Are you pro-slaughter? POLL

Druydess · 03-04-2012, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missy May

No, I was thinking more along the lines of that which shaped all the history, norms, laws, and culture of Europe and its expansion.... greece/rome/christianity. But it is defined in many different way...I was just defining it the way most ignorant naive hill billies w classical educations define it.

It was a phylosophical question. That is all. It tests the logic of "excess meat"...not meant to offend.

Good point Missy...good to know another has a bead on "Western" mores and society... and yes--- if you think eating your pets is acceptable-- human consumption really isn't that far off..

Druydess · 03-04-2012, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missy May

Well, forgive my ignorance, but attacking one's education is not a factual argument style I am familiar with. Implying I am hysterical, emotional and unable to present a "thought out argument" on the basis I posed a philosophical question is equally foreign to me...again, forgive my ignorance.... I am not accustome to engaging in conversations with such superior intellect.
At the extreme risk of embarrassing myself, as you put it, and showing my ignorance of history, I must say, industrialization, mechanization and mass transport changed things for the horse just a teeny tiny bit starting around the late 1800's in the US. Horses went from being very valuable methods of transport and work (which acted as an effective control of their breeding) to being mostly for pleasure. The very mechanized machinery that replaced them in the fields meant commodities were more abundant than ever - and cheap. Which meant, people could raise more horses! I realize this is an over-simplification, and probably never actually happened b/c I am so ignorant...but lets just throw the poor girl a crumb and say...yeah, it happened. Horses were then increasingly bred WILLY NILLY. That is what I have a problem with...completely preventable breeding of unwanted undesirable stock.
Yes, many cultures here and there ate horses. Mongols and icelanders being examples of cultures intimately involved w the horse...but they slaughtered out of what they deemed necessary and they practice(d) controlled breeding...and they could not purchase vast quantities of hay on the futures market or at the local feed store. So, today's horse slaughter in the US and like examples are not comparable - to the point, they are irrelevent.
Historically speaking on this very thread, I have not advocated NO slaughter, I have advocated contolled breeding by license or some other regulatory method. None of which would have any effect on the freedoms of responsible people wanting to breed sire "x" to dam "y" for a specific reason. It would not eliminate slaughter, it would reduce the number of horses that are unnecessarily slaughtered.
Demand is not an argument I find compelling. Heroin is one of the most stable commodities in the US, hence it is in demand. There is a huge demand for human transplant organs...should we not infringe on people's "freedoms" to regulate the sale of same? There is a demand for things unspeakable...should demand for them prohibit laws against the sale of them? I don't know, I am looking to your superior intellect and factual based well though out argument for the answer. I personally do not think "demand" is a good enough excuse to not regulate horse "production" (i.e., preventing, to the degree possible, unwanted and undesirable stock).
People worry and worry about losing their "freedoms"...with the commodities exhange modernization act...you can consider them - gone. No riots over that. But regulated equine breeding...whoa, that is just to much!

Don't let it get to you Missy. Those who cast stones usually have the most reason to be stoned themselves. Debates garner intelligent discourse. Arguments inspire juvenile nonsense. Don't be derailed by the latter. You are neither ignorant, nor uneducated. Don't be dragged down by either.

Derry girl · 03-04-2012, 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speed Racer

What do you define as 'Western culture'? The UK? They eat horse.

Am not an expert on this subject, so correct me if am wrong, but as a "westerner" Iv never heard of horse been served for dinner in the UK or Ireland. There are alot of slaughter houses but as far as am aware most of the meat is shipped to France for human consumtpion.

kevinshorses · 03-04-2012, 11:26 AM

Are the French prohibited from living in Great Britain? What about the north Africans and muslims?

herdbound · 03-04-2012, 12:04 PM

Regardless of "whom" is eating them...the thought for some us is just disgusting...that is our opinion. I do caution you though that going off of the main issue at hand can result in hours of ugly debate that will get everyone nowhere except upset and take us farther away from the issue at hand.

