CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Question of the day

Re: Question of the day

Framk F. Stoneham — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 13:38:44 -0000

Butchering horses for human consumption is no sin, especially since horses are not the brightest animals on the farm.

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

Re: Question of the day

conscience — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 00:27:25 -0000

As a conscience member of humanity I oppose the slaughter of horses and other animals when it involves abuse whether in captivity, transport or during the slaughter. Farming animals for food sometimes involves cruelty that is overlooked or rationalized for profits of corporations. Most farms are now owned by corporations and deal with volume rather than quality. Americans and people of other nations should educate themselves about the quality of the meat and poultry they eat and the methods in which these animals are "ranched". As for horses being pets and therefore not being slaughtered for food, the ethical questions begin well before you get to the point or decision of slaughter. I agree with Julie that people should engage themselves in a process of education and research before forming an opinion so it is not entirely an issue based on emotions or a lack thereof.
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.

Re: Question of the day

Julie — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:05:36 -0000

On my. The ignorance and complete lack of pertinent and truthful information about horse slaughter ( goes to starving people...only old useless horses are slaughtered, used in candles and soap....geez)is frightening. I strongly support Sr.1915 which would outlaw the slaughter of American horses in foreign owned..non-tax paying ( educate yourselves and do the research before you throw around uninformed and erroneous dribble) slaughterhouses to feed the wealthy tastebuds of France (who by the way hate us), Belgium and Japan. I will vote against any politition who does not support this bill. If it is unimportant to you, clam up and find another topic that you are probably equally uninformed about.

Re: Question of the day

Anonymous — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:15:25 -0000

Stavros--this little girl never dreamed of of getting a horse as a pet but apparently when beautiful big girls like Bo Derek come lobbying, big boys are easly swayed.

Re: Question of the day

grand old partisan — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:28:24 -0000

Anon 12:43 - I stand corrected. Thanks

Re: Question of the day

Fan of the Game — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:19:50 -0000

"Other anonymous meat" ;) pretty much said it all in the first response: We slaughter and eat a wide variety of animals, and horses are no different than cows, deer, lamb, or hogs.

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?

Re: Question of the day

Middle Majority — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:19:43 -0000

I grew up on a small farm and although we all worked very hard as a family we were not very well off. My Father had a friend who was wealthier and they had a pet horse for their children. One day (I was about 16) their horse was delivered in a trailer to our farm. The horse was quite old, partially blind, had some tumors, smelled terribly, and was not well at all. My Father just explained that his friend's children couldn't bear to see their pet failing so we would keep it for them until it passed. (I presume money changed hands but my Father would never say...I don't think he was proud of it.)

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.

Re: Question of the day

anon — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:43:41 -0000

Grand Old Partisan said "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."
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).

Re: Question of the day

Charles A. Hardenberg — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:22:21 -0000

We have a fiscal disaster in Illinois and the General Assembly finds the time to vote on garbage legislation like this? State worker's pensions are going down the tubes in this state and they're worried about horse meat?

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.

Re: Question of the day

doubtful — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:47:59 -0000

I think the core of the argument is the difference between livestock and companion animals. I think people who consider a horse a companion animal would be less likely to support eating it. Personally, I don't support it, but I'm not sure if we need more laws to govern it.

Re: Question of the day

Mmmm Good — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:25:06 -0000

Actually cowboys and settlers of the old west regularly ate horsemeat. It wasn't like there were all these fat cows and pigs all over the prairies and western mountain ranges as populations moved further and further westwards. Horsemeat was often a staple food source.

Re: Question of the day

Left Leaner — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:05:41 -0000

I bet John Wayne would've eaten his horse if he got hungry enough! :)

Re: Question of the day

Tweed — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:04:02 -0000

Never mind, it's HB1171

Re: Question of the day

Tweed — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:58:25 -0000

Rich, you make seem a little confusing by mentioning that there is an Illinois Bill when the article is about the US Bill.

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?

Re: Question of the day

Eagle I — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:56:30 -0000

If we were hungry enough, we would stand in line for a good horseburger, and be thankful. Meat is meat.

Re: Question of the day

Way Northsider — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:39:01 -0000

Horse slaughter is no different than killing other animals for food. Makes no sense a pregnant mare was being sent to the slaughter house. The story is illogical and silly.

Re: Question of the day

Sound Reasoning — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 11:27:32 -0000

There should be no ban. These horses go towards feeding some people in parts of the world that are starving. How riteous are we to say that they shouldn't eat horsemeat just because we don't. Would we rather have them starving. I know its hard for some of us in the US to understand but there are parts of the world that do not have the variety of food that we do here. They don't have the option of saying "I will not eat horse, but give me the lamb, duck goose, cow, pig, deer, elk, salad, etc."
For the good of humanity let the horses serve another purpose.

Re: Question of the day

The Conservative — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:55:48 -0000

I agree, put a lid on it and turn up the gas.

Re: Question of the day

Truthful James — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:50:58 -0000

NW Burbs --

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.

Re: Question of the day

Robbie — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:47:40 -0000

I'm all for eating horse if you like it. I personally don't eat it, but who am I to get between a man and his horse meat? I do agree with an above commenter that it is quite odd that young horses and pregnant horses are included. I would assume that in the cattle and pig industries there are regulations against that? Do they exist at all for horses, or is that area unchartered?

Re: Question of the day

grand old partisan — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:47:09 -0000

Nw burbs Ã¢â‚¬â€œ if you arenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t a vegetarian, then please put a lid on it (respectfully, of course).

Ã¢â‚¬Å“other AnonÃ¢â‚¬Â 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.

Re: Question of the day

farm kid — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:35:44 -0000

I'd vote "neigh" on horse slaughter legislation. Sure some lawmakers may be able to cinch up support in the House. But lets not beat the horse out of the gate. These animals, which for a variety of reasons have lost their economic value, will be destroyed, anyway. The issue is what happens to the carcus -- should it go to a USDA-approved slaughter house where its product will be sold for human consumption overseas? Or is the alternative preferable -- being sent to a rendering plant where its hide will be sent to a tannery and its flesh will be boiled down to tallow. (Think of that next time you light a candle, pick up a bar of soap or zip up your purse.)

Re: Question of the day

Diversity of Thought — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:34:19 -0000

VanillaMan,

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.

Re: Question of the day

VanillaMan — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:24:12 -0000

John Wayne never ate his horse. Letting foreign companies butcher horses and shipping the product to their markets is sickening.

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!

Re: Question of the day

Wumpus — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:19:48 -0000

If people want to eat a horse, so be it. It is an animal and I am sure some people around the world are sickened/offended by some of the animals we eat. Truthful James, You ate a dog, how could you? A horse is another animal, eat Mr. Ed, Flicka and the Black Stallion if you wish. Just make sure it is labled as such.

Where is Frank Stoneham on this issue?