[Zimphire]

Think of the poor carrots you just murdered!

[Athens]

Originally posted by DBursey:
Your flippancy serves to further underscore the hypocrisy of your admission IMHO.

My carrots are put down humanely, pulled gently but firmly by the taproot following a gentle summer rain. What's more, your sucking advisory would constitute an absurdly insufficient means of initiating the digestive process, as the chemical action of salivary enzymes on fibrous foodstuffs is rendered far more efficient by means of mechanically vigorous mandibular pulping.

In other words, unless your saliva has the chemical consistency of hydrochloric acid, I'd advise a consistently vigorous chewing of all root vegetables.

Whats the difference between bashing a cows head in and cooking him and a lion taking a big BITE out of a live cow. Either way the cow is dinner. Personally I like to think it suffered less with the bashed in head.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
interesting fact.

look, i have nothing against people who absolutely are dependent on the meat for their well being or survival.

hunting and "killing" animals can be done in a variety of different ways, and i would personally like to see it done in the most "humane" way possible. (you probably know that most of the animals which die for our consumption aren't)

but clubbing seals for their fur is nothing short of completely retarded.

I agree with your first points. There is a difference in killing for surviving/subsisting than for pleasure (like fishing). There are factually exploitations of our environment that should raise eyebrowse; we have landfills full of trash and often, recuperable stuff that we leave aside as if the planet has no lmits. Of course, where are these limits is up for discussion, but there is no doubt that at some point, we will face these limits.

Exploiting an animal solely for the fur seems like a waste. But I am not sure that all these seals are lost to the sea; that is proper meat for cunsumption although it is an aquired taste (apparently the liver is quite delicious). On the other hand, this exploitation of an animal ofr some of its parts comes from its marketability; if the price is worth the effort, then I suppose it makes sense. We can think that not too long ago, cows were exploited for some parts only and it is for economical reasons that they had to create markets for the remaining parts...

Regarding the "humane" way of killing an animal, well, I wonder what is "humane"... I remember walking in the Arctic tundra a few years ago to find a beautiful fox caught in a trap. I was not sure what to do and since it was obviously Inuit game, I thought better of respecting it. The next day, when I spoke to some Inuit hunters about it, they showed what I should have done: squash the animal's lungs with my foot. They called it the most sensitive way to end the suffering of that animal...

When they go seal or whale (narwhal, beluga) hunting, they will shoot with a gun (they rarely use harpoons nowadays). With that technology, which we call an "improvement" they will shoot the animal but they may lose the animal who might flee and disappear and die from its wounds. Yet, traditionnally, they used a special harpoon with a detachable penetrating tip that would stay stuck in the blubber under the skin (which is quite tough and thick). Is that "humane"? This technique would allow the hauling of the animal (try that with a 1 ton bull!) to the boat until it gets tired to then get finally killed with another harpoon that would penetrate the heart... or with a gun shot at the head...

I think there is still quite a lot to admire from a people whom, although their way is not that "humane", do not waste the product of their hunt.

Personally, the way they kill these animals, whether with a club (with a nail at the tip) or with a gun does not make a big difference, if not in the eye and the heart of the observer. Anyway, trying to shoot seals on the ground with a gun is not as easy as it seems. But what is not humane, imho, is the partial use of the carcass and its waste.

[DBursey]

Lions eat live cows you say? I seem to have missed that safari. How about wildebeest on a stick? Far tastier! "None for me please" says Simba, dismissing the carrot platter.

[Athens]

Originally posted by DBursey:
Lions eat live cows you say? I seem to have missed that safari. How about wildebeest on a stick? Far tastier! "None for me please" says Simba, dismissing the carrot platter.

I eat what I want to eat you eat waht you want to eat, next your going to tell me who I can sleep with and then where I can live next. I dont try and force you vegi fruitcakes to eat meat, so why should I accept you fruitcakes forcing me to give up my tasty FLESH


PS I wonder what Cat tastes like, I see you have a couple pretties for your Sig.

[DBursey]

Originally posted by Athens:
I eat what I want to eat you eat waht you want to eat, next your going to tell me who I can sleep with and then where I can live next. I dont try and force you vegi fruitcakes to eat meat, so why should I accept you fruitcakes forcing me to give up my tasty FLESH

PS I wonder what Cat tastes like, I see you have a couple pretties for your Sig.

Easy there, big guy. Methinks you've grossly overestimated my interest in your culinary and/or nocturnal pursuits. What's more, you've totally misconstrued my sentiment on the issue! My obfuscatory bad.

My cats are indeed quite attractive. They were recently wed in a simple but dignified ceremony, and have since been taken off the menu.

[Athens]

Originally posted by DBursey:
Easy there, big guy. Methinks you've grossly overestimated my interest in your culinary and/or nocturnal pursuits. What's more, you've totally misconstrued my sentiment on the issue! My obfuscatory bad.

