Hurting animals for cultural/religious reasons

[manic_depressive13]

Baby steps :L
Animals will die and they will be eaten for their meat, you shouldn't get all high and mighty against humans because we do it too, at least we try to kill the animals as "humanely" as possible. The general idea behind humane is quick and painless, again I have to go back to the "well back in the wild" piece of reasoning. Animals hunt each other all the time; and generally through more violent means such as biting the victim to death. I don't see you screaming at a lion for murdering all the gazelle so don't get all angry at humans.

I don't scream at people either.

Anyway, if reason and morality are what separates us from the beasts, reason and morality should dictate how we treat them. Animals are unable to appreciate the harmful consequences of their actions because animals are stupid. You want to reduce yourself to their level? Be my guest. At least I've never encountered a lion who was under the illusion that his actions were ethically justifiable.

 

[Iron Criterion]

Discussions of animals rights among those who eat meat are just stupid pissing contests. It's unnecessary to slaughter animals and to cut short the life of a healthy animal, however "humanely", is cruel. People here need to take a good hard look at themselves before pointing fingers at third world countries and shouting "savages".

Baby steps :L
Animals will die and they will be eaten for their meat, you shouldn't get all high and mighty against humans because we do it too, at least we try to kill the animals as "humanely" as possible. The general idea behind humane is quick and painless, again I have to go back to the "well back in the wild" piece of reasoning. Animals hunt each other all the time; and generally through more violent means such as biting the victim to death. I don't see you screaming at a lion for murdering all the gazelle so don't get all angry at humans.

I think what disturbs me the most is the whole 'meat parade', how we parade our kills around on TV, saying how tasty it is.

One day we will be judged.

 

[the_dude_abides]

First world citizens complaining about halal/kosher slaughter makes me laugh. In the grand scheme of things, I can guarantee you slitting a cows throat with a sharp blade is NOT what we should be most concerned about.

If you're really concerned about this, go work at any random abattoir in Britain. Some workers just didn't give a fuck about animal welfare after killing a couple dozen every day for a few years. I saw some pretty awful things and I left the profession pretty sharpish as a result.

But hey lets bury our heads in the sand and pretend halal/kosher is the real problem. Cheers!

 

[aba1]

I'm not sure if this counts as a cultural reasons however, the traditional Asian "herbal" medicine trade seems a bit on the inhumane side if you ask me.

There are a couple of practices that I do find rather inhumane, the most wasteful and inhumane that I find is shark finning.

Take 1 shark. Pull it out of the ocean. Lop off its fins and throw it back into the ocean. I've had shark fin soup before and really, the fin itself tastes of nothing. I would rather have my shark fin replaced with glass noodles than have this practice continue.

To be fair it is illegal for them to do this unless this use the whole shark some just do it anyways. The practice is awful though.

 

[Keoul]

That's bad reasoning. Humans are capable of simply not doing it. A lion wouldn't understand at all, humans do. "Back in the wild" is a bad excuse anyway, it doesn't make something right. Unless you're all for murder, incest, rape, cannibalism, and that kind of thing, you really can't use that excuse and be consistent.

The only reasons humans are "capable of simply not doing it" is due to advances in technology. Without meat we'll be severely malnourished, and most likely die from illness. The only reason vegans and vegetarians even last the first few months is from supplements or help from dietitians.

The "back in the wild" argument is that eating meat is a natural process of life, we're omnivores, we eat meat. There's the option to eat plants but simply because "no animals were hurt in the making" doesn't make it the correct diet to take.

 

[Keoul]

snip

Your whole argument is based on the fact that eating meat is(allegedly) wrong, and because we can survive without meat then we should.

Why? if we can survive only on plants why can't we survive on animals as well? Not only is it a much better supply of nutrients but we're keeping their population down, cows don't spawn in from the ether, the fact that there is that much meat available is proof to how many animals are being born.

Infact scientifically speaking, the fact that omnivores and carnivores even exist show that diets that involve meat is more beneficial, or else why would creatures even evolve into that kind of diet?

 

[Keoul]

Anyway, if reason and morality are what separates us from the beasts, reason and morality should dictate how we treat them. Animals are unable to appreciate the harmful consequences of their actions because animals are stupid. You want to reduce yourself to their level? Be my guest. At least I've never encountered a lion who was under the illusion that his actions were ethically justifiable.

morality varies between people your morality is just as correct as mine, give a better reason since so far you've given none besides "it's cruel". Things die, it's inevitable, either the cow dies slowly wasting it's life just digesting grass or it dies a little sooner and gets turned into meat for humans to eat.

If the cow had a "humane" death then it wouldn't even realize it had died. Either way whether we eat meat or not they're going to die we're just doing it sooner and re-using the corpse.

But here's a morality question for you. If we only ate meat that came from animals that died from old age would you still condone all meat eaters?

 

[Imthatguy]

I for one celebrate the killing of animals and humans for religious reasons. How else am I supposed to open the gate to Yog-Shothoth?

