That's a really good question isn't it. As is how anyone with a conscience offer to PAY those that produce the food supply, to actually NOT produce as much. America could solve the famine problem in one go. It has enough to do so. Why don't they?


"According to the World Bank, the number of people unable to meet their basic subsistence needs has reached 1.1 billion, with 14 million children dying every year from hunger and related causes. All the while, large quantities of grain and dairy products continue to be stockpiled in the US, Canada, and the European Economic Union.

A quote from R. Dumont: "The rich white man, with his overconsumption of meat and his lack of generosity for poor people, behaves like a veritable cannibal -- an indirect cannibal. By consuming meat, which wastes the grain that could have saved them, last year we ate the children of the Sahel, Ethiopia, and Bangladesh. And we continue to eat them this year with undiminished appetite."

"If American-type countries would reduce their meat consumption by just 10%, enough grain would be saved to feed 60 million people. This figure is close enough to the number of people that die from hunger-related diseases each year. It would also free enough land and resources to grow over 12 million tons of grain annually -- enough to feed all those who died of starvation. This happens while millions agonize over one diet after another. Changing patterns takes one step at a time by one person at a time, but no one wants to go first."

"Worldwatch states that 75% of the Third World imports of corn, barley, sorghum, and oats are fed to animals and not people. "In country after country, the demand for meat among the rich is squeezing out staple production for the poor." The demand for meat among the rich takes precedence over grain production for the poor since "cash" crops come first. Two-thirds of the grain exported from North America goes to feed livestock which then filters back to only feeding the ones who can afford that type of food."


Everyday, enough grain is fed to animals to provide two loaves of bread to every human being on earth.

Besides the insane amounts of money involved, the main issue is the cruelty, and of course then the inevitable death these animals suffer.


Is this a way to live? Are we not human beings with the capacity to love? If we do how can we allow this?

The truck carrying this cow was unloaded at Walton Stockyards in Kentucky on a September morning. After the other animals were removed from the truck, she was left behind, unable to move. The stockyard workers beat and kicked her in the face, ribs and back. They used the customary electric prods in her ear to try to get her out of the truck, but still she did not move. The workers then tied a rope around her neck, tied the other end to a post in the ground, and drove the truck away. The cow was dragged along the floor of the truck and fell to the ground, landing with both hind legs and her pelvis broken. She remained in this state until 7:30 that evening.

The cow lay in the hot sun crying out for the first three hours. Periodically, when she urinated or defecated, she used her front legs to drag herself along the gravel roadway to a clean spot. She also tried to crawl to a shaded area but could not move far enough. Altogether she managed to crawl a painful 13-14 yards. The stockyard employees would not allow her any drinking water; the only drinking water she received was given to her by Jessie Pierce, a local animal rights activist, who had been contacted by a woman who witnessed the incident. Jessie arrived at noon. After receiving no cooperation from stockyard workers, she called the Kenton County police. A police officer arrived but was instructed by his superiors to do nothing; he left at 1 p.m.

The stockyard operator informed Jessie at 1 p.m. that he had obtained permission from the insurance company to kill the cow but would not do so until Jessie left. Although doubtful that he would keep his word, Jessie left at 3 p.m. She returned at 4:30 p.m. and found the stockyard deserted. Three dogs were attacking the cow, who was still alive. She had suffered a number of bite wounds, and her drinking water had been removed. Jessie contacted the Kentucky State Police. Four officers arrived at about 5:30 p.m. State trooper Jan Wuchner wanted to shoot the cow but was told that a veterinarian should kill her. The two veterinarians at the facility would not euthanize the cow, claiming that, in order to preserve the value of the meat, she could not be destroyed. The butcher eventually arrived at 7:30 p.m. and did shoot the cow. Her body was purchased for $307.50. (Usually animals who are bruised or crippled or who are found dead are considered unfit for human consumption and are used for pet food.)

When the stockyard operator was questioned earlier in the day by a reporter from The Kentucky Post, he stated, "We didn't do a damned thing to it," and referred to the attention given the cow by humane workers and police as "bullcrap." He laughed throughout the questioning, saying he found nothing wrong with the way the incident was handled.

