ELF (Earth Liberation Front)

[Sirton]

What did TR do for the environment? OMG this is a easy one its too much to write and think about so ill just find some copy paste material on facts about him.

Environmental Hero: Theodore Roosevelt

"The conservation of our natural resources and their proper use constitute the fundamental problem which underlies almost every other problem of our national life," he told Congress in 1907.

In 1902 he established the first national park at Crater Lake, Oregon and went on to create four more (Wind Cave National Park, SD; Sully's Hill, ND; Platt National Park, OK; and Mesa Verde National Park, CO). During his tenure as president from 1901 to 1909 he created 51 wildlife refugees, passed the Antiquities Act (which led to the creation of 18 national monuments), and created the National Park Service.

"A nation that destroys its soils destroys itself," Roosevelt proclaimed. "Forests are the lungs of our land, purifying the air and giving fresh strength to our people." He backed up these words by protecting 150 national forests. In all, Roosevelt protected some 230 million acres of national land.

environmental defense

As President, he established the United States Forest Service, championed and signed into law the National Monuments Act, and created five national parks, 18 national monuments, 150 national forests, four national game preserves and 51 national bird sanctuaries.

Teddy Roosevelt, recognizes the importance of our outdoor heritage and the need to protect our precious resources from Long Island Sound to Niagara Falls.

http://nysparks.state.ny.us/press/2003/Jan_16.htm

A true Renaissance man, Theodore Roosevelt was a writer, historian, explorer, big-game hunter, soldier, conservationist, rancher and a winner of a Nobel Peace Prize and Medal of Honor. From his inauguration in 1901 as the 26th president of the United States, he used his office as a Bully Pulpit, to control big business and to protect the environment.

As a society we have failed to respect the foresight of Theodore Roosevelt, John Muir and other conservationist founders of the national park system, neglecting to invest sufficient resources to maintain, let alone properly expand, the parks. A National Park Service-estimated funding gap of nearly $9 billion has left animal populations at risk, park amenities in substandard or unusable conditions and many national historical artifacts in danger of being lost to posterity.
Ralph Nader

http://www.issues2000.org/Celeb/Ralph_N ... onment.htm

Ecology Hall of Fame
Theodore Roosevelt

http://www.ecotopia.org/ehof/roosevelt/biblio.html

Can get a few million more. I also have read and original of his book African Game Trails, which wasnt a great read, but you can see the respect he does have for wildlife and his insight on some animals such as the black rhino. He was afraid it would become extinct because of its poor eye sight and that they had a tendency to charge anything that got near them.

And about the prarie to wet lands saying above...So you'd rather have a whole region such as the Chobe turned to mud holes and mass wildlife extinction, brought about by a buy off of major American environmental organizations to the Botswanna Gov't to not allow conservation or hunting in the region to save every precious elephant life. Now 150,000 elephant in the region when it can only support 40,000....I say good job real smart save 100,000 elephant destroy the ecology of the whole region which covers more ground then 100,000 times of what hunters dug up to make wetlands from praire's.

What you ultra environmentalist need to understand. Is you need to work with Conservationalist and Hunters for the good of the environment. Work together not block each other out. Each group brings there own strengths preservation, money, protection and control. The best scenarios Ive seen have been when all these groups work together.

Organizations like ELF...are crap.

[Aaeamdar]

He was afraid it would become extinct because of its poor eye sight and that they had a tendency to charge anything that got near them.

Yeah, either that or because he, and many like him, enjoy hanging their heads on a wall. Before assholes with guns showed up, the poor nearly blind black rhino was doing just fine. And hey, if it has to die off because man is going to occupy its former space - well, so sad for the Rhino. If it comes down to them or us, easy choice. But humans who take joy in killing and torturing them can fuck off.

No envirvonmentalist should ever treat a Hunter with anything other than scorn. For that matter, no human being should. A person who revels in the tourture of animals is simply sickening and should have no place in this world.

[Sirton]

Actually the main killer of black rhino's are poachers and expansion of the human population into these area's(which is why he was worried about there tendancy to charge), true unregulated hunting did have an impact...You have a hatred for hunters thats cool, but its also a hinderance to true ways to help the environment when it comes time to work together for it. I like the fact ya find one tiny spot to make an attack which is off. But, dont have an answer for the total. Thats cause when ya know your wrong the best thing to do is find a spot to attack.

