(June 11, 2013 at 9:11 am)Rhythm Wrote: @Ind: So humane treatment enters in after all. To which I mention - as I did pages ago, that some livestock already lives a better life than some humans - and we could do even better on both counts.You have a strong argument if you can show that livestock production is necessary to feed the global population. While you've certainly raised some questions in my mind in that department I don't think the answer to that is clear at all.
(June 11, 2013 at 9:11 am)Rhythm Wrote:Do you agree that our actions today have consequences for the planet and the environment and therefore for future generations, your kids and mine? If yes then we should try to do our best to keep the planet intact, and while we can't tell others what to do, there is certainly hope that they might agree and join the effort.Quote:How can we ask the third world not to do this to the planet if we're eating steak ourselves? I don't think it would be very convincing to say "Look, Ma, we're eating less" where "less" is not very well defined. Wouldn't it be much more convincing if we could say "Look, Ma, we don't eat it at all!"?
This..this right here sums it all up. What I'm trying to express is that I'm not in the business of saying "look ma, we're eating less" - to anyone.
"Men see clearly enough the barbarity of all ages — except their own!" — Ernest Crosby.