On 17/05/2021 23:40, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 17 May 2021 22:14:07 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 17/05/2021 17:29, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 17 May 2021 15:52:31 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

Hopefully good news (and there will be plenty of more of that to
come).

Why?

Because it seems it's the only way we can get some people to stop
causing animals to suffer and die unnecessarily?

It still makes no sense.

Ok ...

I would expect the vast majority who eat animals already realise that
they are sentient beings.

Do they? How many here for example consider them 'just meat' and only
pay a lip service to the welfare?

Most meat eaters do want good welfare for animals. In some cases, such
as rearing pig, it is well known that good welfare promotes a reduced
stress environment which leads to greater weight gains.

They can't give up 'meat', not they
want to stop killing animals?

If we want a balanced diet for ourselves and our children it is a
necessary evil to slaughter animals.

Which is why the vast majority of people who
eat animals want to see that they cared for and treated humanely while
alive,

I don't believe they do, because if they did, they wouldn't eat meat.

That's because you don't want to believe it, probably because you don't
want improvements to animal welfare as it furthers your endeavours to
convert everyone to veganism, even if it is an unhealthy diet.

and then killed in as quick and painless way as possible.

Define how quick 'as possible' should be? How much pain do *you*
consider 'ok' to inflict on an innocent creature that doesn't actually
need to die (and certainly doesn't want to) for us to survive?

There are various forms of painless death. This is one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inert_gas_asphyxiation

Having a bit of legislation define them as sentient makes no difference
to those of us who do care about their welfare,

See above, and my reply elsewhere re yet another opportunity to open
up discussion on the whole commodification of animals for their flesh
(eggs / milk).

We do see, and your beliefs as unfounded however much you wish them to
be true.

and also probably little
difference those those who mistreat them either - since both realise
they are sentient.

Quite. Everone who eats meat mistreats animals that do not want to
die. It's the ultimate mistreatment, *death*.

We'll have to agree to differ. I don't believe that. What matters is
their welfare up to and including slaughter.

I doubt there are many for who this must be some kind of news! (even
thick people can normally spot the difference between a pig and a brick.

What they don't seem able to do is spot when they are supporting the
suffering, exploitation and death of sentient creatures and hence the
need for the education and outreach. They *think* that cows need
milking *anyway*, that chickens lay eggs *anyway* so we can just take
them if we want and pigs exist just to give us bacon.

Farmed pigs generally *do* exist just to provide food and a multitude of
other useful materials.

Quite, animals we have exploited into that situation.

We exploit everything, even the air you breathe.

They are not bred just because farmers like to
have lots of pets and enjoy wading through pig ****.

Grow up. ;-)

If animals are to be recognised as sentient beings, shouldn't that mean everyone must become vegetarian?

No, because that means we aren't recognising the sentience and so
rights of egg laying chickens or cows.

Nonsense.

Perfect sense.

You may well think you chicken qualifies for entry to Mensa,

Grow up.

thrrrrrp

but that
does not stop you enjoying an egg with your bacon.

The thought that an animal *will* have to suffer (because they do) for
my pleasure is enough to stop millions of us from 'enjoying' such
things.

And it's your choice.

It's nothing to do with me, it's about the choice *you* aren't giving
to them. To live their lives (especially the wild animals whose
habitat you destroy to grow food and graze your meat that shouldn't
even be here).

Given the short lives these animals would have in the wild your claims
make no sense.

As is enjoying an omelette for the majority.

As it still is for me (except now I don't use chickenS eggs, because I
have aligned my actions to my morals).

You have no morals when you resort to abuse. Taking an egg from a
chicken for which you provide shelter and food, keep predators away is
indicative of a symbiotic relationship.

No
need for either group to proselytise.

Of course there is, because one group is destroying the planet and
causing unnecessary death and suffering to the other? You (meat / egg
/ milk) eaters aren't the victims here, you are the aggressors. ;-(

We are not the ones aggressively abusing fellow humans for eating a
natural balanced diet.

Man is destroying the planet through over-population. If it's that
important why don't you support the groups and countries that are
depopulating. Russia is a good example.

(Never seen a cow egg - so will skip those!)

Yes, it might be best for you as we will have to start testing your
supposed ethics skills again. ;-)

You ain't the sole arbiter of ethics - live with it.

I have never (ever) suggested I was, it's the spirit of millions of
like minded (and ever growing) number of others around the world you
are trying to argue against (and the billions of sentient beings whose
lives you (meat / egg / milk) eaters take from them, just to satisfy
your taste desire?

Not just a taste, it's also texture and nutrients, some known, and some
unknown that we gain from eating meat and fish products we can't get
from plants alone.

If it's all so normal to eat meat, why won't most people be involved
in the process? Why would most go vegan rather than pull the trigger?

Because we live in a society where we specialise in certain jobs. It
promotes efficiency.

If it's so normal, why aren't all children educated re the full
details from when they are first given meat? If eating meat is so
'normal', why don't the kids visit an abattoir like they visit an
orchard or arable farm? Why when they visit a dairy do they not see
the calf being taken away from it's mum and have them explain *why*
both mum and calf are calling for each other?

In much the same way we withhold some details of how children come to
be, sex and other things so they can enjoy their childhood and some
semblance of innocence. Only someone sick in their mind would think
differently.

I know the answer of course, the action of killing anything
(especially sentient) isn't natural at all,

You're simply wrong, it is natural and man and fellow animals have been
doing it for aeons. Some for millions of years.

it's something people do
to each other in rage, self defence, (inc of their country or after
being brainwashed) or when their morals allow them to consider it
acceptable. When they do that they are all judged to see if it was
'avoidable' etc (even within a war).

You're now talking of survival instincts, where we protect those we
love. And go to war when necessary. I would agree that some are
unnecessary and for political / personal gains.

Most people (in the civilised world) bring their children up to
respect and care for animals, then they feed them the dismembered
carcases like it's all perfectly normal... (when they don't need to).

If our children are to have normal brain development then we should
specifically feed them meat and fish products. The alternative is an IQ
10-20 points lower.