 

[Kolby Jack]

Eh, I don't really care how animals feel. Granted, if causing an animal suffering gives you some sort of joy, you're officially fucked up in the head, but if killing an animal for food or cultural/religious reasons I'm fine with it. As someone who eats meat regularaly, I'd be a hypocrite to say otherwise.

 

[Keoul]

No. I am making counterarguments because your arguments are absolute garbage. I never said eating meat was wrong, I noticed that you had some really bad arguments.

So you have no part in this discussion and just came on to correct me? how am I suppose to react to this? thank you for correcting me?

Prove it is better.
And this seems to go along with your utter lack of consideration before you speak, but their population is increased artificially because we breed them to eat them. So that argument is utter garbage.

You think their population wouldn't boom if we didn't kill them? Animals live to survive and repopulate that's about it. Without us killing so many of them of course there would be a population boom, and a massive one at that. Sure they do have predators but they wouldn't kill to such an extent.
Hey look a government website this will be fun

Spoiler

[link]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21872435[/link]

It's an experiment that showed how people who take a vegetarian diet have less protein and are more susceptible to cardiovascular diseases.

Argument from ignorance much? Science doesn't work with your utter lack of imagination. Here's a really obvious one that you should have been able to think of: In the past there was more scarcity, being able to eat a variety was more useful to survival. Doesn't mean eating meat is better.

Scarcity? so you're saying carnivores and omnivores were made from necessity, if we go back now wouldn't there just be a severe lack of plant life on the planet? your argument makes no sense, it would fix one problem only to make 10 more.
You can see how humans have caused fish to shrink due to over fishing, you think that wouldn't happen with plants? I doubt there's enough sustainable plants for us to consume. The huge variety of animals have a plethora of plants they can digest (e.g. koalas can eat eucalyptus) but we can't. We're in a food crisis right now WITH meat in our diets and now you want to take it away and still believe we can survive?
Also what's with the aggressiveness jeez...

 

[Kpt._Rob]

Much as the lion is associated with the Sun (the mother and bringer of life) in primary religions, the bull [because of its horns, reminiscent of the crescent] is associated with the moon (the symbol of cyclical death and re-birth). When the cow is slaughtered it is so that it might be given unto new life. This sacrifice made by the Brahmins unto the Gods represents recognition of the dilemma we all face, that of our inevitable death. While I personally would not sacrifice an animal, I will say that if such an act is psychologically beneficial to the people, in that it helps them deal with the contemplation of their mortality, then I don't think it's immoral.

 

[Keoul]

My only part is you're using bullshit arguments.

Well thank you, could of done it more nicely but whatever.

Maybe you don't know this, but they're in something we call captivity. We can p r e v e n t them from breeding.

How can you prevent them from breeding without harming them? This WHOLE discussion was about how killing them was inhumane, castrating would be just as bad.

Yes and where's the part that says this is something that can't be corrected as opposed to just bad practice on the part of many vegetarians?

It can be corrected, but I just proved why a normal diet was better. You have a lower chance of cardiovascular diseases and you don't have to trouble yourself with supplements therefore not only is it healthier but cheaper as well.

No, there wouldn't be a severe lack of plant life on the planet. Also, do you know what an argument from ignorance is? Because you have yet to correct that bullshit argument you gave me.

Why wouldn't there be? show some facts and figures, you can't just say how my arguments are all bullshit and just make these random claims yourself

Oh look at that, it's our friend the argument from ignorance back again! That's not a valid argument, why don't you use logic instead of bullshit next time?

Really? just really? wow, I just gave you a real scenario where humans have ate so much meat that animals have suffered, and now you're saying if we went off meat the same thing wouldn't happen but with plants? REALLY?

We're not in a food crisis in first world nations.

Yeah YOU'RE probably not in a crisis since YOU have such a wide variety of food, INCLUDING MEAT. Other nations seem to be having a pretty shitty time with a decent food supply and you couldn't give more of a shit but when animals are killed you're all up in arms? get your priorities straight.

You're not even thinking before you post.

And you're doing much better? all you do is continuously call me ignorant, maybe if you actually outlined why everything I say is wrong then I'd listen, all you're doing is pointlessly insulting me, or have you not noticed your reasoning has no backing and is just as shitty if not more so than mine?

 

[Cyberjester]

We don't even protect babies from having bits of them permanently cut off for religious and cultural purposes, it'd seem to me that looking at how poorly it can lead to animals being treated is jumping the gun (although I entirely agree with you).

I'm not very familiar with the subject, but how are the animals killed inhumanely?

Slitting a cows throat isn't inhumane, inhumane is chopping off it's legs and eviscerating it while it's still alive.

Hell, they might do that, in which case, correct me. Like I said, I'm not knowledgeable on the subject.

What you described is called, "being an arse hole", it doesn't render a still-slow process a humane one.

