TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Foie Gras
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Lews No. I understanding wanting to eat animals. But it's very easy to make the meat industry somewhat-not-completely-terrible. While I think Factory Farms are terrible, there are a lot of free range/cruelty-free/humane/blah-blah-etc farms and products out there where you can be somewhat sure that the animal didn't have a terrible life and was slaughtered humanely before being turned into a delicious meal. However, Veal and Foie Gras pretty much necessitate terrible living conditions (Veal) and torture (Foie Gras) before being turned into said delicious meal.

See, you've been spoon-fed this perception. Have you done any research yourself? Or have you just heard time and time again from the media about torture in foie gras farms? Read the article I posted. I found it to be very informative. Most relevant to this point was this - in the US there are only a handful of foie gras farms (hudson valley being perhaps the most well known). they have all come under heavy scrutiny from various media sources and weathered the storms with ease, as there's nothing truly 'inhumane' that takes place - and certainly not in comparison to the sort of farming that takes place all through middle america.

As for the torture aspect: the geese are not humans. I'm not saying this to suggest they don't feel pain - simply that they are not pained from the same things we are. They do not react the same way as we would to having a tube in mouth to feed from. They do not react the same way we would to overeating (in fact the are used to it, as they must prepare for potentially harsh winters by gorging).

This helped to change my perception as well (and I believe a standard has been set for foie gras establishments in more ethics-conscious places like the US):

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights See, you've been spoon-fed this perception. Have you done any research yourself? Or have you just heard time and time again from the media about torture in foie gras farms? Read the article I posted. I found it to be very informative. Most relevant to this point was this - in the US there are only a handful of foie gras farms (hudson valley being perhaps the most well known). they have all come under heavy scrutiny from various media sources and weathered the storms with ease, as there's nothing truly 'inhumane' that takes place - and certainly not in comparison to the sort of farming that takes place all through middle america. As for the torture aspect: the geese are not humans. I'm not saying this to suggest they don't feel pain - simply that they are not pained from the same things we are. They do not react the same way as we would to having a tube in mouth to feed from. They do not react the same way we would to overeating (in fact the are used to it, as they must prepare for potentially harsh winters by gorging).

Geese or ducks' natural gorging before winter does not equate to having a tube shoved down their throat and being pumped full of corn meal.

Inserting a feeding tube in a human isn't torture either, but if you're pumping them with a vastly larger amount of food than they need or than they would normally eat, causing their liver to swell to far beyond its normal size, this is not "okay."

Again, if the ducks are used to it, and if they "enjoy" being overfed, then why do the farmers have to hold them by their throats while shoving the feeding tube down their throat? Do you think it's a normal practice for a duck to eat so much that the food is literally spilling all the way up their throats and out of their mouth? To say that "they're used to it" is completely and utterly absurd.

If the practice was continued for much longer than the 15 days that they normally proceed with the gavage period, the animals would almost certainly die of liver failure. There's nothing normal at all about what they do to those animals on those farms.

Disgusting, and as always, pictures speak much louder than words.

Force feeding.

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights See, you've been spoon-fed this perception. Have you done any research yourself? Or have you just heard time and time again from the media about torture in foie gras farms? Read the article I posted. I found it to be very informative. Most relevant to this point was this - in the US there are only a handful of foie gras farms (hudson valley being perhaps the most well known). they have all come under heavy scrutiny from various media sources and weathered the storms with ease, as there's nothing truly 'inhumane' that takes place - and certainly not in comparison to the sort of farming that takes place all through middle america. As for the torture aspect: the geese are not humans. I'm not saying this to suggest they don't feel pain - simply that they are not pained from the same things we are. They do not react the same way as we would to having a tube in mouth to feed from. They do not react the same way we would to overeating (in fact the are used to it, as they must prepare for potentially harsh winters by gorging). This helped to change my perception as well (and I believe a standard has been set for foie gras establishments in more ethics-conscious places like the US):

Thanks for telling me what I know and how I know it. I've definitely never done any research at all into any parts of the meat industry and completely rely on the media to tell me everything.

Justify it to yourself however you wish. I guess that answers my question.

I'm with Srussell on this one. Shit's pretty damn disturbing.

I personally don't see any moral difference between foie gras farms and any of the major meat industries in the world. Cattle, poultry, and fish raised in industrial farms are no less mistreated.

All this grass-fed/free range/local stuff personally means nothing to me in terms of animal rights - the only value is it just makes the animals taste better and have better nutritional content, not to mention preserves local economies, reduces the use of water and fossil fuels, and reduces the size of the pharmaceutical industry.

I think veganism is the only legitimate moral stance against human consumption of animals in any way, if you're going to take that stance. In the end i don't think it matters how 'happy' one believes an animal is if the plan is just to cut off its head and eat it.