[Aaeamdar]

And by the way, what you call "respect" is utter nonsense. I have read his hunter crap too. He, like most hunters, likes to build all this mysticism around the creatures he is going to kill and maim for fun. That is not respect. That is imbuing a feeling, caring animal with devine reverence so that you can pretend your night on the town is really part of some sacred ritual. Its a load of crap hunters force themselves to believe so they can justify what they do. Its not at all unlike the denigration of blacks - pretending they were merely animals - so that you could justify owning them. The "respect" might flow in opposite directions but both are lies designed to allow atrocities.

[Arborealus]

And about the prarie to wet lands saying above...So you'd rather have a whole region such as the Chobe turned to mud holes and mass wildlife extinction, brought about by a buy off of major American environmental organizations to the Botswanna Gov't to not allow conservation or hunting in the region to save every precious elephant life. Now 150,000 elephant in the region when it can only support 40,000....I say good job real smart save 100,000 elephant destroy the ecology of the whole region which covers more ground then 100,000 times of what hunters dug up to make wetlands from praire's.

What you ultra environmentalist need to understand. Is you need to work with Conservationalist and Hunters for the good of the environment. Work together not block each other out. Each group brings there own strengths preservation, money, protection and control. The best scenarios Ive seen have been when all these groups work together.

Organizations like ELF...are crap.

By the way if you are a conservationist you should learn there is no L in it...

I have no idea what you are on about I was talking about prairie ecosystems being converted to wetlands not dry-veldt ecosystems like Chobe...and it had nothing to do with hunting per se...I am not anti-hunting...I am against groups like DU who seek to convert habitat types to favour their particular causal wildlife to the detriment of other ecosystems...I am against the destruction of endangered habitats with the idea that we can recreate said habitats in more convienient locations at will...We cannot reproduce full habitats.

An apex hardwood forest takes thousands of years to evolve...cutting it down and replacing it with a monoculture loblolly and saying a tree is a tree leads to, well the exact situation we are facing now with the Pine Beetle...An act as simple as cutting a road through apex hardwood forest drastically changes the eco system due to edge and slope effects.

We simply cannot relocate entire living systems. They are far more complex than that.

[Sirton]

I agree with you on your points...But, you were the one that got off first on hunters with the wetlands when I wasnt talking about that. I just did the samething back.

[Sirton]

Aaeamdar
You can hate hunters thats cool...We do live in a free society, but you can't claim TR didn't do mosre good for the environment then just about and single individual.

[Aaeamdar]

Actually Sirton, its just a simple moral decision. Happens all the time. Some people are purely utilitarian. An easy example:

Cancer kills millions. If you are given the choice to kill 10,000 innocent people in scientific experiments to reveal the cure to cancer, do you do it?

For a utilitarian, the answer is an easy yes. I am not such a person. I am a moral person. How a result is achieved is at least as important as whether that result is achieved.

Killing for fun is repugnant. If the only way to save a species is to allow hunters to kill it for the purpose of experiencing whatever sick feeling they get from killing the animal, then that species should die off.

Extinction itself is not evil. Happens all the time. Species die off, often to make room to more successful or agressive species. Hunting is evil. People who hunt are evil. Moral men should take no part in it nor draw any quarter with it. Regardless of any benefits from the effects of hunting, killing an animal for the sheer joy of killing it should not be permitted.

On top of that, your utilitarian arguments about the benfits of hunting are specious. Clearly if, for example, the wolrd became too crowed with humans. The solution you would apply would not be to license people to hunt other humans for fun. We would find some other way to deal with it. Why? Because we are moral and it is the right thing to do.

[Arborealus]

I agree with you on your points...But, you were the one that got off first on hunters with the wetlands when I wasnt talking about that. I just did the samething back.

You mentioned hunters as conservationists which most aren't unfortunately...DU is a major group of "hunting conservationists," though there are certainly others, who perpetuate the specific sort of non-conservation I was on about.

Killing for fun is repugnant.

I'm not certain killing for fun is more repugnant than killing for profit.

[Siji]

Extinction itself is not evil. Happens all the time. Species die off, often to make room to more successful or agressive species.

Might want to clarify that with "Natural extinction" as opposed to extinction caused by humans.

Agent Smith had it right. Humans are a virus on the planet.

[Krurk]

Don't forget hunters can use the uncle jimbo rule..

"IT'S COMING RIGHT FOR US!"

.

