Leave a comment

Comments 12

blingblingvegan October 14 2006, 13:08:41 UTC
thank you!

Reply


shne October 14 2006, 16:48:02 UTC
"The law and society may disagree with me on this, but regardless, I refuse to buy an animal. Period."

This isn't asked to antagonize you, but more for my own curiosity: what's your stance on buying an animal to raise as a pet? I'm not necessarily talking abt buying animals from breeders vs. petsmart...just in general.

Reply

squittycat October 15 2006, 04:02:52 UTC
Not taken as antagonism in the least. This is a real question about how I feel about real situations. :)

I personally wouldn't keep a pet, because I don't think it's my business to stick myself into an animal's life the way that people do with pets. If you must live with a pet, though, I think it's best to adopt from a shelter. There's a big difference between buying an pet from a pet store (pets = property), and adopting a pet from a shelter (pets = individuals in need of your care).

When you pay an animal shelter when adopting a pet, you are not paying to buy the animal; rather, you are helping the shelter cover the costs of caring for the animal while at the shelter.

Reply


anonymous October 14 2006, 19:07:41 UTC
The problem is that people are stupid and they are getting dumber by the minute. If the average US citizen knew where veal came from, they wouldn't eat it. If they saw a 'high tech' chicken coop they wouldn't eat chicken or eggs.

I am not a vegetarian but rather a 'free range' carnivore. I am willing to pay $3.00 per half-dozen for eggs from happy hens.

I think people need to be more conscious of the results of their actions. There is a balance between being a carnivore and being respectful of all life, even plants and trees. I don't think the answer is being a vegetarian but if I had to live with the animal cruelty that you mentioned, I would become one.

-v-

Reply


robarchangel October 15 2006, 01:51:48 UTC
hey brother- good post. i'm mostly with you ( ... )

Reply

squittycat October 15 2006, 04:13:34 UTC
The main issue for me isn't that animals get killed, either. Death happens. I don't think it's my place to decide how somebody else lives. My life is my life, your life is your life, and Porky Pig's life is Porky Pig's life. I think it's a terrible thing we do, killing animals for food, but I think it's a worse thing we do, raising them so that we can kill them for food, and a worse thing yet, breeding them so that we can raise them so that we can kill them for food. I'm with you, in that treating animals as property is a bigger problem than killing them for food. I personally don't think I could bring myself to kill a wild animal for food, because I'd like for the animal to live the life he or she would, were I not a part of the picture, but I agree more with your POV than that of the "vegetarian" who thinks it's OK to not eat meat, but still drink milk and eat eggs ( ... )

Reply

robarchangel October 15 2006, 04:52:05 UTC
agreed. for most of human experience, that idea (property) was limited to small items you could carry with you and use, and even then, it was often only when you were actually using it that you had legitimate claim to it. this was a very different time than this one and very different context from ours ( ... )

Reply

robarchangel October 15 2006, 04:53:58 UTC
one other thing i forgot that occurred to me. the idea of property as we understand it, of 'mine' and 'thine,' very likely has its roots precisely in the birth of agriculture and animal husbandry.

it might just be that we're talking about the same phenomena here, brother.

Reply


anonymous October 15 2006, 20:30:30 UTC
FYI, kosher cheese explicitly does not have rennet in it, that in fact being its defining attribute. The laws of kosherness prohibit mixing milk and meat, and rennet counts as meat, coming as it does from animal parts.

-- anonymous crzwdjk

Reply


Leave a comment

Up