upon numerous “factory farms.” Start with the documentary film ***Food, Inc. ***
   

   *]The statistics on tail docking are taken from a report 8 years ago.
   *]The dairy trade group says that the practice of tail docking is in decline among their member groups.
   
   I think that covers most of what I brought up.

   Tail docking is only currently illegal in California as of January 1, 2010. Unless other states follow suit, and make this practice illegal, it will continue. That is one of the reasons that these news stories are brought to our attention.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Yes it is.

Yes I see that now, it is in the title on the page but missing from the Title Bar.

Animals have the right to run if they have legs, fly if they have wings, and swim if they have fins. God created them this way. It is abhorrent that we treat animals as cash machines and deny them their God given right to move about freely, experience land under their feet, and to live outdoors under the sky.

Those are functions, not rights.

God created them for man to use and take care of.

Yes, and we have industrialized maltreatment. It is called mass scale “factory farming.”

We have been through this before, I guess it has been a couple of months since your last thread on the topic so it must be time to start this all over again.

Showing that some do what you call bad does not mean that all do so.

If you do some research you will easily be able to unearth video from numerous, upon numerous “factory farms.” Start with the documentary film ***Food, Inc. ***

Again, we have been through this.

Tail docking is only currently illegal in California as of January 1, 2010. Unless other states follow suit, and make this practice illegal, it will continue. That is one of the reasons that these news stories are brought to our attention.

And the dairy trade group said that its usage is in decline. You do not have to make something illegal to stop it and making something illegal does not always put a stop to it anyways.

 

[Marfran]

And **the dairy trade group said **that its usage is in decline. You do not have to make something illegal to stop it and making something illegal does not always put a stop to it anyways.

I don’t think that the dairy trade should be trusted to police itself. Yes, we need to enact laws to protect people, and to protect animals in agribusiness. If the dairy trade, or any other business is on the up and up, they should have no resistance to such protective laws.

 

[Brendan]

Animals have souls; they just don’t have immortal souls.

So does plankton.

 

[Sheeniac]

LOL ByzCath - perhaps you should just link your replies and arguments from the older thread to save yourself the typing.

“Animal rights” as mere semantics? How can one argue with that?

 

[Marfran]

Women always had rights, it was the law that did not recognize this, that does not mean their rights did not exist.

The Civil Rights movement gave no rights, it got the State to recognize the rights that always existed.

Animals do not have rights, but there are laws protecting them, as there should be.

We should care for God’s creation, but as unrational beings without souls animals do not have any rights.

I don’t care if in any dictionary animals have rights or don’t have rights. Sometimes this “rights” argument gets too cerebral and leaves the poor animals’ heads spinning. And they don’t even care about us arguing about concepts and words–they just want to stretch their legs and get some sun. And we deprive them of that because of the green of the dollar. I’ll drink soy, or almond, or rice milk instead. God entrusted animals to our care, and we abuse this privilege by treating them as machines with total disregard for their discomfort and suffering.

 

[Jermosh]

So does plankton.

But he is pretty evil guy no less.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I responded at length in another thread having the same subject, so I won’t repeat verbatim here what I said there.

First, I will admit that I don’t know for sure why those New York dairymen keep their cattle indoors all the time. Perhaps there are climatic reasons for that. In my area there are lots of dairy operations and not one keeps the animals indoors. It’s more expensive and more work to do that. But there may be good reasons, like proximity to markets in an inclement climate.

Second, while I think the guy who hit the cow on the head with a wrench was out of line (I would have fired him for it in principle because it shows how stupid he is.), it has to be recognized that the cow almost certainly reacted to the “startle” of it, rather than pain per se. I achieve exactly the same result by simply cracking a whip a few inches from the animal’s face or backside. But that’s not the real point. Cattle in a field under the most ideal conditions butt each other head-on all the time. It’s part of their “pecking order” thing. Picture two 1,000+ pound animals smacking head-on at full tilt and showing no ill effects from it at all, and you quickly realize that’s a lot more force than that guy could possibly deliver with the wrench or whatever he had. Up the scale a bit and make it two 2,000 pound horned bulls. The force of just one of them would break every bone in a human body and rupture every internal organ. I have seen bulls do it and then proceed to munch grass or keep at it as if it did not affect them at all. I have seen bulls tear up steel pipe gates with their heads just to get at cows in the next pasture. We can’t project onto animals what we, ourselves would experience.

Third, perhaps the most stupid thing in the clip (I didn’t see the whole program. I don’t care to watch propaganda films as a general rule.) is the comment that the poor cows are “kept perpetually pregnant”. Well, yes. Cows become fertile again about 30-60 days after their calves are born. In an open, idyllic field, if there’s a bull in the herd, the cow inevitably becomes pregnant again that quickly if she’s healthy. Their gestation period is about the same as that of humans. That’s the way it is with animals. Almost all female mammals, wild or domestic, are pregnant most of the time unless (as with our pets) people prevent it. That’s how they replenish the species. They need to, because their lives are short relative to ours, and their survival rate in a natural state is much lower than ours. Just because humans don’t want to be pregnant most of the time does not inform us that animals hate it or even know about it. Just because Diane Sawyer thinks Planned Parenthood and public funding of abortion are the marvels of the age, that does not mean animals share the sentiment.

 

[vz71]

I don’t care if in any dictionary animals have rights or don’t have rights. Sometimes this “rights” argument gets too cerebral and leaves the poor animals’ heads spinning.

Allow me to paraphrase what I am reading here…

I don’t care if I can be proven wrong or not, Everyone else is wrong but me.

Let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good feeling now.