Over population in certain areas often has a detrimental effect upon a species. Since we have already fucked up the balance of most ecosystems, we have to replace the food chain at times with an AK-47

[Aaeamdar]

If what you mean by profit is food and clothing, then agree, in the society we live in today, both are wrong. Clearly, though, killing for fun is more repugnant. There can never be a case where killing for fun is anything other than evil. Killing for food and clothing, on the other had, can be perfectly morally justified. As I said earlier, if it comes down to "them or us," the choice is easy.

I personally agree that in today's western society, there really is no need to kill for food or clothing (e.g. profit). I don't eat meat. I don't buy clothing or other articles made of leather.

If you were really honest with yourself (and I have no doubt after I post this a bunch of "proud" meat eaters will come here with all sorts of very macho sounding stuff about meat), and if you took the time to really see the way animals were treated to get you that tastey morsel, I don't think you would really say it was worth it. Our society has made the slaughter of animals unneccessary. You all eat meat and love your leather shoes and couch out of habit and marketing. Given the perfectly satisfactory (and in many cases indistiguisahable) substitutes available, I know if you really took the time to learn what you needed to learn, you would give it up too.

I know you will claim otherwise. But it will not be from reason. You will not present arguments about why it is necessary, only that you want it and have the power to take it. Well, at one point Americans wanted and had the power to take slaves from Africa. It did not make that right, it just made it what we did. Some day I am certain people will stop treating animals the way they do, but it is not going to happen overnight.

Now, all that said. It is very clear that there are times and situations when killing animals for food or clothing (e.g. profit) is entirely necessary. Because of that, it is certainly true that killing animals for profit is clearly less repugnant than killing them for fun.

[Arborealus]

If what you mean by profit is food and clothing, then agree, in the society we live in today, both are wrong. Clearly, though, killing for fun is more repugnant. There can never be a case where killing for fun is anything other than evil. Killing for food and clothing, on the other had, can be perfectly morally justified. As I said earlier, if it comes down to "them or us," the choice is easy.

I personally agree that in today's western society, there really is no need to kill for food or clothing (e.g. profit). I don't eat meat. I don't buy clothing or other articles made of leather.

If you were really honest with yourself (and I have no doubt after I post this a bunch of "proud" meat eaters will come here with all sorts of very macho sounding stuff about meat), and if you took the time to really see the way animals were treated to get you that tastey morsel, I don't think you would really say it was worth it. Our society has made the slaughter of animals unneccessary. You all eat meat and love your leather shoes and couch out of habit and marketing. Given the perfectly satisfactory (and in many cases indistiguisahable) substitutes available, I know if you really took the time to learn what you needed to learn, you would give it up too.

I know you will claim otherwise. But it will not be from reason. You will not present arguments about why it is necessary, only that you want it and have the power to take it. Well, at one point Americans wanted and had the power to take slaves from Africa. It did not make that right, it just made it what we did. Some day I am certain people will stop treating animals the way they do, but it is not going to happen overnight.

Now, all that said. It is very clear that there are times and situations when killing animals for food or clothing (e.g. profit) is entirely necessary. Because of that, it is certainly true that killing animals for profit is clearly less repugnant than killing them for fun.

I'm talking about for profit, not for utility...Someone who works in a slaughter house or more to the point someone who owns a slaughter house who is killing beef cows for example for someone else's utility...they could i suppose be a vegetarian...but they are profiting from said death...Is that less evil then than killing for fun?...is the utility morally/ethically transferrable? As a trader is it ethical/moral to derive profit from trading in the stocks of companies who derive profit from the slaughter of animals? Is it ethical/moral to own the stocks of said companies?

I have killed my own cows and chickens in past for the express purpose of eating them (when my family owned a small farm). The cows and chickens were in fact treated well and it did cause me grief to kill them and they were killed as humanely as was possible.

I appreciate that your position is well reasoned but I'm curious where the line is drawn.

edit: typos

[masteen]

Extinction itself is not evil. Happens all the time. Species die off, often to make room to more successful or agressive species. Hunting is evil. People who hunt are evil. Moral men should take no part in it nor draw any quarter with it. Regardless of any benefits from the effects of hunting, killing an animal for the sheer joy of killing it should not be permitted.

On top of that, your utilitarian arguments about the benfits of hunting are specious. Clearly if, for example, the wolrd became too crowed with humans. The solution you would apply would not be to license people to hunt other humans for fun. We would find some other way to deal with it. Why? Because we are moral and it is the right thing to do.

Hunting is evil? Goddam evil lions and tigers and bears!

Speaking of specious arguments, the overpopulation of deer (for example) isn't because they're some super successful species. They're overpopulating because we killed off their major predators. The next natural step is for us to move into that vacant top predator spot. But apparently, nature is evil, according to you.

