This is disgusting, can the meat industry ever be humane?

Watch
Arsenal96
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
I'm surprised only the Mail reported on this. I couldn't even watch the video.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...like-dead.html

I admittedly eat meat but make sure it is free range and sourced specifically. I stay away from the likes of KFC and subway so I try my best. But I rarely have it nowadays anyway.

But is there any chance of the meat industry reforming? Surely there is ways to process all this humanely? Are there any laws in the process of being introduced?
1
reply
Jamie S
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
i like bacon and chicken and steak omonononmonomon
4
reply
username1204031
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
It's more humane than what happens to chickens living in the wild.
1
reply
Zargabaath
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
(Original post by Jamie S)
i like bacon and chicken and steak omonononmonomon
mature
5
reply
Zargabaath
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
Probably not, as the need for more cheap food increases along with population we're probably going to see worse treatment if anything.
1
reply
Prince_fancybum
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by JordanL_)
It's more humane than what happens to chickens living in the wild.
Not really though
3
reply
username1204031
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Prince_fancybum)
Not really though
Really? Because if I had to choose between getting thrown around a bit or getting hunted down by a fox and slowly torn to bits, I'd choose the former.
1
reply
Prince_fancybum
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by JordanL_)
Really? Because if I had to choose between getting thrown around a bit or getting hunted down by a fox and slowly torn to bits, I'd choose the former.
Battery chicken: spends whole life being force fed in tiny cage unable to move, with no natural light. Killed by decapitation.

Wild chicken: varied and drug free food, plenty of space to move, lots of natural light. May be killed by a predator, but will almost definitely live longer than the few weeks a farmed chicken would
3
reply
So Instinct
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
Not a chance, not anytime soon and never will be until the the meat market isn't so ruthlessly driven by profit margins and protected by governments.
3
reply
Amazing Egghead
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report 5 years ago
#10
After seeing this thread, I decided to double up on the pepperoni on my Domino's pizza :borat:
1
reply
Pulse.
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report 5 years ago
#11
That video made my mouth water.

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
reply
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
Let's be serious. Any normative ethical question concerning animals depends on one's views of the extent of moral importance which can be afforded to them. There are all sorts of good arguments. Personally, I cannot see animals as morally important, though I could be convinced otherwise (and if I were, I would feel it correct to become vegetarian, if not vegan) (n.b. I doubt that anyone on here could convince me). If you do see animals as morally important and yet eat meat, I suggest you seriously question your views and make sure you're able to articulate a moral basis for your decisions.
1
reply
Farm_Ecology
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
Let's be serious. Any normative ethical question concerning animals depends on one's views of the extent of moral importance which can be afforded to them. There are all sorts of good arguments. Personally, I cannot see animals as morally important, though I could be convinced otherwise (and if I were, I would feel it correct to become vegetarian, if not vegan) (n.b. I doubt that anyone on here could convince me). If you do see animals as morally important and yet eat meat, I suggest you seriously question your views and make sure you're able to articulate a moral basis for your decisions.
The question as i see it is how the importance of the well being of the animal weighs against potential gain from eating it.

In the western world, the gain of consumption is purely one of convenience, as its just simply easier to have a balanced and pleasurable diet when eating meat.

Meanwhile, the animals themselves have varying degrees of awareness of the situation they are in (depending on the animal) but are certainly able to feel displeasure from it (less so with chickens).

Now, unless you place an arbitrary line around mankind, it makes sense that uneccisary harm of any form of life that can experience it is immoral, based on the degree to which it can ecperience it.

Now, i personally place the prevention of the suffering of an animal as more important than the convenience of a person. Partially because i see the prevention of suffering as more important than the promotion of pleasure.
2
reply
miser
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
Let's be serious. Any normative ethical question concerning animals depends on one's views of the extent of moral importance which can be afforded to them. There are all sorts of good arguments. Personally, I cannot see animals as morally important, though I could be convinced otherwise (and if I were, I would feel it correct to become vegetarian, if not vegan) (n.b. I doubt that anyone on here could convince me). If you do see animals as morally important and yet eat meat, I suggest you seriously question your views and make sure you're able to articulate a moral basis for your decisions.
I'm interested to know why you don't see animals as morally important. If moral behaviour is behaviour that attempts to avoid causing unnecessary suffering, then participation in the meat industry is in contradiction with it. So, if moral behaviour is in fact not dependant on the intention to avoid causing unnecessary suffering, then what is it and why bother with it?
0
reply
TheDefiniteArticle
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by miser)
I'm interested to know why you don't see animals as morally important. If moral behaviour is behaviour that attempts to avoid causing unnecessary suffering, then participation in the meat industry is in contradiction with it. So, if moral behaviour is in fact not dependant on the intention to avoid causing unnecessary suffering, then what is it and why bother with it?
Morality is a calculus which dictates behaviour based on what is best for the class of beings deemed morally important. It is silly to decide first what the content of morality is, and then the beings to which morality applies. Unless, of course, you define the class of beings as 'those capable of experiencing suffering', but that needs justifying - it's very far from being able to be taken as obvious.

Edit: the reason I don't take animals as morally important is because I start from the assumption that something isn't morally important until proven otherwise, and I find humans to be morally important because I feel intuitively that some humans are morally important, and I can't find a rational distinction between those humans and any other human.
0
reply
Danq
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
As far as I know, cattle isn't being waterboarded. You could make the argument for foie gras I suppose, but killing is killing, no humane way to do it.
0
reply
Jamie S
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by Zargabaath)
mature
No, fresh. However I like mature Cheddar.
0
reply
Wolfegirl98
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
Please watch cowspiracy on Netflix or YouTube, I guarantee it will change your life, and oh and btw free range doesn't mean ****. Please if you do watch it get back to me, I'd like to discuss it!!!
0
reply
LadyEcliptic
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 5 years ago
#19
As far as I'm aware, the welfare standards in America are far far less than that in the UK.

In America they cut the trachea out of the cow and let it suffocate/drown in it's own blood, whereas here we stun it.

I don't understand why the chicks can't be raised for meat though? I'm not sure why they don't do that instead of just crushing them to death.
0
reply
Macy1998
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#20
Report 5 years ago
#20
Not really.

No offense but I was expecting to see something bloody or gruesome. I just saw was chicks in cages. Those were pretty mild pictures for "inhumane" actions.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (44)
27.67%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (14)
8.81%
No I am happy with my choice (89)
55.97%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (12)
7.55%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed