-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2006/09/29/question-of-the-day-178/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
Americans may not generally include horse meat as part of their diet, but we include cow meat, pig meat, chicken meat, etc. Farm animals get slaughtered for food.
Just because our diets don't include horse meat doesn't make the practice of packing meat any more or any less ethical. I'd have more respect for the proponents of this idea if they proposed banning all slaughterhouses.
Unlike bovines which a raised strictly for milk and food and not as pets and not in the United States as work animals, horses have other connotations. This slaughtering takes a small number of animals willingly delivered and under Department of Agriculture facilities and procedures butchers them and exports the product.
Now, of course, we have politicians searching for votes with their own coats soaked with the blood of self dealing.
"City Council simply reaffirmed the longstanding moral and ethical principal against cruelty towards God's creatures," said Alderman Moore.
There we have it.
Although I don't like the idea of slaughtering horses, there's no ethical basis for banning horsemeat, and not beef, pork, or anything else. Anyone who thinks our slaughter methods for horses are any more cruel or unusual than other livestock is very naieve about where their food comes from.
But perhaps this ban really comes back to our politicians obsession with promoting gambling.
"You can't slaughter horses! We can bet on those! We need those horses alive to fund education!"
Just because protecting God's creatures (as foie gras ban sponsor Ald. Joe Moore puts it) isn't one of your principles doesn't mean others can't stand up for their beliefs. The Spotted Owl (which is an indicator species -- think canary in a coalmine) also falls into this realm.
What sort of principles do we have if we don't stand up for what we believe in? Conservatives don't have the market on being strong in defense of your convictions.
Where is Frank Stoneham on this issue?
Is it unethical - shut up!
I've ridden for 25 years, owned horses and I think that anyone who doesn't have a problem with this needs to get their fat butt off the couch and back in the saddle, pilgrim!
We're Americans - not Eurofreaks!
Strap a saddle on a cow, and spend the next 25 years with it. I'm guessing your opinons on eating beef would change dramatically.
“other Anon†is completely right. If there is something inherently cruel or unusually about the way we go about slaughtering horses, that would be one thing. But the supporters of this ban are parsing species in a way that disconnects it from any broader principle. I suppose it is thus not much of a coincidence that many of the strongest supporters of this ban were also vocal supporters of an arbitrary raising of the minimum wage for workers of certain stores - another proposal that has much more to do with symbolism than a principled concern for the plight of low income workers.
As usual, your reach exceeds your grasp. For you, a living embryo is not one of God's creatures. but that is a horse of a different choler.
For the good of humanity let the horses serve another purpose.
I personally cannot believe that both the US and Illinois have such an obscure law going on, but I started to search the IGA website using the HR503 number. Does anyone by any chance now the number for the Illinois resolution?
That's the problem with this state, focusing on legislation that doesn't do anything, while letting the major stuff, like being able to pay its bills, float on by.
If my State Senator or State Rep. votes for this, I will vote for their opponent.
You are way off base. First the min. wage bill was a Chicago thing. The horse slaughter bill was in Springfield and was split more along the lines of men & women legislators than any other common denominator. Even many, if not more, of the pro-labor votes were actually against this bill because it would cost jobs(except for Molaro, the bill sponsor, of course).
Anyway, we cared for that poor animal for several weeks trying to get it to eat and drink and watching it suffer. It was very unpleasant and seemed wrong because we would never let one of our animals suffer that long. Finally, my Father made a call and put it down. Later that day, I had to usher the rendering plant truck through the gates and held my breath as I helped them fasten a cable around the horse's head and tried to find something else to look at as it was winched into the truck with other carcasses.
I would guess the kids who once rode that horse have fond memories...I'll bet they are mortified by the thought of slaughtering horses. As for me, I am a little more pragmatic. There are ugly and unpleasant things that have to be done in this world. When you pretend they don't exist, you disrespect the people who do those ugly and unpleasant things for you.
I, too, would have more respect for the bill if it were to seek the ban of all slaughtering. That would be more honest.
Of course, I don't suggest such a ban. Where would I get a good NY strip?
A good read on this subject is a John Robbins Pulitzer Prize nominated book named "Diet for a New America".
I support legislation on this issue but really believe that education and dialogue would lead to much needed reforms in this industry.
If, we decide to save the most intelligent animal on the farm from our dining table, then we'll never know the great taste of pork roast and mmmmmmmmm, bacon.
Horse meat should be available to AMERICANS, instead of shipping that delicacy to Europe!
Yours truly,
Frank "try it, you'll like it" Stoneham