(April 18, 2012 at 11:37 am)Rhythm Wrote: I don't think that halal is such a good idea, they are allowed to circumvent what laws we do have based on a religious belief. I've commented upon that here on this site. I'm no friend of religious traditions as they apply to food production, not even a little bit.
What makes veal production more or less ethical than any other type of livestock operation? Because they're babies? That sounds like an emotional issue, not a issue of logic. I don't eat veal, mostly because it just doesn't jump out to me as "tasty". But I don't call veal operations unethical because I don't have any argument against them, and they seem to operate within the scope of the laws we have created to address ethics.
So, you feel the laws are lacking, that's fine, let's discuss how we could better those laws from your point of view. I don't disagree with you here in the least bit. On the other hand I don't think that we're going to reach the conclusion you seem to hope for.
You have either misunderstood me or I did not clearly communicate my thoughts on the matter. "Unnecessary suffering" is no such thing -as an absolute-. It's just a description of things which you or I have assigned a negative value judgement to, and our lists are likely to be different.
Why not minimize it? We do............that's why we have animal welfare laws that apply to livestock production.
The question I've been repeating for many posts now, is whether or not there might be a livestock production system that meets the criteria of avoiding "unnecessary suffering", because if there isn't, then we may as well just drop the pretense of basing our arguments on this principle, right? Just call a spade a spade "Livestock production is morally wrong in all cases". If you you create a separation between "necessary" and "unnecessary" suffering, but then put all suffering on the side of "unnecessary" then what is the point of creating the distinction in the first place? If there is such a system, if livestock can be produced without "unnecessary" suffering then vegetarianism is not some moral or ethical absolute, is it?
Veal production and the production of halal meat are both legal. Do you have a bias based on one being for a religious belief.
The veal crate is a wooden restraining device that is the veal calf's permanent home. It is so small (22" x 54") that the calves cannot turn around or even lie down and stretch and is the ultimate in high-profit, confinement animal agriculture. Designed to prevent movement (exercise), the crate does its job of atrophying the calves' muscles, thus producing tender "gourmet" veal.
The calves are generally fed a milk substitute intentionally lacking in iron and other essential nutrients. This diet keeps the animals anemic and creates the pale pink or white color desired in the finished product. Craving iron, the calves lick urine-saturated slats and any metallic parts of their stalls. Farmers also withhold water from the animals, who, always thirsty, are driven to drink a large quantity of the high-fat liquid feed.
They are then slaughtered at 14 weeks.
I think treating a newly born calf in this way is unethical. It matters not to me whether it is done for religious purposes or to satisfy someone's taste for the flavour.
It used to be legal to keep slaves, but thankfully, someone was not satisfied with society's stance and eventually the law was changed. Not sure why you keep raising law as an issue.
Calves are not babies. I would argue though, that a new born calf and a new born baby have a capacity to suffer and feel pain much on a par with one another. On what logical basis do we treat them differently?
I do think that livestock production is wrong for a lots of reasons. First comes the ethical basis of inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering but then there are other ethical concerns like global warming etc. I am a pragmatist and fully understand that not everyone is going to become a vegetarian. Many are not open to the idea of not eating meat because they like it so much - there are some inane posts in this thread that are testament to the lack of an ability to think here. There are lots of things meat eaters could do to make the world a better place like eating less of it, avoiding factory farmed animals etc. And there is some evidence that this is happening but I think more out of self-interest (avoiding cancer) than through ethical choice.
