Animal propaganda

For years it seems we have been led to believe that animals are dumb, not intelligent and therefore food. Please do not misunderstand me. I am no vegetarian but I am not cruel either. If the meat I was eating was not killed fast, cleanly and humanly, I would not buy it and would not eat it. If I had no choice and it became apparent that no meat was processed this way I would become a vegetarian.
If it has hands, I won’t eat it. If it is a dolphin, whale, endangered shark or fish I won’t eat it. It is as if by giving all diverse species on earth other than ourselves the name “animal” we desensitize ourselves and alleviate the guilt of killing them and eating them.

A slow torture before being flayed alive somehow fails to register on even the brightest minds because if it is in the market, it must be processed properly. I urge everyone to be aware of where your meat comes from and how it is processed from the kill floor to the table. I would also like to point out that just because something is an animal, does not mean it does not feel or deserve the best we can give them in life or death. The plight of the moon bears breaks my heart as does that of the dolphins in the secretive cove of Taiji in Japan.

It’s true we can be cruel to each other but at times we are compassionate, loving, caring and nurturing. We have the capacity to give, be generous and kind for no other reason that to be good to one another or to lend a helping hand. Let’s extend those qualities to every species we share this planet with and make a point of really changing the dreadful situation many animals are forced to endure out of nothing more than ignorance. For really, once you remove the money factor in these situations, the need or market will fade away.

Lets stop supporting Sea World’s that support the live capture of dolphins. Email the IWC (International Whaling Committee) to find out why they do not include dolphins, porpoises and pilot whales in the commercial whaling ban. The IWC exists for regulating the hunt for Inuit’s and native people whose lives revolve around whaling. Yes, I also understand the need for research but fail to see why killing more than a few selected subjects is necessary and this should also be banned. Stop buying bile that has no therapeutic or medicinal value and perhaps even less spiritual value from the vampiric way it was obtained. Don’t go to the circus that whips the baby bear because it doesn’t want to walk a tightrope in a tutu.

Do away with Zoos and let’s create large natural sanctuaries and protected wildlife parks where different species can still be protected with a semblance of living free. Buy organic free range produce and meat, it will cost more but if the majority of the consumer supports it, it will force the feed lots to change. Slap perpetrators with fines so expensive that they will no longer continue such barbaric practices. If most of the world who finds such practice distasteful cannot stop the few countries still engaging in such practice, then it is we who are the animals.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Wait, I'm super confused. What are you suggesting we eat then?

What is your view on cannibalism?

I don't think doing away with zoos is wise. I personally wouldn't want to walk to the mailbox with the fear of having a tiger kill me. Also wouldn't putting them in a "large" sanctuary just really be another form of a zoo. They're still confined to a restrictive wall vs a whole country they can roam in.

reply to post by MollyStewart


good perspective and an awesome post, i feel the same way you do, unnecessary cruelty to the creatures of the earth has to stop, im not vegetarian either but its hard to track meat you get from a butcher or supermarket to its source and find out how the animals were treated before you decide to buy it, unfortunately the world somewhat thinks its okay to eat whatever we want and assume the source was treated well, if only we know.

Sea world and other such businesses should be shut down, their just water curcuses and no one knows how the animals have been treated to act on cue, animal trainers can be cruel. open range zoo's are better then normal zoo's. I know i wouldent like to be wild but have the restricitons of a cage either.

S+F for you.

Wait, I'm super confused. What are you suggesting we eat then? What is your view on cannibalism? I don't think doing away with zoos is wise. I personally wouldn't want to walk to the mailbox with the fear of having a tiger kill me. Also wouldn't putting them in a "large" sanctuary just really be another form of a zoo. They're still confined to a restrictive wall vs a whole country they can roam in.

reply to post by Absco


I am suggesting that if we are going to eat meat, at least be aware of where it is coming from. Is it coming from a filthy cramped feedlot where the animal never sees the light of day and cannot even turn around in it's cage? If so, and you are happy with treating an animal like that before consuming it, then you and I think differently, my friend. I am not suggesting that you cut meat out of your diet, i am simply saying that even animals that are bred for consumption deserve as good a life we can provide while they live. I am not sure what my view on cannibalism has to do with this topic on the treatment animals and how it pertains to the thread?
Yes, a large wildlife park is perhaps another word for a bigger zoo but I was thinking more along the lines of providing the animals much larger natural habitats with room to grow, have their own fenced off territories and continue breeding programs around the worlds for endangered animals in conservancies.
As for going to the mailbox for fear of a tiger killing you, you must hate swimming in the ocean for fear of sharks.