Personally I am am a lifelong omnivore and lover of food. But I have basically become vegetarian since my girlfriend was a raw foodie and still is vegetarian, and a lot of my friends are vegan. I will only occasionally eat meat if it's really good food.

After I began reading and learning more about the food industry, I no longer can stomach a lot of processed foods, especially meats - foie gras disgusts me personally - I've never really been into organs.


also

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk I'm with Srussell on this one. Shit's pretty damn disturbing.

lol Stu...we all knew which side you'd be on

i can't be the only one here against the banning of foie gras. even if you find it reprehensible, some of you must have some sort of american sense of privilege about you! i feel like this is one issue jay and i could agree on. where he at?? (tho i'm sure a comment from him would agree with me and ridicule me at the same time, so perhaps it's better of like this for now...)

until this thread, i had no idea what foie gras was.

doesnt look or sound particularly tasty either...

oh yeah, ducks are rapists.

that is all.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec All this grass-fed/free range/local stuff personally means nothing to me in terms of animal rights - the only value is it just makes the animals taste better and have better nutritional content, not to mention preserves local economies, reduces the use of water and fossil fuels, and reduces the size of the pharmaceutical industry.

You do realize that the term free range refers to farms in which the animals roam freely, and are not "factory farmed" in pens, as most commercial cattle or poultry farms do? So no, the only value is not just to make them taste better and have better nutritional content. Your entire statement is just completely incorrect.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 You do realize that the term free range refers to farms in which the animals roam freely, and are not "factory farmed" in pens, as most commercial cattle or poultry farms do? So no, the only value is not just to make them taste better and have better nutritional content. Your entire statement is just completely incorrect.

Actually, the term "free range" can be pretty misleading in a lot of cases. Not all cases, of course, but certainly quite a few.

It varies, from country to country, and state to state, what can actually be legally called "free range".

Consider it similar to how the word "organic" is thrown around. It doesn't always mean what you think it should.

@srussel, ^^ you're arguing over what the term free range means to nef

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec

So you see no difference between a life of pain and cruelty that ends in a terrible death and an animal that lives a decent life of being outside, having room to move around, eating good feed, etc., that ends in a quick and relatively painless death?

Seems like a rather black and white way of looking at things.

quote:

Originally posted by Lews So you see no difference between a life of pain and cruelty that ends in a terrible death and an animal that lives a decent life of being outside, having room to move around, eating good feed, etc., that ends in a quick and relatively painless death? Seems like a rather black and white way of looking at things.

i think you inadvertently demonstrated nefs point here (something i believe as well). she doesn't see the difference between the slaughter of one animal in poor conditions and the slaughter of a different animal in slightly poorer conditions. That would be 'gray' whereas you've called upon this arbitrary notion of what a terrible life means for animals (anthropomorphizing them, to a point), effectively setting it as a 'black and white' issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Lews Seems like a rather black and white way of looking at things.

You've always got to bring up the race issue, don't you?

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights he

You gonna get yo ass bitch slapped, son.

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk You gonna get yo ass bitch slapped, son.

wut?

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights wut?

Nice edit

quote:

Originally posted by LAdazeNYnights i think you inadvertently demonstrated nefs point here (something i believe as well). she doesn't see the difference between the slaughter of one animal in poor conditions and the slaughter of a different animal in slightly poorer conditions. That would be 'gray' whereas you've called upon this arbitrary notion of what a terrible life means for animals (anthropomorphizing them, to a point), effectively setting it as a 'black and white' issue.

^ this.

srussell, believe me, I know what free range means.

if you raise an animal to kill it and eat it, what value is its life to you whether it's been running around in some pasture or stuck in a pen wing to wing?



Srussell - what do you think of free range cat? Would you eat a free range cat?

Cats are obligate carnivores, therefore their meat is rather stringy. Same goes for dogs, spotted owl, and bald eagles - they all taste pretty bad.

The stress of poor or even torturous conditions tends to tighten the meat, allowing for deposits of fat rather than the desirable marbling. This is a tragedy.

I have a very modest proposal for all of you...

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On I have a very modest proposal for all of you...

lay it on us, baby

I only wish to prevent the innocent animals of Ireland from being a burden of guilt on their keepers, and for making them beneficial to the publick.

quote:

Originally posted by nefardec Srussell - what do you think of free range cat? Would you eat a free range cat?

Sure, why not?

quote:

Originally posted by Vector A http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=452563

Oh right, that thread is why I have thought Fledz is a fucking idiot for years.

'humane'

i think if you raise cattle to eat you should make sure their treatment is bovane.

Or we could just let them all run free and hunt them in the wild like we did with the American Bison. That worked well.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.