Your final utilitarian argument holds water only if we place equal value on the life of an animal that we do on the life of a human being. Even you cannot be stupid enough to make this leap.

[Siji]

and if you took the time to really see the way animals were treated to get you that tastey morsel

Aaeamdar, you'd really like a book called "Diet for a new America". It's not a cookbook, and it's very informative. (Assuming you haven't already read it)

[Sirton]

Aaeamdar wrote:
Extinction itself is not evil. Happens all the time. Species die off, often to make room to more successful or agressive species.


Might want to clarify that with "Natural extinction" as opposed to extinction caused by humans.

Agent Smith had it right. Humans are a virus on the planet.

Heh or my whole point...overpopulation of elephant causing extinction to animals, because they are not controled in those areas, because there natural predator the human tribesman hunting them for food is takin out, or the controlled hunter. Ill just agree to disagree with ya.

[Sionistic]

and if you took the time to really see the way animals were treated to get you that tastey morsel

I saw that little peta video with alec baldwin, It made me want to get the grill out, its not like no one knows what happens in slaughter houses

[Siji]

its not like no one knows what happens in slaughter houses

You're talking about a country with some people who don't know the name of their leader, or that eating fast food can make them fat.

[Aaeamdar]

I saw that little peta video with alec baldwin, It made me want to get the grill out, its not like no one knows what happens in slaughter houses

Of course it made you want to get the grill out. You were faced with truely horrifying cruelty and your participation in it became undeniable. This left you with two choices. 1. Quit. 2. Defend.

The problem is, as I said before, you cannot actual defend your choice with reason. So your response is of proud machoism. "Let's grill some of those things up! Yeah!" So no, it does not suprise me one bit that your reaction to seeing the cruelty was to revel in it. You really had no other choice. You cannot actually set out a reasoned aproach for your willing participation in it, so you hoot and hollar, make it seem like fun. You are part of a big population all doing the same thing - how can that be wrong? I completely understand your reaction. I just wish you did as well. If you did, you would realize there are no real choices and you would just quit.

[masteen]

The problem is, as I said before, you cannot actual defend your choice with reason....

Actually, I can. I don't own a farm where cows can be raised. Fortunately, there are nice people who will raise the cows for me, kill and slaughter them, then age the meat in a coldroom until it's tender and delicious, and then ship the steaks to my local grocery where I can buy them. Seems reasonable to me.

You are part of a big population all doing the same thing - how can that be wrong? I completely understand your reaction. I just wish you did as well. If you did, you would realize there are no real choices and you would just quit.

You, on the other hand, are a part of fanatical minority. You don't like eating meat, and since YOU don't fucking like it, YOU want to force YOUR little views on ME. Did God/Allah/Legba/Cthulu come down from on high and tell you that eating meat is wrong? Show me the gold plates upon which is writ the will of the Almighty, motherfucker, and I'll convert to veganism in a second.

[Sionistic]

yea that

[Aaeamdar]

I'm talking about for profit, not for utility

Ok. I think this is a conversation for a different thread, but I just want to at least make sure you understand my take on this part first. Profit and utility are the same thing. Profit is just something that happens when one person does somethign for someone else. So, put in the facts of our conversation, if there is someone out there that "needs" meat and another person provides that meat for him, that is no different that the person needing the meet doing it for themselves. So, yes, the utility is morally transferable as you look at it, or as I look at it, the question has no meaning, since I make no distinction between utility and profit.

As a trader is it ethical/moral to derive profit from trading in the stocks of companies who derive profit from the slaughter of animals? Is it ethical/moral to own the stocks of said companies?

I don't know. Ultimately I think the answer is "no." I think the fact finding is a little harder and I am not sure people are morally compelled to do it. It's an easy call not to buy ADM or Swanson's, etc., directly. You might want to know if your mutual funds have significant holding in these as well. But there are all sorts of deriviatives. I mean a Wilshire 5000 Index fund is obviously going to have some part of its value derived from these companies. And all major corporations hold stocks of other corporations. It's quite possible that Microsoft is a 4% holder of ADM for all I know. I guess I am saying, "it would be nice, but you are asking an awful lot."

This is not so different from any "slippery slope" problem, though. Some lines are very easy to draw. Hunting. Vegetarianism. Those are simple. Everyone should do it. And truthfully, if everyone did, a lot of the other questions you are asking would ultimately become non-issues.

cows and chickens were in fact treated well and it did cause me grief to kill them and they were killed as humanely as was possible.

