The Slaughtering of Animals in Factories. Moral dilemmas in the modern world

[HelpingHands]

Hi Mosher

I suspect that you did not read the report on pork farming since you replied so quickly. Please take the time to at least skim through it. I’m not familiar with Upton Sinclair, but factory farming in the U.S. has hardly become more humane in the last hundred years. In fact, it’s become utterly dehumanized. The pastoral relationship that humans once had with the animals they used for food and clothing is practically non-existant today.

I know that in the UK there is far more oversight and regulation of production of meat, eggs and milk, from the humanitarian POV. I think that this is good. The fact that some animal rights activist are unbalanced people and don’t value the life of unborn humans doesn’t change my mind. Sometimes, in order to accomplish a good, we need to have alliances with those that we disagree with in other areas, such as our Holy Father did with Muslim leaders to advocate against abortion.

 

[mosher]

HelpingHands:

Hi Mosher

I suspect that you did not read the report on pork farming since you replied so quickly. Please take the time to at least skim through it. I’m not familiar with Upton Sinclair, but factory farming in the U.S. has hardly become more humane in the last hundred years. In fact, it’s become utterly dehumanized. The pastoral relationship that humans once had with the animals they used for food and clothing is practically non-existant today.

I know that in the UK there is far more oversight and regulation of production of meat, eggs and milk, from the humanitarian POV. I think that this is good. The fact that some animal rights activist are unbalanced people and don’t value the life of unborn humans doesn’t change my mind. Sometimes, in order to accomplish a good, we need to have alliances with those that we disagree with in other areas, such as our Holy Father did with Muslim leaders to advocate against abortion.

No, I did not read it because I am well aware of some of the conditions that animals raised for food and clothing are in. I am not arguing that everything that is being done is right but that it needs to be placed in perspective.

 

[HelpingHands]

Well why are you argueing then? I don’t think anyone here is really a fanatic about it. Does it bother you that some Catholics are concerned about the deplorable and inhumane conditions that farm animals are raised in? Maybe you’ve known a particularly annoying animal rights person. I think some of them have psychological problems stemming from childhood that led them to overly bond with animals, probably from parental neglect. What do you think about that theory?

 

[aurora77]

mosher:

This is opposed to a Vegan who is just crazy.
.

Quote–mosher "I have yet to insult and give any form of ad hominim attack of any sort nor have I ever posted one single “mean” post on CA in the 400+ posts that I have made. "

Kind of contradictory, huh? I just don’t understand the insensitivity, not just of Mosher but of many on this board. How does it hurt us to want to care for God’s creation? How does that detract from the concern for human life? Yes, some people will take this too far, but that is true of many causes. Just because I’m pro-life doesn’t mean I support bombing abortion clinics. Just because I care about animal welfare doesn’t mean I’ll raid labs and throw paint on women in fur coats. All I ask is that if you disagree, at least be charitable about it.

 

[Pug]

mosher:

A vegitarian is a person who does not eat any other sensative beings but will still eat products that come from the use of these creatures such as milk or butter…In this covenant there are no restrictions on dietary law and no abolition of the command given to Noah and then to Peter - “Kill and eat.” Thus, it can be discerned from scripture that it is contrary to divine commands and allowable practices of the current dispensation to be vegitarian

Thank you for providing your reasoniing.

I agree that there is no reason at this time (dispensation if you will) to say that it is fundamentally wrong to eat an animal. I think you may mean to cite Noah and Peter just to indicate that it is not fundamentally wrong to eat an animal, but I am not sure. It almost sounds like you see it as a divine command to eat meat, that it is an *injunction *to do so. Do you mean this as well?

I do not interpret Acts with Peter and the sheet to be a positive injunction to eat meat in one’s lifetime. Do the Father’s do this? I understand it to be the second thing he hears from the voice, “what God has made clean, do not call profane.” The point Peter takes from it is that he ought not complain upon being told to visit Cornelius. The Gentiles are not to be called profane. (Acts 10:28,29).

I find it hard to view as a command to eat meat, since Peter was already willing to eat meat (like the passover). Perhaps, though, it is a command to eat what your (Gentile) host puts in front of you. (I’ve had some poor hosts in my day).

I don’t recall God telling Noah to “kill and eat.” Is that in the prophets somewhere? I do recall that after the flood all animals were given over to his hand and could be eaten, as long as they were slaughtered in a kosher manner (get rid of blood).

For the others on the thread, I do consider it to be foul and wrong indeed to kill an animal with needless cruelty or pain. I feel reasonable care must be taken to avoid doing it in a cruel manner, and that it must be done with respect for the animal’s purpose.

 

[seeker63]

“The point is this - All dogs do not go to heaven in fact no animal does. You are correct that cruelty is absolutly immoral however that is not related to what I have cited. I am in no way degrading God’s creation I am just putting them in proper context of the economy of salvation.”