I love animals and I hate to see senseless violence done to them. But say a farmer in a 3rd world country needs to kill one of his life stock for food. I'm sure he probably doesn't have a lot of extra money to throw around to buy a gun or that shock thing. The easiest and cheapest solution is to cut the throat. If it's like a big business then yeah they should invest in something that kills fast and effectively.

If it's for a religious reason I don't think I should have a say in it unless I know and understand how that religion works. To each his own is how I look at things.

My point was simply that one being worse doesn't make the other any better. The thread is about cultural and religious reasons, not farming. 3rd world farming is a different topic.

'If it's for a religious reason I don't think I should have a say in it unless I know and understand how that religion works.'

Why does that matter? If they're treating animals cruelly they're treating animals cruelly, doesn't matter what reason they give.

I meant that I don't think I had the right to judge and say "what you're doing is terrible" unless I know why the are doing it. Let's say some religion says that an animal has to be sacrificed at the end of a wedding. (I don't know if this is true for any religion but just using a scenario) Now to an outsider it would probably been seen as inhumane and wrong. But if you haven't grown up in that religion you wouldn't understand why it has to be done. If you were part of it tho you would understand that it's something that has to be done because of culture/religious reasons. I'm not saying you have to like it or agree with it but I think it's always best to research and see why they might sacrifice animals and how long it has been going on.

To me something is inhumane if it is pain/killing that servers no purpose. If someone pushes a cow into a lake to watch it drown it's inhumane. If it is killed during a celebration or other religious/cultural thing then it's killing served a purpose.

I fully agree, and as a faux Aztec descendent, I need your heart to ensure the sun will rise tomorrow. Now stay still...

 

[Lieju]

I don't think 'it's religion' is a sufficient excuse for doing anything. Or in the case of something like bullfighting, 'it's tradition'.

Mistreating an animal for religious purposes is equally wrong as mistreating them for fun or tourism or something.

You think their population wouldn't boom if we didn't kill them? Animals live to survive and repopulate that's about it. Without us killing so many of them of course there would be a population boom, and a massive one at that. Sure they do have predators but they wouldn't kill to such an extent.

Yes, if we don't eat all the cows they will take over the world.

Scarcity? so you're saying carnivores and omnivores were made from necessity, if we go back now wouldn't there just be a severe lack of plant life on the planet? your argument makes no sense, it would fix one problem only to make 10 more.
You can see how humans have caused fish to shrink due to over fishing, you think that wouldn't happen with plants? I doubt there's enough sustainable plants for us to consume.

What do you think the cows and other animals eat?
You need much more plants to feed the amount of animals it takes to feed the people than just having those people directly eat the plant life.

 

[saluraropicrusa]

I'm not against the death of an animal for cultural or religious reasons if it's not made to suffer pointlessly beforehand, and if it's a domestic animal or one that isn't critically endangered. What I have a problem with is when an animal is killed for completely avoidable or pointless reasons (defense of livestock that can be achieved non-lethally, such as with the use of dogs against cheetahs, poaching for a single resource, such as shark finning, or hunting purely for sport where the meat isn't eaten and the only point is a trophy).

I don't view an animal having its throat slit as being cruel. It may take longer to die, but in the end it's dead before it's used as food. That's arguably more humane than the way some predators will literally start eating their prey alive because they can't risk waiting for it to die, lest another predator come and steal their kill (this has been observed happening with hyenas, but it's likely something other predators do as well). Hell, some snakes will swallow their prey alive even if they can kill it (constrictors may do this if the prey isn't big or strong enough to pose a threat, and some frog-eaters will swallow frogs alive). Nature is rarely humane. I don't feel bad unless I'm aware the animal was treated badly while it was alive. That's unfortunately sometimes the case, but it's not always possible to choose organic meat due to price.

 

[Dwarfman]

... Is it fair to slam another culture because it does not align with animal rights (at least in Australia there is great concern about animal rights - the entire cattle trade to India was stopped last year temporarily because of it, but I'm not sure about much of the rest of the world.

If it's what they do in there country then no it isn't fair to slam another culture for what they do. At least not until you've done some research in the matter.

Some places just don't have the capabilities or technology to slaughter a beast in what we in the 1st world call humane. Sorry to say but I value human life over an animal's if someone is starving and the only two things around are a baby sheep and a rock, poor baby Lambert is going to find out how practical a human with a rock can be.

As for religious culture I was unaware of ritual sacrifices still taking place - at least among the dominant religions - not counting that one strange ritual in Spain where a village throws a goat off the church steeple...yeah I never quite got that either. Once again though, if it's in THEIR country and part of THEIR culture, then we looking in have no right whatsoever to judge them.

The thing with the embargo on trade to Indonesia - sorry dude the embargo was on Indonesia - Is that the abottoirs have the capabilities to ensure the live cattle are slaughtered quickly and humanly. They weren't. The workers were in fact practically torturing the poor beasts as they were slaughtered and taking home movies and happy snaps. This is clearly unacceptable and worthy of not just your rage, but everybody elses.