My cats are indeed quite attractive. They were recently wed in a simple but dignified ceremony, and have since been taken off the menu.

LOL was it a hetrosexual marrage or a gay marrage, I cant tell there sexes in the picture. They are cute though

[Spliff]

Originally posted by Athens:
Whats the difference between bashing a cows head in and cooking him and a lion taking a big BITE out of a live cow. Either way the cow is dinner. Personally I like to think it suffered less with the bashed in head.

The difference is that you don't require the cow to survive. You're only justification for eating the cow is that you enjoy the flavour. IMO, that's isn't sufficient justification, not by a long shot.

Morever, you can't justify your behaviour by citing an example from nature. Otherwise, you could justify rape, theft, etc by saying, "Well, animals do it; therefore I can do it."

[Athens]

Originally posted by Spliff:
The difference is that you don't require the cow to survive. You're only justification for eating the cow is that you enjoy the flavour. IMO, that's isn't sufficient justification, not by a long shot.

Morever, you can't justify your behaviour by citing an example from nature. Otherwise, you could justify rape, theft, etc by saying, "Well, animals do it; therefore I can do it."

why are lions feed meet in a zoo? it dosent require it

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by Athens:
why are lions feed meet in a zoo? it dosent require it

actually, yes, it does.

Originally posted by Spliff:
The difference is that you don't require the cow to survive. You're only justification for eating the cow is that you enjoy the flavour. IMO, that's isn't sufficient justification, not by a long shot.

Oh please, don't be a hypocrite. You don't need wheat to survive either, but yet you don't seem to mind the millions of mice and bunnies being mowed down by wheat harvesters at harvest time.

At least we eat the flesh we have killed. You let it rot in the field. That's wasteful and sad.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by SimpleLife:
Exploiting an animal solely for the fur seems like a waste. But I am not sure that all these seals are lost to the sea; that is proper meat for cunsumption although it is an aquired taste (apparently the liver is quite delicious). On the other hand, this exploitation of an animal ofr some of its parts comes from its marketability; if the price is worth the effort, then I suppose it makes sense...

one of the many reasons i believe that "economy" should not be at the center of human culture.

and the more i think of it, maybe the inuit should just (slowly but surely) give up their way of life and their natural habitat. i know we can learn a lot from them (especially the part about not "wasting" natural resources)...that's just imho, of course.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by hayesk:
You don't need wheat to survive either, but yet you don't seem to mind the millions of mice and bunnies being mowed down by wheat harvesters at harvest time.

very good point, - though how do you know that spliff "does not mind"? i certainly do.

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
very good point, - though how do you know that spliff "does not mind"? i certainly do.

By "you" I mean any vegan who preaches that meat eaters are evil because animals die to feed them, and then ignore the animal deaths caused to grow grains and vegetables.

[Spliff]

Originally posted by hayesk:
By "you" I mean any vegan who preaches that meat eaters are evil because animals die to feed them, and then ignore the animal deaths caused to grow grains and vegetables.

First of all, I'm not preaching; we're having a debate. Second of all, I never said anyone here was evil. Thirdly, I'm fully aware of the deaths that are caused by grain farming.

As for that last issue raised, I'll comment on it more later, after an appointment I have.

[kmkkid]

Whine Whine Whine.

Would you rather have them overpopulate/evolve and have 'giant mutant seal people' come down and invade america? We're doing the world a favour.




God forbid.





Chris

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
one of the many reasons i believe that "economy" should not be at the center of human culture.

Of course. But there is a difference between "should" and "could". To make such a change requires money. In the case of Nunavik, Canada which is in the Northern most part of Quebec, the territory is not accessible by the road. You need to take the plane ($2500 two-way ticket from Kuujjuaq to Montr�al, a bit higher to reach Iqaluit, Nunavut). The employment of the Inuit is less than 40%, and the income is not on par with the living expenses. 50 % of the population is less than 18 years of age and not many have a High School diploma. Unemplyment rate is often close to 40%.

Any goods is freight at $10.00/kg, except the food (slightly lower).
A case of 24 beers sells locally (when it was allowed) at $64 ... A 500ml of orange juice can go as high as $10. A club sandwich, in one of the rare restaurants is $14. Think of the fuel price... Since most of the food is shipped by plane (or by boat, during the 3 months of Summer...) the cost of living is very high. Lodging is also quite expensive. So the food available from the Hunting and the Fishing is a life savior.

People living in the communities where we see this baby seal killing are submitted to very similar expenses (although they are not Inuit).

and the more i think of it, maybe the inuit should just (slowly but surely) give up their way of life and their natural habitat. i know we can learn a lot from them (especially the part about not "wasting" natural resources)...that's just imho, of course.

Nice opinion of course, and I am certain that many would like to try it, but as I demonstrated, this is not for tomorrow or even the day after...