Ah, here Mosher tips his hand.

Without fail, whenever there’s a thread mentioning animals on this board, somebody invariably gets on and bludgeons all the pet lovers with heavy doses of theological citations, Debate 101 argumentation tactics, and lots of “holier than thou.” They claim they do this to “help and educate,” but in fact they do it to bully and generally be sadistic to people with a sentimental fondness for their pets.

Why do these posters do this? Probably a combination of arrogance and cruelty, along with some past issues with animals. Maybe these people were bitten by dogs or scratched by cats in childhood. Who knows?

But whatever their stated motives, speaking ill of people’s pet, saying they won’t go to heaven and so forth, serves no helpful purpose, and can do much harm. It’s like telling children Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny don’t exist, then claiming, “Oh, I’m only doing that for their own good.” It’s still a mean-spirited, selfish thing to do.

The only problem with my analogy is that I don’t believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, but I do believe pets go to heaven, and you may throw citations at me and argue until Doomsday, but you will not change my mind on this question until I see Heaven, God willing, with my own two eyes.

I do not see why a God of mercy and love would save a faulty, sinful creature, and condemn an innocent, sinless one. Animals are not part of the question of salvation precisely because they are not part of the question of damnation. Why would God keep an innocent out of Heaven on a human technicality?

Let’s look at it this way: no one would probably say trees have souls (save an animist, I guess), but when God finished creating He pronounced all of His work good. There is nothing I’ve seen saying there will be trees all over Heaven, but nothing to prove there won’t be. God certainly created a lot of them–He must have some fondness of them. They certainly add to the quality and beauty of life, and so do animals.

I just have a problem going through theological citations like a lawyer looking for contractual loopholes and declaring that since there is nothing officially saying animals won’t be in Heaven, then it is impossible for them to wind up there. God has the final say in this, not us.

But it is very interesting that this thread about cruelty to animals in factories got diverted into the old familiar “Animals won’t go to Heaven” argument. There’s always someone on these kind of threads who wants to rain on everybody else’s parade.

Now I think we need to focus on the problem at hand: praying for the safety of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.

 

[Ruthie]

I’m a carnivore, and I live in cow country. I can’t speak to chickens or pigs, I have no experience there.

Cows are bred to be stupid. On purpose. Smart cows are troublemakers, so they are made into hamburger before they reproduce. Same with sheep. (Apparently, we haven’t been able to breed the brains out of pigs and goats!)

Part of this stupidity is the acceptance of conditions that we humans would hate to live in. I drive by the stockyards every time I go to town. Yuck, all that manure. But the cows look content. The manure gets bulldozed into a heap in the middle of the pen - and guess what? the cows climb up on it. They don’t care about the stink.

Helping hands, your article quoted the Catechism very selectively. That article somehow missed the part about it being fine to eat animals. (CCC 2415, 2417)

And the website your pictures are from promotes veganism, which makes me suspect it is an animal rights site. As usual, the pictures are all sensational, and nobody bothers to tell you that most of the animals shown are already dead.

I am an animal lover. A real animal lover. I love animals, not some made-up fantasy of what animals are. I work with animals. I’ve been kicked and bitten, stomped and butted, slobbered on, peed , pooped, and vomited on, and I still love them. Want to see me get violent? Abuse an animal where I can see it.

And I know enough about PeTA to know that the acronym really stands for “people for the elimination of tame animals.” The animal rights people seem to me not to love animals, but rather to hate humans. (One reason why they’re so predominantly “pro-choice,” I guess.)

As for the advice to a budding vegetarian to just keep eliminating meat - BAD. Meat contains several things that are essential to human nutrition - you need to find out how to replace them in your diet. Otherwise, you will get sick. (Especially if you want to be a vegan.)

It may not seem like it, but I do respect those who are committed to vegetarianism and veganism. I obviously don’t agree with their reasons, but I respect their ethics; they practice what they preach.

 

[kev7]

[

-](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology_of_Pope_Benedict_XVI#Treatment_of_animals)

It is clear to me that our new pope is a very good man. It is just too bad that most people in NA are giving him such a hard time.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

seeker63:

ByzCath and Mosher, I think you’re both being obnoxious and offensive and trying to upset people. If you hate animals, take it somewhere else. Those of us who love animals have the saints and popes on our side.

I am being obnoxious and offensive because I post what the Church actually teaches and post the paragraph from the Catechism to prove it?

ByzCath, you tell that “PETA” joke all the time, and it’s not any funnier now than it was the first thousand times you told it.

Thousands of times? I did a search on the forum and only came up with two threads here where I used that line, “PETA, People Eating Tasty Animals”.

What is offensive and obnoxious to me is how you (and others like you) exaggerate (as you do here), misrepresent, and out right lie.

