you are very uninformed, the question is not to eat or not but to ABUSE
or not. the way we treat animals for food is disgusting, and it not
healthy for us, full of chemicals and abuse makes the nutritional value
go down. anyone who hears how veal is produced and doesn't get angry
and throw up is pathetic.

also it take 16 pounds of grain for one pounds of meat in a world full
of starving people. WHAT A WASTE

wrote:

you are very uninformed, the question is not to eat or not but to ABUSE
or not. the way we treat animals for food is disgusting, and it not
healthy for us, full of chemicals and abuse makes the nutritional value
go down. anyone who hears how veal is produced and doesn't get angry
and throw up is pathetic.

also it take 16 pounds of grain for one pounds of meat in a world full
of starving people. WHAT A WASTE

Mmmmmmm... this double Whopper sure is good. I got fries with it too!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Awwwww hell,,,,,,, them critters get a Bullet between their eyes or
their necks Chopped off.They never feel a thing.It isn't abuse to them
critters,it is abuse to us Humans not to eat them critters!
cuhulin

Agree with you about the antibiotocs and growth hormones...that's why I
try to use meat that isn't fed that stuff. Otherwise, I'm not too
worried about the farm animals.

Yeah, it may take 16 pounds of grain to create a pound of meat, but it
is difficult to cook milo so it's rare and juicy red. And we do use
it's waste as well as literally every part of the animal but the moo,
so your figure is overstated.

Hmm...For dinner I think I'm going to have a little goose liver pate
for an appetizer followed by a veal picatta with pasta.

And for breakfast tomorrow I will have a bagel with cream cheese and
lox. And the lox came from a salmon that was caught with a hook or
gill net, clubbed on the head, just thrown into an icer and gutted
later. It may have been just thrown in the icer live too. Yummm!!!!

wrote:
you are very uninformed, the question is not to eat or not but to
ABUSE
or not. the way we treat animals for food is disgusting, and it not
healthy for us, full of chemicals and abuse makes the nutritional
value
go down. anyone who hears how veal is produced and doesn't get angry
and throw up is pathetic.

also it take 16 pounds of grain for one pounds of meat in a world
full
of starving people. WHAT A WASTE

wrote in message
ups.com...
you are very uninformed, the question is not to eat or not but to
ABUSE
or not.

Documentation of abuse by PETA is, by nature, suspect.
They are not a reputable organization because for every
legitimate thing they document, they ruin their reputation
by guerilla tactics and dubious assertions, such as beer
is better for you than milk. (I may prefer beer to milk, but
milk has much more calcium and other nutrients that I
could use as opposed to beer, which has pretty much
a good amount of B6.) Their current fish campaign
echoing Finding Nemo assigns characteristics to fish
found in higher level vertebrates or humans, not accepting
fish for what they are.

the way we treat animals for food is disgusting, and it not
healthy for us, full of chemicals and abuse makes the nutritional
value
go down. anyone who hears how veal is produced and doesn't get angry
and throw up is pathetic.

Or a farmer.

also it take 16 pounds of grain for one pounds of meat in a world
full
of starving people. WHAT A WASTE

Please explain to me what you will do after you
feed everyone, because there will be an incredible
explosion of population and an incredible need
for health care when that happens. I have
no problem with the goal of feeding the world,
but no one seems to be focusing on the problems
that that will cause if that goal is achieved.

--Mike L.

birth control, free condoms for the planet

or sex every seven years

Barbecued Vulcans,,, I wonder how that would go over? I bought some
Trout and Chopped Steak at the foodstore this afternoon.
cuhulin

y'all damn peta queers out there.y'all damn peta queers know what
happened both times y'all damn peta queers came to Mississippi.The cops
came along and locked y'all damn peta queers up! and then ran y'all damn
peta quees OUT! of Jackson and Biloxi.
cuhulin

Michael lawson wrote:

Documentation of abuse by PETA is, by nature, suspect.
They are not a reputable organization because for every
legitimate thing they document, they ruin their reputation
by guerilla tactics and dubious assertions, such as beer
is better for you than milk. (I may prefer beer to milk, but
milk has much more calcium and other nutrients that I
could use as opposed to beer, which has pretty much
a good amount of B6.) Their current fish campaign
echoing Finding Nemo assigns characteristics to fish
found in higher level vertebrates or humans, not accepting
fish for what they are.

Fish are creatures that feel pain, as do you and I. When it comes to
compassion and the inherent existence of "rights" as we human call
them, that is the only factor that matters.

If we as humans did not feel pain or could not be harmed, there would
be no reason for the concept of rights. No matter what anyone did, we
could not be hurt.

You may not like PETA, and I may not support everything they do, but
the concept of treating every other living thing with as much kindness
and as little cruelty as possible is both (1) a very human thing to do,
and (2) a just and ethical thing to do. To purposely make life
miserable for fish, or any other animal, in the name of profit and for
the purpose of the luxury of meat, is neither human (humane) nor
ethical.

Bruce Jensen

And it's a well established fact that plants respond to light and
temperature. So they too appear have some sensory response akin to
pain. Why should we be concerned about fish but not plants.

Have you ever considered how difficult it must be to live the life of a

carrot? Living your early solitary life 6 inches beneath the ground
you are summarily yanked from the ground, your curly green hair is torn

off and you are thrown into a scrubber. As a carrot your ultimate fate

is to be either peeled, chewed, boiled or frozen. Not a pretty picture

for carrots is it...

Pretty soon we won't be eating anything....


bpnjensen wrote:
Michael lawson wrote:

Documentation of abuse by PETA is, by nature, suspect.
They are not a reputable organization because for every
legitimate thing they document, they ruin their reputation
by guerilla tactics and dubious assertions, such as beer
is better for you than milk. (I may prefer beer to milk, but
milk has much more calcium and other nutrients that I
could use as opposed to beer, which has pretty much
a good amount of B6.) Their current fish campaign
echoing Finding Nemo assigns characteristics to fish
found in higher level vertebrates or humans, not accepting
fish for what they are.

Fish are creatures that feel pain, as do you and I. When it comes to
compassion and the inherent existence of "rights" as we human call
them, that is the only factor that matters.

If we as humans did not feel pain or could not be harmed, there would
be no reason for the concept of rights. No matter what anyone did,
we
could not be hurt.

You may not like PETA, and I may not support everything they do, but
the concept of treating every other living thing with as much
kindness
and as little cruelty as possible is both (1) a very human thing to
do,
and (2) a just and ethical thing to do. To purposely make life
miserable for fish, or any other animal, in the name of profit and
for
the purpose of the luxury of meat, is neither human (humane) nor
ethical.

Bruce Jensen