Featured Cause
-
End Homelessness
- 2257 Members
- 2122 Actions
- $205 Dollars Raised
Animals in the Blogs: "Expendable" Animals, Global Warming, and More
Published December 04, 2008 @ 07:44AM PST
Animal Person covers Problem Solving 101 this morning, tackling the issue of most scientists' and environmentalists' preference for trying to ignore or work around the enormous contribution of animal agriculture to climate change:
When you have a problem and you know what causes it, what do you do? Do you attack the symptoms of the problem? No, because you know what the cause is. When wouldn't you go to the problem's cause? Simple: When you don't want to.
(This comes a day after some other smart Animal Person commentary, on interesting responses to Bush's pardon of a poacher.)
----
A couple days ago, the Reformed Fast Food Mascot described the "final two hours of a life" of an animal humans like to pretend doesn't feel, think, and suffer and contemplated people's reactions to such a death.
You do one thing and one thing only to a rat. You kill it. That's what you do. Life is filled with so many gray areas, enough moral ambiguities to drive a person nuts. So those few certainties there to grab hold of, we grab hold. One of those certainties is this: the life of a rat has no value. The pain a rat suffers is of no consequence.
It's a great post. Please read it.
----
The Animal Law Blog has remarked briefly on an unimpressive policy revision from the American Veterinary Medical Association:
Another hundred years or so and they may actually come out with a position that actually takes the interests of the animal into consideration.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Blog author Amy also directs us to a Wall Street Journal article that I otherwise would have missed: "Seeking a Presidential Pardon? Try Praising the Right to Bear Arms"
----
And finally, check out The Vegan Ideal's latest post: "Moving From Abstraction to Veganism: Advocating Alternatives to Exploitation, Not Alternative Exploitation"
Advocacy for new methods for exploiting other animals, based on the abstraction that it will reduce existing suffering, is in fact advocacy that supports the exploitation of actual other animals who will specifically be bred into existence to meet the demands of the new methods of exploitation being advocated. . . . What we end up with is an actual increase in suffering for the individuals and for the collective group.
Comments
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Stephanie Ernst
- St. Louis, MO
-
Stephanie is a vegan, a tree hugger, a freelance editor and writer, and an animal rights advocate. She lives in St. Louis with a motley pack of three dogs and two cats as well as the world's most adorable foster pit bull.
Related Blog Posts
-
- Reformed Fast Food Mascot Roundup
-
Posted by Stephanie Ernst
Dec 23 @ 07:32AM PST
-
- ALDF: Fix Global Warming the Easy, Low-Tech Way
-
Posted by Stephanie Ernst
Dec 10 @ 06:00AM PST
-
- Planet in Peril--and Denial?
-
Posted by Stephanie Ernst
Dec 09 @ 08:01AM PST
lets save our animals before they are all gone.
Posted by sarah ryen on 12/04/2008 @ 09:36AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
lets save our animals before they are all gone.
Posted by sarah ryen on 12/04/2008 @ 09:36AM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
My question is... does a mosquito count as an animal? Where is the line? Is there a line?
Posted by Laura Wolfe on 12/04/2008 @ 02:50PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
I wish we could focus on the core issue of animal agriculture (being the WAY animals are raised) rather than than the peripheral issue (being the fact they are raised at all). I know that the latter is really the primary issue for most of the people reading this blog, but for for a moment let's go with the reality that you will never be able to persuade everyone to leave their meat eating ways behind.
Yes, people should eat less meat.
But, the real question is how do we feed the world's growing consumption for meat while raising (and yes, slaughtering) animals in an environmentally sustainable way (yes, it is possible). I really don't think the answer is try and advocate for a world of vegans or vegetarians. You must keep in mind that a great percentage of the land used for livestock production is not suitable to grow fruits, veggies or grains (which is primarily why it is used to raise animals). With a vast percentages of prime farmland being lost at an alarming rate, where are we going to find the land to feed people veggie only diets?
Posted by Greg Plotkin on 12/05/2008 @ 12:54PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.
"where are we going to find the land to feed people veggie only diets?"
Actually, quite a large proportion of the corn, grain & soy grown is grown to feed animals! Instead, we could feed more people with it.
I don't think that the purpose is to creat a 100% vegan planet, it's to reduce the suffering & improve the treatment of the animals. Most people, prior to the 2nd half of the 20th century, didn't eat meat as frequently as they do now. It used to be something "special" and expensive. Because of the massive factory farm industry, meat is cheaper & people have access to it. Perhaps the best first step is to encourage people to eat less meat and to be educated on where their food comes from.
facts about an animal based diet impact on the environment: http://www.goveg.com/veganism_environment.asp
Posted by Lisa Smolen-Jenk... on 12/05/2008 @ 01:52PM PST
You must be signed in to report content.