I’m really tired with people on this board acting like lawyers and trying to define away things, sledgehammer and bully people with the CCC or Aquinas, and generally ignore the spirit of the Law in favor of its letter. You’re acting like modern-day Pharisees.

And maybe I’m not being charitable or whatever in my reaction, but I’m really sick of people acting this way on the boards.

But you are doing the exact same thing, trying to bagger and bully people to your point of view. Even to the case of trying to make eating (tasty) meat into a moral issue which as pointed out by others in this thread as animals do not have a rational soul as well as them being placed on the earth for our use.

 

[springbreeze]

Dear friends

‘I do not delight in the blood of animals’ and following this Jesus turned all of the animals and birds loose from the Temple.

Jesus loves nature and animals, He wove them into His parables and knew how to refer to nature so that men may understand His Gospel message. How could Jesus not love animals? He created them. He created them to live in harmony with His greatest creation, humans.

I am not surprised people hold animals with such little regard and treat them so poorly, after the fall all of the relationships in respect to humanity were fractured, our relationship with God, each other, animals/creatures and the earth. The earth responds to our sins.

How does anything at all live unless it ‘lives and moves and has it’s being’ in God, nothing can live at all unless God wills it.

We are stewards and we have been given our talents and we must use them responsibly, otherwise we have squandered what God has given us. We can if we desire, eat animals, I do myself, but the manner in which we treat them must be kind and merciful.

Whatever anyone writes it will not change hearts unless the Holy Spirit convicts them of it. Such disregard for God’s creation as to reduce it to something to be plundered and used without love, kindness and mercy leaves a severely bad taste in my mouth and I am not surprised at all that people become offended by such attitudes. All living things deserve a level of respect, they do not live by chance, but by the explicit will of God and I agree with the Saints, the Pope and the Catechism, animals may be have like animals , but that does not excuse human behaviour one iota! If I was an animal, I’d bite me as a human!

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[sententia]

Many animals that are slaughtered for food purposes are in fact still conscious when the process starts. And many others are forced to live in miserable conditions beforehand

I do this as my major at college. This is a huge part of what I work with every day. We stun these animals before they are killed- a person is standing behind and over them and “shoots” them in the head. They ARE rendered unconscious; we are extremely conscientious about that, as are the slaughterhouse workers. The circulatory system IS still functional (at least for 10-15 seconds) during the time in which the throat is slit so the animal can be bled out.

Now, this is what enrages me with groups like peta- after this, the animal is dead- all functions have ceased- they are put through an electrical shock stimulator which further facilitates the bleeding out process- it causes the limbs to jerk and such- so that the blood does not pool in the extremities. You will see activist groups use that footage saying “the animal is alive!” when in fact it is not. I don’t deal with chickens, and I don’t like the way most chicken farms work. I do have intimate knowledge of the beef/lamb/and pork industries, and how those animals are raised, fed, kept, and slaughtered.

I’m hesitant to put very graphic details on this board as I know many are very sensitive to the images this may conjur up, esp. if they have never actually seen the slaughter proccess (which actually isn’t that gory or messy-what people imagine it is is usually much worse). If you would like mroe detail, you can AIM me at featherjinxer.

I love reading the responses, because I think animal welfare is a part of religion which is often overlooked. To have ‘dominion’ over animals doesn’t mean we can do whatever we want with them; on the contrary it means we have a greater responsibility toward them and their welfare, especially seeing as, as far as we are aware, they do not have an afterlife.

 

[fix]

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.

 

[aurora77]

Ruthie:

As for the advice to a budding vegetarian to just keep eliminating meat - BAD. Meat contains several things that are essential to human nutrition - you need to find out how to replace them in your diet. Otherwise, you will get sick. (Especially if you want to be a vegan.)

Ruthie, I can see your point, except for this statement right here. It’s simply not true. We don’t NEED meat to survive. We do need some of the (very few) nutritious things that it provides. My discussion about eliminating meat from the diet was directed at a poster who seemed intelligent enough to understand that you don’t just not eat meat, you replace that with other, much better for you things. If I need to edit my post, I can do that. I recommended a website; I’ll also recommend the book Becoming Vegetarian. It’s an easy to understand comprehensive guide to vegetarian nutrition.

The other problem I have is where you say that “cows are bred to be stupid.” To me, this is a slippery slope argument. I’m sure others will disagree, but when we start breeding certain traits into animals, we’re tampering with God’s creation. I’ve got a friend at work who raised chickens. The kind they got were specifically bred to put on so much weight that they’d be unable to move at 4 months, so they could be slaughtered earlier. I find this a disgusting manipulation of life.

I’m in no way saying meat eaters are bad; I just wish people would think a little more carefully about their food choices and what it takes to get those foods to their dinnertable.

Oh, yeah, Ruthie, if you’re a carnivore, you may be in trouble–you really need to be eating some fruits and vegetables along with your meat!

