I challenge you to watch this and not reconsider the meat in your diet. Bear with it for the first 10 minutes, after which it really gets going.
“The architecture of slaughter is opaque, designed in the interest of denial.”
Related Comments (6)
I challenge you to watch this and not reconsider the meat in your diet. Bear with it for the first 10 minutes, after which it really gets going.
“The architecture of slaughter is opaque, designed in the interest of denial.”
This is utter nonsense. Animals are not earthlings, they are not even on the same level as humans as they don’t have sould like humans do. Animals are subordinate to humans as decreed by God in Genesis, “Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
This doesn’t mean animals should be treated with cruelty, but God created humans specifically with incisor teeth which serve no purpose except for the tearing of meat. We are not cud chewers, otherwise all our teeth would have been created with molars like cattle.
This sort of idealogical horse-hockey os typical of the Godless and effeminate liberal left who would be at a complete loss if they ever had to survive out in the wilderness by their own hand. They are complacent and soft and if they had done like I had growing up on a farm, ever had to behead and pluck a chicken for dinner, would probably starve. Can’t wait for the revolution and civil war to come because they will be the first to be preyed upon (since they don’t believe in owning guns either) and the world will be rid of these, for lack of a better word, pussies.
OK, first (leaving your religious leanings totally aside):
I see a dramatic ethical chasm between hunting to survive, and relying on the industrialized meat production system (which as the documentary clearly shows is cruel on a vast scale) in a society where you can quite easily survive on either a vegetarian or ethically-sourced meat diet.
I have plucked chickens that were raised and killed in my parent’s garden, and shot & cooked rabbits that were destroying the vegetable garden. So, I’m by no means a radical vegan. But I do think it’s ethically/morally (choose your preferred word) dubious to write off the avoidable suffering of billions of living organisms just because it’s more convenient.
Secondly, what is your definition of soul? If you’re talking about “going to heaven” or anything similar that’s totally unprovable, then we have nothing to talk about. But, wouldn’t you at least concede that animals (or, perhaps more specifically: most vertebrates) have a) consciousness and b) pain receptors? Isn’t it therefore “bad” to impose pain on them, if avoidable?
I think I specifically said in my first post that cruelty is unacceptable.
When humans die, their consciousness continues into another realm of existence, that would be the definition of having a soul. Animals, once dead, do not posess this. But as I said, I’m not condoning treating animals cruelly. Indeed, most meat packing plants stun the animal before it’s slaughtered. My argument is that just because some people are womanly squeemish about where meat comes from doesn’t make it wrong.
Killing animals for food is not wrong, those are direct words from God.
Acts 10:9-13:
9 Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
“When humans die, their consciousness continues into another realm of existence, that would be the definition of having a soul. Animals, once dead, do not posess this.”
Is this just a theory, or do you consider this a fact? I don’t think that anywhere in your authority (the bible) the question of animals having souls is mentioned, even.
Incidentally, how much of the bible do you consider valid? Do you stone gays and murderers? Do you believe the earth is 6000 years old? Do you believe the earth was created in 6 days? Do you believe that the entire earth was flooded 5-6000 years ago, and that we’re all descendents of Noah? Do you believe Adam and Eve were literal people?
“Killing animals for food is not wrong, those are direct words from God.”
Just to clarify, those are quotes from an old book. If you believe them to be from God, good for you, but the burden of proof on that one is for you (it’s impossible to prove a negative.)
If you want to get into a religious debate, I’m more than happy to, but this post is probably not the ideal location for such (search for Dawkins, and reply to one of those posts). If you are introspective otherwise, I suggest that you check out either Dawkins’ documentary or book - after doing so, either you will be satisfied that you are right to hold your convictions, or you will be able to refine your belief systems, and in either case you win.
One more point:
“Indeed, most meat packing plants stun the animal before it’s slaughtered. My argument is that just because some people are womanly squeemish about where meat comes from doesn’t make it wrong.”
You clearly didn’t watch the documentary.
WRT your first point, here is an eloquent (if lengthy) research article which in the end says the same thing, animals do not posess immortal souls like humans do because only humans were created in God’s image while the animals are not.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/448
Secondly, yes, the Bible is not “an old book”, it is the inerrent, inspired, infallible Word of God regardless of whether scoffers want to believe it or not. I do believe in a literal 6 day Creation and I believe there is LOTS of scientific evidence that proves it (and likewise disproves the myth of Evolution) which I can give a short list of here such as: lack of meteoric dust on the moon, Venus rotating backwards without impact craters visible to have “flipped it upside down” defying the laws of angular momentum after an explosive Big Bang, some scientists now saying it appears 90% to 99% of the expansion of the universe happened in the first nano-seconds of the “Big Bang” (which is a problem if the universe as some of these scientists are now saying would make the universe less than 100 million years old, but the the earth is supposedly 4.5 billion years old), the earth slowing on its rotational axis such that you only have to go back 100 million years before the Coriolis effect creates wind speeds incapable of supporting any life on the planet, Carbon 14 radioactive decay isn’t a constant, it has slowed measurably just since 1950. I could go on and on…. The Bible predicts people would scoff at the Creation and the Flood accounts in the last days calling them “willingly ignorant” (meaning they will have heard the truth but chosen not to believe).
2 Peter 3:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
Incidentally, the Welsh people of Britain did not originally call themseleves Welsh, which comes from the Saxon word “Welash”, meaning “foreigner” (ironic since the Welsh were in Britain first, but after a few 100 years the Saxons forgot this). The ORIGINAL term the Welsh people used to refer to themselves was “Gomeraeg”, meaning, “Sons of Gomer”. Gomer was one of Noah’s grand sons, and the Welsh believed themselves to be his descendents, and they were pagan at the time and had forgotten anything having to do with there being one God. Gaelic came from Gallic came from Galatian in central Turkey and guess what, the Bible says Gomer’s descendents settled in central Turkey. They migrated over several thousand years across Europe (and the archaeological record proves this) and settled in Britain. One instance of a people spreading out across the globe just as the Bible said the tribes of Noah’s descendents had in the Table of Nations.
As for stoning murderers, yes, those who commit intentional homicide of another human SHOULD be executed an eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life, just as the Mosaic law says. While Jesus did say, “He who is without sin cast the first stone”, note he DIDN’T say, “Don’t execute her, that would be wrong.” His point was that she SHOULD have been executed, but he alone had the power to forgive. Homosexuality is a sin, no matter how much the gay community wants to deny this, that doesn’t make this not true. By the same token so are lot of sexual trnasgressions such as adultery and fornication. All are forgiveable.