As I stated earlier in this thread, people of other cultures eat many things that us as Americans find absolutely unacceptable. Bugs, raw & rotten meats, rats, dogs & cats, and in some primitive tribes even human meat is consumed. There is a slippery slope...that I think ethically we should try to prevent ourselves from sliding down. Even though many of us may not like to admit to it...our diets are based upon Religious beliefs. As I stated earlier in India, eating beef would be considered unacceptable & sacrilegious. The US was founded on Christianity, the Bible clearly states we are not to eat any meat unless it has a split hoof AND chews a cud. That is why pigs are not on the menu for people of Jewish decent. Although they have a split hoof they do not chew a cud. This would also take horses off the menu for many sharing this religious belief. BUT as we all know in America we also have the freedom of religion...sooooo it just comes down to what is acceptable by the majority of people in our country. I do think that IF horses were raised like cattle for the purpose of being consumed and were governed by the USDA as cattle are to make sure they are not subjected to chemicals, hormones, and ect...people in America may have decided to eat them. Being that a horse has a gestational period of 11 months and it takes around 2 years to have an almost fully grown animal...waiting three years to "harvest" them they may not be a profitable animal for meat. This debate, whether it is legit to eat a horse could rage on and on and on if you fuel the fire. I personally along with many others would never eat a horse. That is just our opinion...that is our right...and I do hope I never see a time in America that horses do start to be raised for consumption.

BUT to really take our horses off the plates of wealthy Europeans what we need to do is PREVENT the need for these animals to ever go to the slaughterhouse in the first place. Promote responsible ownership by enforcing and lobbying for stronger legal consequences for "irresponsible owners" who are guilty of neglect/abuse. Try to educate back yard breeders about bringing more unwanted horses into this downed market...much like the ad campaigns for the spay & neuter campaigns for dogs and cats have been effective...we need to apply this over to horses...AND go after the largest suppliers of mass amounts of "unwanted" horses as in the racing industry and their unquenchable thirst for 2 and 3 year old runners.

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" to REALLY get this under control it is IMPERATIVE and only logical to try to curtail the numbers going.

Derry girl · 03-04-2012, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevinshorses

Are the French prohibited from living in Great Britain? What about the north Africans and muslims?

When did I say anything like that?
Of course theres many different nationalites, I think that's a bit of a silly thing to say.

Back to the point...
I simply said that Iv never heard of horse meat been served as a meal either here or in england... I havent seen it in the local butchers...but I am sure if someone wants it they will no where to go but as far as I am aware most is shipped to France.. and then on-through the rest of the continent.

Cherie · 03-04-2012, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Regardless of "whom" is eating them...the thought for some us is just disgusting...that is our opinion.

No one is telling you or anyone else that finds it 'disgusting' that they have to eat them or send them to slaughter. Personally, I do not send horses to a slaughter nor would I eat one. But I am not so presumptuous nor narcissistic as to think that I have the right to impose my likes, dislikes or religious dietary laws on anyone else.

By the way, pork and other meats ruled unclean and forbidden in Judaic Law are not forbidden by New Testament Christianity. As far an I know, pork is only forbidden by Islamic and Judaic Dietary Laws.

Horsemeat is available (and popular) in many Canadian restaurants and very high priced. I believe it is called 'Tartare' in restaurants in Quebec.

Piaffe · 03-04-2012, 02:13 PM

Yep...I am pro slaughter...

Missy May · 03-04-2012, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie

To compare eating a class of livestock that one personally does not want to eat to cannibalism is pretty far out there -- kind of like giving them human emotions and 'rights'. No one is saying that anybody HAS to eat their horse or send it to slaughter. It is just not their right to tell others what they can eat or do with their horse that THEY OWN.

I am not completely anti-slaughter by the way, just FYI. I have made it pretty clear I would like to see steps taken to reduce the number of horses unnecessarily sent to slaughter...not eliminate it all together.

Scientifically speaking...protein is protien, meat is meat in the manner it is digested..protien structure and content varies between animal class a bit - but not significantly. My point was, if excess meat is the only basis for slaughter - then why draw ANY line. Cannabalism is taking it to extremes to make a point? Which part, the emotional, the nutritional, or the "too much freedom" part?

Steps should be taken to limit unnecessary slaughter. The key word there is "unnecessary". And I am totally w herd, no animal should ever suffer during any slaughter process. I go back to chemical warfare .... it is prohibited by treaties in a WAR theater where the idea is to kill people - but I am guessing it is the manner in which people will SUFFER that was at hand when the treaties were signed. Taking it to extremes again?

Speed Racer · 03-04-2012, 05:21 PM

Cannibalism is a health risk. Eating your own kind, especially their brain matter, can cause something similar to Mad Cow disease in humans. It's been documented among aboriginal tribes who practice it.

So there's that, even if you want to ignore the moral and ethical taboos, as well as thinking murder is okay.

I'm not sure what you define as 'unnecessary'. Obviously supply and demand play a big part in how many animals, not just horses, are consumed.

View Poll Results: Are you pro-slaughter
I am pro-slaughter	161	66.53%
I am anti-slaughter	69	28.51%
I don't know yet	12	4.96%
Voters: 242. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search