From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: meat eaters (was: Re: Gun Control Petition)
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:09:36 GMT

g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:

>In article <schuck.724456188@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:

>>g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:

>>>[trying to move this thread to talk.politics.animals, again.]
>>I don't read that group, and I like to my responses show up and
>>respond to them.
>If that group is available at your site and you want to debate this subject,
>perhaps you should subscribe to it.

I am debating it. If you want to debate it somewhere else go ahead.
But, I like my thread in can.general.


>>Murder? Killing an animal for food isn't murder when a human does it
>>any more than a cougar killing a deer to eat is murder.

>It's an analogy.  

A very bad analogy.

>>
>>Necrophilia? You have sex on the brain.
>>

>I didn't start the sex analogy, a previous poster did.

You must agree with it if you keep using it.

>>>Do you think someone who sets fire to dogs for fun is being unethical?
>>
>>If the dog is dead and the person plans to eat it, then the answer is no.
>>If it is killing for the sheer pleasure of killing and torturing for
>>the pure pleasure of torture, then yes.

>How about killing for the sheer pleasure of the taste of meat?  Why is it
>different?  Why does the pleasure some people derive from eating meat
>justify the killing of animals, when we agree that the pleasure some people
>derive from killing does not?

Predators probably enjoy the taste of a young healthy game animal more
than old diseased ones. Just because an animal enjoys one type of food
over another doesn't make it wrong.

Human beings *need* animal protein to stay healthy.
Early in life we get it from mothers milk or cow's milk.
Later in life we get it from meat or dairy products.

>>
>>>In my experience most people are opposed to cruelty to animals.  Vegetarianism
>>>is merely a logical extension of this.
>>
>>Is the SPCA cruel to animals when it 'puts to sleep' thousands of
>>animals each year? No.

>Debateable.  In the SPCA's case euthanasia may be considered to be the lesser
>of two evils, but that doesn't make it good.  Meat-eating is hardly analogous,
>since it is not the lesser of two evils, it is an unnecessary evil.

Unnecessary? Where do you think milk comes from? Where does yogurt
come from? Eggs?

>>
>>A sledgehammer blow to the head or a high speed bullet to the brain
>>causes little or no pain and is not cruelty.

>Do you think it would be acceptable to kill people if done humanely?

I've already made the point that killing for another reason than food
is not something I approve of. I don't plan on eating anyone, even if
it is done humanely. However, we do kill other humans for other
reasons than food: self-defence, war, abortion.

>>A truly *ethical* person who wanted to cause no cruelty -- by your
>>definition- would kill themselves and stop competing with animals for
>>food, air and living space.

>*No* cruelty is an impossible ideal, alas.  I am advocating eliminating as
>much cruelty as we can.

Suicide is an easily obtainable ideal.

What you are really saying is that avoiding cruely to animals is only
worth it when it doesn't inconvenience you *too* much.

I'm saying the same thing, but I'm not a hypocrite about it.


Xref: sparky can.general:5931 ns.general:102