reply to post by camouflaged


Thanks for your response, I appreciate it. My first post on this site and i wanted it to be something important to me in the hopes that others feel the same way.

reply to post by MollyStewart


Great first post. I am a meat eater but there's not a day that goes by where I don't feel guilty because I know that some poor intelligent creature has SUFFERED for what went on my plate. We all think the gas chambers and death camps are the worst things a person or people can endure but animals continue to suffer the same things, only worse.

It's a cognitive dissonance thing. Like knowing cigarettes are bad but reaching for another one.

My daughter was taught at school the other day about the first dog in space, Laika. She was told she came back to earth happy and healthy, (or my daughter doesn't listen properly).

So, I came across Laika's story on the BBC site yesterday. The Russians had lied for years and years about her death. It was thought she died painlessly after a week in space but in 2002 it came out that Laika died from overheating and panic just a few hours after she was blasted off into the sky. She then orbited the earth more than 2500 times in her "coffin", and was then cremated by re-entering the earth's atmosphere. I couldn't sleep last night thinking about that poor wee thing that was taken off the streets of Moscow as a stray probably thinking "great, someone wants me".

One sad story out of millions and millions and millions. Too much for a head to bear. I'll stick with my dissonance because a head couldn't take all that.

OP, you're right. Calling them animals is wrong. Personally, I think we should start calling anything not human that has a heartbeat, Food.

reply to post by DerbyCityLights


It's okay to call them food. The OP isn't about trying to convert everyone away from using animals as resources for human needs. But this thread is reminding us there are ways of using animals that are more humane and respectful of life than those most often practiced. The OP was very respectful in tone and I hope the feedback on this thread can be the same. Your post would be more appropriate in its tone to a post that said "Non vegans suck! Eat tofu or die, scumbags!" and goodness knows I've heard enough of that sort of message. That's why I clicked on this thread with some trepidation but was very pleasantly surprised at how thoughtfully worded it was.

Originally posted by SheeplFlavoredAgain
reply to post by DerbyCityLights

 

It's okay to call them food. The OP isn't about trying to convert everyone away from using animals as resources for human needs.(snip)

Are you sure about that?

Lets stop supporting Sea World’s that support the live capture of dolphins. Email the IWC (International Whaling Committee) to find out why they do not include dolphins, porpoises and pilot whales in the commercial whaling ban. The IWC exists for regulating the hunt for Inuit’s and native people whose lives revolve around whaling. Yes, I also understand the need for research but fail to see why killing more than a few selected subjects is necessary and this should also be banned. Stop buying bile that has no therapeutic or medicinal value and perhaps even less spiritual value from the vampiric way it was obtained. Don’t go to the circus that whips the baby bear because it doesn’t want to walk a tightrope in a tutu.

reply to post by DerbyCityLights

I'm not sure where your initial comment and that part of the post that you highlighted relate.
but then again my mind always stops working properly when I think of bears in tutus. Anyway I didn't see anything in the highlighted section that screamed out against all use of all animals as resources. I think it is pretty clear in advocating thoughtful selective and humane animal management and treatment of wildlife.

Are you sure about that?

reply to post by DerbyCityLights


Yep, I am sure. I even advocate the use of farmed animals in the post provided they live their lives as well as can be provided them. I do not advocate the slaughter of hundreds of dolphins per day for months on end simply so a few can be sent to Sea worlds and Marine Parks. They only keep the ones they sell. I do not advocate whaling other than for indigenous people's who only take what they need to survive. Not purchasing bile from a bear does in no way equate to not using animals as a resource. It simply means that bile from bears is not a resource and simply a cruel practice on a species for some fictitious want to create a market rather than a need.

Cheers

I think it is pretty clear in advocating thoughtful selective and humane animal management and treatment of wildlife.

reply to post by SheeplFlavoredAgain


Thank you, that was my intention

cheers

Originally posted by MollyStewart

Are you sure about that?

reply to post by DerbyCityLights

 

Yep, I am sure. I even advocate the use of farmed animals in the post provided they live their lives as well as can be provided them. I do not advocate the slaughter of hundreds of dolphins per day for months on end simply so a few can be sent to Sea worlds and Marine Parks. They only keep the ones they sell. I do not advocate whaling other than for indigenous people's who only take what they need to survive. Not purchasing bile from a bear does in no way equate to not using animals as a resource. It simply means that bile from bears is not a resource and simply a cruel practice on a species for some fictitious want to create a market rather than a need.