This has little to do with our conversation, and possibly should be in a PM, but I'll ask it here. I think the morality of the above is not circumspect. I don't have a strong moral issue with you did at all, but I do have a complete lack of understanding.

I'll use me as an example. I have two cats. If some sort of tragedy happened, long before I allowed myself to die, I would kill them and eat them. But, they are my pets. I love them and I know they have affection for me and trust me. It would never occur to me to just come home and decide - "hmmm, I think I'd like cat tonight" - then grad my large cutting knife and kill and prepare one of my cats for dinner.

So here you are on a farm. You are raising animals. You obviously have some effection for them. They obviously have some effection for you and trust you. They also no doubt have effection for one another. What made you decide that you wanted meat so badly that you would go out and kill one of these creatures. When you do that, you concede to causing yourself grief. If you had children, I know you caused them greif as well. You caused grief to the animals you left alive who will now feel the absence of the creature you killed. And no matter how hard you tried not to, it is just impossible not to have that animal - the one that cared for you and trusted you - experience fear and extreme suffering in the last moments of its life.

Was it worth it just to have some steak? Couldn't you have eaten something else that night? I mean you are on a farm. You did not raise crops and other vegatables? I know this might sound harsh and judgemental, but its really not intended to be. If factory farming could be done away with and the only kind of animal slaughtering done was the kind you descrinbed, well I still would not understand it, but I would not complain so fiercly against it. I am just trying to get a grasp on what you were thinking at the time from someone who clearly understands what I am talking about now and isn't going to come back at me with some macho crap. Explain to me your feeling and thoughts, and what moral balancing you were undergoing when you were doing those things.

[Aaeamdar]

Did God/Allah/Legba/Cthulu come down from on high and tell you that eating meat is wrong?

So you need a god to come down and pronounce thing wrong for them to be wrong? It seems to me a simple and easy thing to analyze to say it is wrong to needlessly torture animals. I don't need a god to tell me that. you don't either, as is obvious in the words and tone of your response.

Fortunately, there are nice people who will raise the cows for me, kill and slaughter them, then age the meat in a coldroom until it's tender and delicious, and then ship the steaks to my local grocery where I can buy them. Seems reasonable to me.

Right. That's what I said. You choose to absolve yourself of what it takes to get that piece of meat to you. You choose ignorance. If you had to actually participate in the horror, you wouldn't. But because others are willing to do it for you, you are willing to pretend it does not exist - or when confronted with its existance - defend it with pride, but not reason. The wierd thing to me about it, is you do it so you can have something that is "delicious." There are other options out there for delicious foods that don't involve the torture and killing of animals. Why not choose that instead?

[masteen]

So it's OK to eat fish?
Cause they don't have any feelings?


Seriously, Iwas just wondering what makes your morals better than mine? My inner voice tells me that eating meat is very, very right. So how do we determine which of us is correct, without having a popularity contest?

Don't try to lable me as somebody who's afraid to get his hands dirty. I've killed, gutted, and skinned deer, rabbit, wild hogs, a couple type of birds, and more fish than I can count. I don't do it with cows because it's just not practical.

Now answer me this: do you grow ALL your own food? Do you process your own soybeans into tofu? Because unless you do, telling us that eating preprocessed meat is wrong simply because we're a couple steps removed from the live animals makes you a hypocrit.

[Aaeamdar]

What sort of horrors are going on at the tofu processing plant that I shoudl know about? Are the torturing the beans, before processing them? Did you read what you typed before you hit submit?

You may have gutted all those animals, but as I was pretty clear about the morality of that in my questions to Arbor. If that is all that was going on to get you your tastey morsel, well I still would not understand it, but I would not be here complaining about it. You either don't know the full extent of factory farming, or you know and are pretending you don't. What they do is simply not defensible. Feel free to try, but if you don't know, go learn first.

[masteen]

I'll not defend the feed lot system. Until you've seen a man sew a cows ass back inside it's body, you can't appreciate how much they suck.

Fortunately, Florida doesn't have a shitload of them, and I'm pretty sure that most of my beef is more humanely raised than that. I know this because I read the USDA census.

[Truant]

way to roll with the stereotypes. you're such a model adult, gee i have so much growing up to do to be just like you!

maybe we should turn these eco-freaks into craters just like those iraqi animals.

be right back, i'm going to go have some irresponsible sex and get knocked up by a random stranger so i can better understand what family values REALLY are. gotta have kids to understand, right?!

please, keep the insights coming. i'm truly inspired. i'll be enlightened in no time!

