Jim writes:
> Newkirk's argument seems to be that "since these animals are all
> going to die anyway, who cares whether they are killed and buried as
> opposed to being killed and consumed."  The argument also overlooks
> the fact that a significant proportion of animals being killed in
> Britain right now were NOT destined to be killed for food, for
> example sheep being raised for wool and also dairy cows.

I think the argument is consistent with vegetarianism, and the ethical
treatment of animals. I eat meat but I have also been a vegetarian. I would
not want someone putting me into a corral, feeding me with machines and then
shooting me in the head one day. I watched what they did to pigs in the
slaughter house once. I will never forget that. The pigs know that they are
being killed before they are killed, and they are frightened to point of
terrible shrieks. The whole slaughter business is absolutely awful to watch.
When the pig is killed ther blood goes into a drain ...and this blood is
collected as is everything else. The pig is barely killed and then within
two minutes the whole pig is dipped into very hot water so as to remove the
hair. What is amazing is that the live pigs get to hear and watch
this...before the too are shot in the head. The pigs all know that other
pigs are being killed.

I think if people really knew what happens when the food is being
'processed' that the position of PETA may not appear so unreasonable.

PETA is making extreme statements. We all do this. I made an extreme
statement the other day to my forester friends, and one of my clients who is
a forester for Slocan Forest Products Ltd:


I said I was serious:

"Wood should be banned from house construction"


Do you think that Slocan Forest Products foresters would be upset with my
statement?

Not necesssarily....but if I was Dr. David Suzuki and I was on the Nature of
Things and said this, then Slocan foresters would be upset with the
statement, but they should not be upset with me nor with Dr. Suzuki because
he can say what he likes. The only things that can truely upset people are
actions: like buying a home made from 'airstone' or 'enviroc' or 'celllock'
or 'tiltup systems' which are all superior building products to the wood
stick frame house.

I know that this statement will upset Chris Perley, but I don't care because
this is reality. Wood houses in some areas should be banned. They are a
death trap, especially considering that 5000 persons per year die in house
fires in the US. Laguna Beach California was wiped out by brush fires. The
only house left standing was made from light weight insulating concrete.
Wood stick frame houses are not hurricane proof, nor tornado proof, nor
termite proof, and they root very quickly in humid climates....

I think PETA is particluarly correct when they say that the animals are
mistreated by humans. For the most part cattle and chickens are enclosed
into feed lots and batteries. Some never see the sun, and the cattle that
are kept in feed lots have only one thing to stare at; there is no shade so
they don't look at the sky. They stare at the piles of shit everywhere. I
have seen these feed lots in Texas and Canada. There is nothing 'humane'
about this. PETA would not exist if the farmers were really being humane
with the cattle. Here in BC the cattle are wild for the most part. They live
in the forest from spring until fall. In the winter they stay in the field
and the cattle are fed hay. There is nothing inhumane about that. In fact
the rancher protects the cows from wolves and grizzly bears here (that is
another issue).

The rancher sells the live cattle to a buyer. There is nothing inhumane
here, except the branding, and castration I guess.

chao

john foster





>
> I'd have to agree with Steve here that the stand PETA is taking on
> this issue is very strange indeed.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> >
> >  All things considered, the lack of basic information here is
interesting. I
> >hope that Newkirk realizes that foot and mouth doesn't just attack live
> >stock intended for consumption, it also hits pets and such.
> >
> >Is it just me or is it strange that PETA continues to have any
credibility?
> >
> >Steven
> >
> >  . . .in the last days he lost his appetite
> >and fed only on vegetables. He soon acquired
> >the forlorn look that one sees in vegetarians.
> >His skin became covered with a thin moss,
> >similar to that which flourished on the
> >antique vest that he never took off,
> >and his breath exhaled the odor of a
> >sleeping animal.
> >                  Gabriel Garcia Marquez, 1967
> >                One Hundred Years of Solitude