This is not an isolated case; in fact, it is so common that animals in this condition are known in the meat industry as "downers," and no effort is made by industry insiders or the USDA to see that animals are treated more humanely. Standard practice is for stockyard workers to find "downed" animals, tie them to the back of a pickup truck and drag them to one area, where they are piled one on top of the other, making it easier for the butcher to kill them and reducing the chances of interference by concerned passersby. Stockyard workers seem to find these practices acceptable. They have proved that the meat industry cannot monitor itself. It is up to the public to demand change and for consumers to refuse to purchase the products of this miserable industry.

I don't think we can be claiming to love animals just because we "keep" pets when in fact through the choices we make we contribute to this:

This is the end conclusion for the calf that's pregnant.

Do we really have the right to inflict this on living entities?

Foie Gras, which is sold as a "delicacy" in some parts of the world, is the grossly enlarged liver of ducks and geese that have been force-fed by having a metal pipe shoved down their throats to their stomachs.

Should hunt the damed things:

Results from studies using domesticated or feedlot meat cannot be generalized to all omnivore diets. Results of experiments in which test subjects eat domesticated/feedlot meats are often interpreted--usually unknowingly, but at the least implicitly--as reflecting the results of all meats and/or all omnivore diets. However, the composition of domesticated/feedlot meat is very different from the composition of the lean wild animal meat (in terms of both overall fat level as well as type of fats contained) that was a part of humanity's evolutionary diet. (Not yet available: "Disparities between Wild Game and Domesticated Meat in Fat Distribution and Composition" explores these differences in detail.)
Eaton et al. [1996, p. 1735] note that the level of fat in domesticated meat compared to wild game is on average five times higher. Just as tellingly, the proportion of saturated fat as a percentage of total fat is five to six times higher in domesticated meat compared to wild game. And there are other significant differences as well.

"Unfortunately, eating milk and eggs, and using animal by-products all come down to the
same thing: cruelty and death for animals. Many vegans started out as vegetarians, and became
vegans because of this reason. A compassionate person who does not eat meat because of ethical
reasons, cannot avoid the reality of their other choices, and the consequences they make on the
lives of animals. By refusing to purchase or use these products, we send a strong economic
message that profiting at the expense of our health, our environment, or the lives of animals will
not be tolerated."

Lilith, What does cruelty have to do with diet?
Yes it is barbaric these pictures, I have seen them before though, and worse, I don't live in America (I hear), and battery farming is hated here. Come to New Zealand, it is a nice place to collect your thoughts.
But you seem to think that being vegetarian will make people nicer to animals...your kidding right? Mankind mistreate and Kick animals they supposedly love, flush puppies and kittens, through them over bridges, and you think that will change just because plants are our sole diet?
People will feed the poor if they are vegetarian. That is in no way sane, and credit humanity with much more than it deserves, if the Poor were going to be fed, they would have been by now.
I am not justifiying my right to eat meat, because I do not have to, what I am saying is this, consuming life is nessecary, it has nothing to do with civilised or uncivilised, that is a seperate issue.
If you have a problem with the cruelty, don't preach about making people vegetarian, stop the cruelty, because regardless of diet, the cruelty will still be there, and just becuase you cant see plants as human doesn't mean they are not.
Like a Doctor Your not fighting the illness, just a symptom.
Your argument is like the one for Anarchy, which is if people lived in smaller communites and shared all information they have the world will be peaceful... People are not going to share all their information, because people are not going to stop being arrogant greedy sons of Bitches just because they live in smaller communities.

So this idea is born from what?
The fact that certain vitaimins and minerals are found more abundantly in meat, And require a greater amount of knowledge for a vegetarian, becuase they have to know what is in the food they are eating?
Come on, only two people I know of actually read the labels to find out whast is in their food, and none can tell me what vitamins. The belief that you have no time, does amazing things.
More often than not people that are vegetarian, or vegan, have to either go back to meat, or consult a dietician(?) otherwise die of malenutrition. And you seem to think that this is because of laziness? Rather than the belief that they have no time, everything must be now, now, now. I piss people off because I refuse to live in the fast paced world, I think its stupid and can only lead to stress. And you seem to think that the people who live in this world believe they have an option.

