That's fine, Will I will sit on the moral high horse, regarding this practice. You said this once, it was eloquent, and I agree with it. I consider this wrong, and not everything under the sun devolves to "efficiency." The history of the 20th Century alone should tell us that. There are better, and worse, ways to kill an animal for its meat. And if efficiency were the optimal measure, why not just drop a nuke in the Norwegian Sea? Something's gotta kick up...
I think the point is pretty obvious, Will, that there are greater and lesser ways to kill an animal, morally, and I think you know and agree. Driving a forklift through the side of a sick and dying cow, or high-pressure hosing water through its snout to push it into the abattoir is probably not moral. Nor is systematically torturing chickens as a means of slaughter. Nor is this practice, and many others like it.
The point is obvious and effectively irrelevant. The animals live their lives and the suffer at the time of their deaths. Such is it with all creatures. They will never experience the pain of chemotherapy. Their deaths in becoming food for the Danes are probably no worse that their deaths at the hands (er... teeth) of any other predator. Nature is not pretty when viewed from an ivory tower. I find it ridiculous to worry about the last few hours of a bunch of dumb animals when over a billion human beings are living their entire lives on this planet as virtual slaves. Not just a few hours of pain -- decades of pain and suffering. Clean up North Korea, China, Iran, Cuba, and Zimbabwe -- then maybe I will find time to care about the "feelings" of my dinner.
I find that specious. You yourself have said it: what distinguishes us from lesser creatures is our ability to make judgement. Yet here, you collapse all things into "nature as it is," eschewing the sense of judgment that is precisely at our behest. We can choose how we secure our food. To choose a manner that is atavistic, wanton, and, willfully, exceedingly cruel, makes us less, in fact, than animals, since we do have the power of conscious choice. I can't accept that.
It looks pretty terrible that's why I find it funny. It reminded me of this comic strip on ElectricRetard (not safe for work, graphic images). BTW, I wouldn't recommend looking any further into the site, reactions vary
And we should use that judgment wisely. I used to have a bumper stick that said "SAVE THE PLANET; KILL YOURSELF." Instead of choosing that path, I choose life. I choose to eat plants and animals. I choose to wear leather. I choose to murder innocent insects whose only crime is to enter my home. I choose to murder innocent plants whose only crime is to grow on my lawn. I choose to murder innocent animals whose only crime is to enter my garage. I choose to murder other innocent animals whose only crime is to be tasty. And I also choose not to pass judgment on other people who make similar choices. Anyone who eats meat, uses pesticides, wears leather, or kills mice in cruel metal traps would be hypocritical to be critical of the Danes.
As Simply and I are discussing, I'm deeply saddened by the last sip of Buffalo Trace in my glass, so I'll have to leave it here, Will - but basically, agree with you that wise choice is what we should be doing, in all we do; disagree that this wholesale slaughter, and the means of carrying it out, is a wise choice, and think it an illogical leap to say that because one eats meat, one must accept that all means of acquiring meat are equivalent, morally speaking. This brings us back to the beginning. We judge right, and wrong, as human beings. We even tell others what is right, and what is wrong - you certainly do it all the time, so do I. I consider these whale hunts cruel beyond belief, and needless, so I condemn them, by my moral sense. You disagree. I'm heading to the cupboard to see if something can replace my orphaned Buffalo Trace.
The philosophical question becomes are we guardians of nature or are we merely users of it? I like the conservationist concept, that we are here to guard it for as many to use it for as long as possible. I would have a hard time believing this is really an efficient conservative method. That being said I have to admit I find the treatment of animals in factory farms and this type of slaughter method to be disgusting regardless of whether it is efficient or not. All the old farmers around here tell me that a steak from a cow that has been stressed before the slaughter by pain and mistreatment will actually not taste as good. Something about muscles tensing and hormones in the blood stream. I think the closer you are to the food you eat the better you are too, if you can I would suggest meeting the people who grow your food, but of course I guess Wal-Mart food is more efficient...
Absolutely agree. I'm a chef (or was a chef - still getting used to my ex-status!), I eat meat, and I use meat. But as a chef, and as a consumer, it is imperative to me that how an animal lived, and how it died, cannot be removed from the equation. The plastic wrapped pieces of flesh kicked out from industrial production is designed to remove the end user from the literal hell the animal endured to get there. If more people were made aware of the practices of industrial production, we'd have a wholesale change, I'm quite certain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle was testament to that.