Stereotypes normally work, because they are often true. People who hate to be associated with those stereotypes speak out against them. Not everyone fits into stereotypes, but a good percentage do.

Never said you "HAVE" to have kids to understand. I said when you do you will. Big difference. When you have kids you see things a little differently.

Also never said I was a great role model. I do my best for my children, but I also realize my many faults and continue and try to improve everyday. I think it's important to try and improve.

Fact is, you stand on your moral pedestal belittling at least 90% of the people on this board for not being as supreme a being as you.

And then you turn and make ignorant, rediculously outlandish claims, insults, statements, and even threats. Your new avatar is a good choice for you, because you do nothing but contradict yourself on a daily basis here.

[Lalanae]

oh but he has kids so he knows better

[Fallanthas]

When idoit groups like ELF stop looking for things to burn and start making an effort to contribute to positive environmental impact I will begin to respect them.


Until then, they are a bunch of punks hiding behind ski masks and t-shirt logos.


Nice job of displaying your ignorance, Dar.

[Sionistic]

So here you are on a farm. You are raising animals. You obviously have some effection for them. They obviously have some effection for you and trust you. They also no doubt have effection for one another. What made you decide that you wanted meat so badly that you would go out and kill one of these creatures. When you do that, you concede to causing yourself grief. If you had children, I know you caused them greif as well. You caused grief to the animals you left alive who will now feel the absence of the creature you killed. And no matter how hard you tried not to, it is just impossible not to have that animal - the one that cared for you and trusted you - experience fear and extreme suffering in the last moments of its life.

What? You name me a farmer that raises cows for slaughter that has emotional connection to them.

[Fallanthas]

And obviously animals feel affection for one another in the same way that humans do....


Someone has been watching too much Disney.

[emmer]

While I agree with the fundamental goals of ELF (i.e. stop fucking up the planet so much), I will never support or condone an extremist group using terrorist tactics as a means to justify their end. Yes, I understand they haven't killed anyone (yet), but resorting to wanton destruction because a corporation isn't adhering to your views is childish.

oh, and p.s.

Quoting Tupac is tacky ><

....said the dude with one of those "which character are you polls" incorporated into his sig.

[Dregor Thule]

....said the dude with one of those "which character are you polls" incorporated into his sig.

Ok, I'll give a bit on that one, but it's Penny Arcade, so it's OK! Besides, man, I'm Divx... that's just cool!

[Aaeamdar]

What? You name me a farmer that raises cows for slaughter that has emotional connection to them.

Umm, ok. Arborealus.

it did cause me grief to kill them

I quoted that right before I asked the questions in the paragraph you quoted. Were you paying any attention at all, or just frothing at the mouth?

Fallanthas,

Not sure why I am bothering, since you have presented nothing and are obviously not interested in leaving behind your preconcieved notions, all of which are based on lies, but here you go.

And obviously animals feel affection for one another in the same way that humans do....

Someone has been watching too much Disney.

Disney movies show animals conversing with themselves and humans using english. Just because they cannot do that, does not mean they feel nothing. Anyone who has spent any time with animals and has bothered to observe them at all, knows they are not unfeeling automatons. But references are easily found on the subject. Dominion, by Mathew Scully, is both a great book in its own right and a rich source of secondary references. Next of Kin, by Roger Fouts is a primary reference by a behavioralist. I suspect you have no interest in rational discussion, or in knowing the truth, as this might start to interfer with your desire to use animals for target practice with those bows of yours.

Siji,
Diet for a New America, by John Robbins, is a great book. It and Dominion are the books I most recommend to people who are meat eaters, but who I think will listen to reason, rather than puff their chests like a barbarian and immidately seek out spare ribs to demonstrate their manliness. Both do a fantastic job of exposing the lies that most meat eaters live with until they stop the "machoism" and start asking questions. Dominion, I actually find to be an even stronger reference in many ways. Both are great at doing the most important thing, though, exposing the truth that the meat industry is very concerned the typical consumer will eventually come across. Many in my circle of friends, like me, are politically conservative. Dominion is written by a conservative, christian vegetarian. His approach is to not only reveal the facts of the meat industry (and of the "sport" of hunting) but also to relate those back to Christian ideals and in some cases scripture. Both are excellent books. If you have not yet read Dominion, I strongly recommend it, especially if there are some conservatives in your circle of friends that might be receptive to a rational discussion of why they choose to eat the things they do.