Cheers

I think the problem you have with understanding the meaning of my post is your own understanding of cultural taboo's. Different cultures view resource gathering techniques differently. What one culture views as a part of their life, other cultures may view the same technique with disdain. I don't believe in mindless dolphin slaughtering either and I'm pretty sure you will be hard pressed to find many that do, but other cultures do engage in some of these practices and that bothers you (and many others).

But the fact is, you ARE trying to sway opinions just as I said. You do not hold the same views as some of the other world cultures on these resources and you are trying to bring your views to light in an attempt to possibly help others understand your point of view. I wasn't knocking you, just simply stating a fact that someone else was wrong about.

I think I can pretty much sum up your thoughts in one sentence. Unnecessary slaughter of any animal should not be considered morally right.

While the op has made several points on the food we eat, namely the meat that we consume and about the zoo’s there are a few things that can be stated:

While as noble as it may seem to stop eating meat, and go all vegetarian, the problem is that the animals we now consume, well they just really do not occur normally in nature. That is to say, if you go out in the wild, you will not see herds of wild cattle running around grazing. Nor will one see the pigs, or the chickens or some of the fish, or even many of the household pets, such as dogs, cats and rabbits. Much of the meat we consume and the household pets have been part of an age old eugenics program that man has been doing for years, since the dawn of time. Cows are bred to produce milk and meat, with different species having a purpose. They have some remnants of their ancestors in them, but in short, they would not survive long without the assistance of man, most would die off without man being there to care, feed, vaccinate and breed.

While zoo’s may seem to be a horrible place, at the same time, what is not shown or known to the general public, is to get rid of the zoo’s then the number of animals that enrich our world would be far fewer, than there is now. Zoo’s have a purpose, while it may seem cruel to keep these wild animals caged up, they do serve to teach and to preserve the animals for future generations. Many zoos participate in a program that allow for them to breed and release some of the more endangered species back into the wild, such as the cheetah, the California Condor, and in some cases, such as the wild dog of Africa, preserve an entire species from extinction that would occur naturally in the wild. Think carefully on what you wish for, cause one day those very institutions that one would think is cruel and gone, would also take with it a percentage of the animals that it displays from both what is in the city and outside in the wild.

Zoos keep databases on all of the animals that it has in captivity, to include the parents of such, to prevent inbreeding, and to try to increase the genetic diversity of those endangered species. Aquariums are falling into that category, as many of the aquatic species are falling into being endangered. Ask yourself this, what is the far greater evil, keeping an animal in captivity where all can marvel at it, while it is out of its natural habitat, or for the last one to die with no one knowing about it?

reply to post by sdcigarpig


I think you are enhancing her point. She doesn't seem to me so much want to completely end animal resource management, she wants to see it vastly improved. You make an excellent point about the good that zoos can do, but as that other thread about the cigarette smoking orangutan illustrates, we have ample room for improvement and need for change. It may mean a reach across cultures to build a consensus on what ultimately best serves the animals and the ecosystem at large.

OP, you're right. Calling them animals is wrong. Personally, I think we should start calling anything not human that has a heartbeat, Food.

reply to post by DerbyCityLights


That it is pretty clear, I understand that just fine and absolutely do not agree.

I think the problem you have with understanding the meaning of my post is your own understanding of cultural taboo's. Different cultures view resource gathering techniques differently. What one culture views as a part of their life, other cultures may view the same technique with disdain.

I understood your post and cultural differences well enough my friend and I can assure you, whether you agree or not that slaughtering animals you do not need for the sake of a 100k each for the handful you keep has little to do with being a resource and everything to do with greed. Farming the bile of a species kept in cramped quarters has nothing to do with tradition when modern science proves there is no medicinal value and the only benefit of the practice is so the traders can make vast sums of money from the people who are mislead by the advertising claims of the people pushing the "product".
You are correct, I did indeed write an opinion piece on the treatment of animals with the intention of perhaps moving others to at least be more aware of the plight some species face at our hands.

Cheers