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

Fox:

We are all called to be good stewards to the Earth and its animals. My question is this: Is it good stewardship to the animals if people support factory killing and harvesting eggs and dairy from animals for food considering that the factories frequently screw up the slaughtering process and really don’t care of the humane treatment of the animals?

The factory raising of animals is horrid, I have been to a few slaughterhouses and places where the animals are raised. It really isn’t a “happy go lucky” place they say it is.

So is it morally acceptable to go buy the meat, eggs, and dairy from these factory settings? In your opinion will there be ramifications with God in the end of your life if you do? If so, why? If not explain why not.

Note: I am not a PETA terrorist, but I do believe that animals should be slaughtered (kosherly) in the most humane way possible.Animals should be able to live in open places. Factories do not provide this.

Just something to think about. Part 2 on the human body coming up.

Because I like my hamburgers, steaks, and eggs benedict and refuse to remove meat from my diet, I agree that all animals should be slaughtered in the most humane and painless method possible. But how am I supposed to enforce that when there are several other codes, statutes, ordinances, and laws I am unable to get enforced with only my measly vote as my source of empowerment?

 

[springbreeze]

Bobby A. Greene:

Because I like my hamburgers, steaks, and eggs benedict and refuse to remove meat from my diet, I agree that all animals should be slaughtered in the most humane and painless method possible. But how am I supposed to enforce that when there are several other codes, statutes, ordinances, and laws I am unable to get enforced with only my measly vote as my source of empowerment?

Dear friend

You might like to think about buying from sources that do humanely slaughter animals and keep them in living conditions that are natural. I buy eggs taken from free-range out-door kept chickens and ducks. I buy meat that has been approved by the RSPCA (british animal welfare society), this meat has definetely been obtained from the animal by humane slaughter methods. These are widely available and easy to buy at most supermarkets.

Your power is in the ‘dollar’ in your pocket. If people buy the humane stuff, then that’s the methods ALL farmers etc will have to adopt and not cut corners and make half measures at being truly kind to animals.

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[mosher]

aurora77:

Quote–mosher "I have yet to insult and give any form of ad hominim attack of any sort nor have I ever posted one single “mean” post on CA in the 400+ posts that I have made. "

Kind of contradictory, huh? I just don’t understand the insensitivity, not just of Mosher but of many on this board. How does it hurt us to want to care for God’s creation? How does that detract from the concern for human life? Yes, some people will take this too far, but that is true of many causes. Just because I’m pro-life doesn’t mean I support bombing abortion clinics. Just because I care about animal welfare doesn’t mean I’ll raid labs and throw paint on women in fur coats. All I ask is that if you disagree, at least be charitable about it.

I think that there is no lack of charity in my statement. Being charitable does not necessarily equate to always being nice that would be false charity in some instances. In the quote that you reference I am merely stating by hyperbole how being Vegan is irrational.

 

[vern_humphrey]

ByzCath:

But you are doing the exact same thing, trying to bagger and bully people to your point of view. Even to the case of trying to make eating (tasty) meat into a moral issue which as pointed out by others in this thread as animals do not have a rational soul as well as them being placed on the earth for our use.

Dave, apparently you’re not aware of Luke’s recordings. As we all know, Saint Luke “investigated everything accurately anew” (Luke 1,3). He used a pocket tape recorder, and the cassettes have recently been discovered. A transcript of the relevant section of Acts follows:

Like we’re in Jaffa, you dig? And Pete’s like, “I’m goin’ up on the roof. Call me for lunch.”

And this Voice is like, YO! PETE!"

And Pete’s like, “Huh? Wuzzat?”

And this thing like a sheet comes down (I sheet you not!) and the Voice is like, “You know I don’t want you to eat cuddly little critters, but when you don’t eat cuddly little critters, you can not eat these cuddly little critters, too.”

And Pete’s like, “Whoa! Them’s creepy-crawlies! I don’t not eat no creepy-crawlies!”

And the Voice says, “I said you can not eat these critters!”

And Pete’s like, “Ow! Leggo my ear!”

And when we got to Cornelius’ digs, he says he knows we can’t not eat with Gentiles, but Pete says, “I can not eat anything you don’t eat.”

And Cornelius is like, “You da Man, Pete! What happened to your ear?”

I hope this clears it up for you.

 

[tcay584]

mosher:

The point is this - All dogs do not go to heaven in fact no animal does.

Phooey on you, you great big meanie. :tsktsk:
If no animals go to heaven…boy, do I ever wish I was a vegetable!

 

[tom.wineman]

There are countries that are so desperately hungry that they don’t care were their food comes from or how it was killed. Just that they have something to eat is good enough.

 

[vern_humphrey]

tcay584:

Phooey on you, you great big meanie. :tsktsk:
If no animals go to heaven…boy, do I ever wish I was a vegetable!

Be careful what you wish for . . .