[Aaeamdar]

Fortunately, Florida doesn't have a shitload of them, and I'm pretty sure that most of my beef is more humanely raised than that. I know this because I read the USDA census.

I know you would like to believe this. People in most states would probably say the same thing. The problem is, the meat industry goes to considerable lengths to hide factory farms. Unless you buy Organic meat, or go by meat directly from a farmer you know, it is extremely likely that you are buying factory farm meat. There is just so little meat left in the US that does not come from factory farms.

Smithfield is the largest Factory Farm corporation in the world. They have a huge farm in (ironically) Plant City, Florida. They have distribution hubs (yeah, the industry is so large, that they use a hub and spoke system for distributing their products), in Miami, Daytona and Tallahasee. In Florida, the Smithfield farm goes under the operating name of Lykes Meat Group. Some of the lables its meats are sold under include, among others, Fleetwood, Gwaltney, John Morrell & Company, Kretschmar, Lykes, Patrick Cudahy, Rath, Schneider and Smithfield.

The other reality is, locality is by and large irrellevant, unless you are purchaing Organic meats. The Factory Farm industry, as I mentioned, uses a hub and spoke system of distribution. Its just more efficient that way when dealing in the volumes they deal in. So, even if it were true that factory farms are rare in Florida (it isn't), it really would not matter. The meat sold at your grocery store very likely comes froma factory farm.

The reality is that the meat industry is very interested in perpetuating the myth that family farms are alive and well in America and that the meat you will eat tonight came fresh off Farmer John's feilds last week. It is, however, a lie. No one can produce meat at the costs factory farms can, so no one can compete with them. Even the small portion of meat that is raised on family farms will end up sold to (often at a loss, but thank Uncle Sam for those Farm Subsidies) processors owned and operated by the factory farms. Outside the small Organic Meat market, there is just no such thing as a "family" slaughterhouse.

If you do not believe me, just ask your grocier for the names of their meat wholesalers. Post them here and in a couple days I'll give you the name, with tracable references, of the Factory Farm that is producing that meat.

[Chidoro]

I saw that little peta video with alec baldwin, It made me want to get the grill out, its not like no one knows what happens in slaughter houses

You know, I bet you think you know what happens in slaughter houses, but read Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser when you get the chance to, it's a shitload worse than you could possibly imagine. I blew through this one in about 3 days. Some of the "free-market at all costs because businesses are all peachy and need no regulation" pundits should also take a look at what happens to an entire industry that gets protections from the government (in this case, the mostly republican congress through the last twelve years not to mention the way Reagan let the industry get away with feeding people poison and employees to basically live under horrible conditions to save a few bucks).

I don't particularly like extemist groups of any kind as there has to be a certain level of realistic resource usage to conduct a modern lifestyle. However, you can't let companies completely ravage things taking the easy way out all of the time just to gain a double digit year over year profit. That type of environmental massacre really only helps a tiny number of folks get rich anyway, but I'm sure the trickle down people will think that's going to help us all (even though it's never ever worked).

As far as hunting goes, I don't really care much either way about the topic. I don't do it because it doesn't really interest me. I certainly don't consider killing an unaware deer from 50 yards using a high powered rifle a sport. Fuck, bowling, is more of a sport. On the other hand, I like venison and I hate when deer try to commit suicide on my car so I understand the population control measures and what they are in place for. The only things that tends to bother me about hunters is that they kick and scream at ANY reasonable gun-control measures and that their practices are out of "love" for the land (laughable at best).

[Aaeamdar]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/14/opini ... N2.html?th

An article in NYT today exposes the lie of "hunters as naturalists."

The Hunters in Alaska are trying (and in many counties have succeded) to get limits on Wolves significantly upped. The problem isn't human expansion or too many Wolves near populated areas. The problem is wolves doing what they do naturally - hunting moose. Hunters in Alaska don't like how hard it is to find Moose to kill, so they want to kill off the natural preditors of Moose so that there will be a Moose population problem that "only hunters" can control.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

way to roll with the stereotypes. you're such a model adult, gee i have so much growing up to do to be just like you!

maybe we should turn these eco-freaks into craters just like those iraqi animals.

be right back, i'm going to go have some irresponsible sex and get knocked up by a random stranger so i can better understand what family values REALLY are. gotta have kids to understand, right?!

please, keep the insights coming. i'm truly inspired. i'll be enlightened in no time!

