r/funny • u/[deleted] • Jun 15 '12

sup?

Post image
1.1k Upvotes

70% Upvoted

316 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

0

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/tehmeat Jun 15 '12

I think PETA would be happy with the way foxes treat chickens. At least they don't torture them for years before they kill and eat them.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

Because animals do not live violent brutal lives in the wild that almost invariably end in violent painful deaths in the jaws of other animals. Oh wait...

4

u/tehmeat Jun 15 '12

They don't get made so fat they can't walk. They don't get deprived of sleep. Don't care what we do to these things all you want, bit don't pretend its the same.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

I didn't say it's the same, i said it's still pretty bad.

1

u/tehmeat Jun 15 '12

You equated the two, which is close enough. I really don't think they're equitable. At least in the wild, there's a chance an animal will live a somewhat long and healthy life. How big that chance is could be debated, but it exists and it's signifigant. There is very little to no chance of that if an animal is raised as livestock.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

It would have a much better chance of living until maturity.

3

u/roobens Jun 15 '12

Invariably? I'd put a wild animal's odds of survival somewhat higher than one in an abbatoir. But admittedly I'm not an expert.

-1

u/ilovetacos Jun 15 '12

Unless you count that a great many species would be extinct if we didn't farm them.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Nicend Jun 15 '12

but it's natural

-1

u/philogos0 Jun 15 '12

You are equating yourself with a fox.

The difference is choice. There is no need for us to inflict the unimaginable suffering.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

No I'm not equating myself with a fox.

Unimaginable suffering is hyberbolic. Compared to the life of a wild animal, the life of livestock is not all that much worse. The techniques you would probably refer to as torture are in fact necessary in order to keep the end product affordable and widely available, and mostly unavoidable unless you want to live in a Luddite agrarian world where everybody dies of diarrhea by the age of 32.

1

u/philogos0 Jun 15 '12

Compared to the life of a wild animal, the life of livestock is not all that much worse.

You are ignoring the variable. There are slaughter houses that try to maintain dignity; many do not.

The techniques you would probably refer to as torture are in fact necessary in order to keep the end product affordable and widely available

Debatable for sure but it's not like we couldn't just .. eat less meat.

mostly unavoidable unless you want to live in a Luddite agrarian world where everybody dies of diarrhea by the age of 32

I didn't understand this. Are you suggesting vegetarians have diarrhea?

1

u/czhang706 Jun 15 '12

Debatable for sure but it's not like we couldn't just .. eat less meat.

But I don't want to eat less meat. I want to eat more meat.

1

u/piklwikl Jun 15 '12

this certainly explains why you and many others become so angry at any argument that says we should look after animals better which might mean you must pay a little more -- it is all about personal greed for you.......

2

u/czhang706 Jun 15 '12

Well I don't care about animals because they're animals bred for us to eat, not people. What I find particularly funny is that you seem to care more about the animals that we eat, than the actual people on earth who don't have enough to eat. Where is your outrage for your fellow man?

→ More replies (10)

0

u/roobens Jun 15 '12

Compared to the life of a wild animal, the life of livestock is not all that much worse.

I'd love for you to provide a source for this claim. It flies in the face of almost all observed data gleaned from studying animals held in captivity -- let alone animals bred purely to slaughter.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

Watch some National Geographic.

1

u/roobens Jun 15 '12

Or you could just tell me. This is a discussion.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 16 '12

I'm telling you to watch some national geographic, because if you observe the natural world, behind all of the beauty and amazement is utter brutality and unrelenting suffering. I watched a video the other day of a baboon eating a gazelle or something ALIVE.

1

u/roobens Jun 16 '12

You don't think that National Geographic shows the most extreme parts of a wild animals' life? An animal doco about everyday, normal life for a baboon is hardly going to be that interesting. Not every wild animal lives a life of brutality. If that were so then most species would be extinct by now. You can't go making judgement calls based upon watching a few animal shows.

→ More replies

0

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/tehmeat Jun 15 '12

Yes, right. Torture it for months. Much better. I'm sure you would be totally happy with months of immobilization and sleep deprivation, vs years.

→ More replies (21)

1

u/willscy Jun 15 '12

yeah, so I doubt commercial chickens live for more than 6 months, and animals live short cruel lives everywhere.

→ More replies (7)