How can you seperate the cruelty from the dietary choices of the majority of this world? It goes hand in hand and if you cannot see that then please take a closer look at the realities.

If you remember (and read) the original post that started this, I said that I believed vegetarianism would go a long way to rectifying the imbalance in this world, it would solve so many of the world's problems and I also said that if man had respect for all living creatures he may just have more respect towards his fellow man. It's a process, as everything in life is. Have you ever met a vegan that was cruel to an animal? And I mean a true vegan not just one claiming to be one? Of course I am aware of the cruelty against animals, but you seem to fail to see the connection: "I eat living creatures so why the hell need I respect them when I can just as easily beat it to death to feed my lust for flesh." Don't you see the glaringly obvious connection between people who do not eat any meat at all versus those who do? If it's just a meal to you on one day why would you think twice of giving it the respect as a living creature as it deserves?! And if you read my post to you carefully you would see that I do acknowledge all living things as being alive and if you had read my posts in the beginning of this you would see that I said taking any life would have karmic implications. But still, I ask you, how can you equate the slaughter of a horse, cow, calf, pig, chicken... etc. whose hearts all pump the same colour blood as yours, to that of picking up an apple that has fallen down ripe from a tree. Or finding a crystal embedded in a mountain and taking that for yourself... do you honestly think these things are the exact same thing?
And in all honesty, this is not a provocative rhetorical question, I am very sincerely curious and therefore must ask: Why is it that you feel you have the right to eat another living breathing creature? Who gives you that right? Please note, it is a serious question, I am not meaning anything other than honestly wanting to hear your views on that.

You obviously haven't read any of the nutritional and health related posts on this thread have you? And actually, you don't need to read a banana's label, or an apple's, or a carrot's. As for the other convenience food, I've read labels my whole life, as do every single other person who live their lives in this manner.

In all honesty I cry for the death of a Plant, or hill range as readily as that for any animal, I see all things as the same.... Kind of like if my life is sacrosanct then ALL life is sacrosanct, all days are holy, or none are, can you truly watch a plant die of starvation and feel nothing? Have you never sat underneath a tree and felt its presence comfort and shelter you? That inner peace from just being there?
And what you are talking about is respect. But respect does not come from diet, a wolf respects the deer. Respect comes from knowing all things are equal, that you are worth no more, and no less then a mouse, or any other animal. Humans my dear feel that they are better than animals, smarter, and can do what they like becuase they aren't human.
Yet animals are not the ones who are destroying the world so that we can have tv trays and plastic, and there in lies the error. Humanity believes it has the right to do this, regardless of the other life on this planet. That is why the cruelty happens, becuase humans don't see the rest of the planet as real, no mind, no heart= cant feel a thing (You seem to feel this way about plants).
'If all life died on the Planet, at least humanity would still live' it is that kind of thinking which is why my favorite saying is 'And I became Death, Destroyer of Worlds' and why people preaching love anger me so.

No not really, about 60% of my friends are vegetarian, and I lived in a house where I could not eat meat. So I do know what it is like to some extent.

Instantanious world-wide veg-ism ain't gonna happen without alot of people dying. There are people who have eaten nothing but animal flesh for thousands of years, such as the Inuit (Eskimos).

That being said, I believe both the production and consumption of meat has to be reduced drastically. The recomended daily intake of meat products(according to the Canada food guide anyways) is a little less than a hamburger paddy.

There's lots of other reasons too, most of which have already been posted. There's just not enough need for meat to justify the godawful mass-production of livestock.

That's a cop-out if I've ever heard one. If you don't have faith in our generation (and it's just as much yours as it is mine and everyone elses), then you're saying you don't have faith in yourself. If you don't have faith, why should the rest of us take that leap and save the planet? And if we have no faith in our generation, how in the hell do you expect the generation we are raising to have faith in theirs? and how then would the generation they raise have faith in themselves?

The problem just ain't gonna 'take care of itself.' The task is ours, here, in the present, as it always has been. And as always, we as individuals can choose to be either part of the solution, or part of the problem.

Yes it does take away personal choice, as does every law ever written.