Stereotypes normally work, because they are often true. People who hate to be associated with those stereotypes speak out against them. Not everyone fits into stereotypes, but a good percentage do.

Never said you "HAVE" to have kids to understand. I said when you do you will. Big difference. When you have kids you see things a little differently.

Also never said I was a great role model. I do my best for my children, but I also realize my many faults and continue and try to improve everyday. I think it's important to try and improve.

Fact is, you stand on your moral pedestal belittling at least 90% of the people on this board for not being as supreme a being as you.

And then you turn and make ignorant, rediculously outlandish claims, insults, statements, and even threats. Your new avatar is a good choice for you, because you do nothing but contradict yourself on a daily basis here.

Ok Truant.

What threats have I made?

Ignorant and outlandish claims? To you they might be yes.

Supreme being? Obviously you don't read what I say, just tidbits. If you just read tidbits, yes you can come away with that idea of me. But, thats the problem with just reading tidbits. I know, I have done it myself.

I am very honest in my words. I'm sorry you can't handle my honesty.

Are you really going to battle stereotyping? Seriously? You can probably link 50 billion example of people who defy stereotypes, but they will make a minority of whatever group they differ from.

[masteen]

Dar, I don't give a shit how they're slaughtered, as long as my meat isn't getting contaminated. You can preach all you want about how bad the cows feel as they're being killed; I have yet to see a more substantial argument from you.

I don't give a shit about family farms, either. I could care less who owns the field, as long as the cows aren't packed in pens for their entire lives.

Florida isn't a big feedlot state. I went to school and lived in north and central Florida for a lot of years, and I know for a fact that there are a shitload of cow pastures there. From the 1997 Census, there are 11,896 non-feedlot farms covering 5,187,838 acres compared to 309 feedlots covering 38,160 acres.

But I'm sure every bit of meat I've ever eaten here was raised on one of those 38,000 acres, and that the millions of acres on the census and those cows I see everywhere in Florida are a fucking illusion perpetrated by the evil meat industry.

[Pherr the Dorf]

Chorus:
This land is your land, this land is my land
From California, to the New York Island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was made for you and me

As I was walking a ribbon of highway
I saw above me an endless skyway
I saw below me a golden valley
This land was made for you and me

Chorus

I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Chorus

The sun comes shining as I was strolling
The wheat fields waving and the dust clouds rolling
The fog was lifting a voice come chanting
This land was made for you and me

Chorus

As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!

Chorus

In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple
Near the relief office - I see my people
And some are grumblin' and some are wonderin'
If this land's still made for you and me.

[Arborealus]

Bah add teh new verse...

As I was reading, our dear old rights bill
We got a president, who said he'd had his fill
Of some brown people, so our rights are dying
This land was made for you and me

[Chidoro]

But I'm sure every bit of meat I've ever eaten here was raised on one of those 38,000 acres, and that the millions of acres on the census and those cows I see everywhere in Florida are a fucking illusion perpetrated by the evil meat industry.

Who gives a shit where the cows are raised. The cattle you're seeing on all of those pastures are being sold to feedlots, they're not the ones typically sent directly to a processing and/or packer plants.

[Deward]

I eat meat. I like Meat. I don't like how it is processed so I eat less meat or try and only eat organic meat. I think that most cattle farms are not feedlots but nearly all cattle end up on a feedlot for a short period of time before they are sold at auction. This is to fatten them up right before a sale. From what I have heard, this feedlot time is usually about 3 months long. I doubt the cows have a happy go lucky life before that but the FDA does inspect meat plants quite often and if someone gets sick or a plant is found dirty, then teh FDA will come down on them hard. Of course I have also heard that the FDA will give advance warning of inspections. Either way cook yer freakin' meat good afore ya eat it!

[Chidoro]

Actually, the FDA has had trouble putting inspections into place all across the board since the Reagan years (like the problems in the poultry realm during the Clinton years). It's always lobbied out and never gets anywhere. The only people who really have a say when it comes to inspections are the largest domestic purchasers, in this case fast food restuarants. Hell, the FDA can only recommend a recall of tainted meat, they can't even fucking force it if you can believe it. Again, that's a measure successfully lobbied to the beef pundits in congress. I'm afraid you're at the mercy of the fast food industry to regulate the three big suppliers.

I pretty much purchase the meat at a butcher shop or at a high-end supermarket like Wegmans since they cut it up or ground it at the store that morning. That way, at least I can be reasonably sure there won't be cattle shit in my burger.