On 11 Jan 2007 04:41:02 -0800, wrote:

Jim Webster wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


I only wish that it was true but unfortunately there is nothing to make
up about all the horrible cruelty associated with factory farming.

but the only evidence you have is what comes from those who make a living
out of selling that story
These who somehow neglect to mention that all farms get cross compliance
inspections from government agencies on a regular basis, and also they
neglect to mention that if they have a case, then the RSPCA will be round
there pretty damn quick to deal with it, and the RSPCA enthusiastically
prosecutes.
So how many of these cases they have produced have resulted in RSPCA
prosecutions, or any sort of prosecution?

They are purely scam artists conning a gullible public for their own
financial gain

Count me as one of the gullible public.

No doubt about that! We can count you more than once in fact.
Do you believe that veg*nism helps or saves any livestock? If so,
we can count you again. Do you think "ar" terrorism does some
good? If so, we can count you yet again...

There is a big difference
between what the government with meat industry input considers cruel
and what most people of reasonable caring does. The very nature of
factory farming is cruel and I for one will never support it and will
continue to support those who are making an effort to improve their
condition.

Being veg*n doesn't do anything to help any livestock. "ar"
organizations *exploit* AW issues in order to obtain funding,
but the philosophies of "ar" and AW are completely different:
__________________________________________________ _______
.. . . Not only are the philosophies of animal rights and animal welfare
separated by irreconcilable differences, and not only are the
practical reforms grounded in animal welfare morally at odds with
those sanctioned by the philosophy of animal rights, but also the
enactment of animal welfare measures actually impedes the
achievement of animal rights.

.. . . There are fundamental and profound differences between the
philosophy of animal welfare and that of animal rights.

.. . . Many animal rights people who disavow the philosophy of animal
welfare believe they can consistently support reformist means to abolition
ends. This view is mistaken, we believe, for moral, practical, and conceptual
reasons.

.. . . welfare reforms, by their very nature, can only serve to retard the pace
at which animal rights goals are achieved.
.. . .

"A Movement's Means Create Its Ends"
By Tom Regan and Gary Francione
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
__________________________________________________ _______
AVMA POLICY ON ANIMAL WELFARE AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

Animal welfare is a human responsibility that encompasses all aspects of
animal well being, including proper housing, management, nutrition, disease
prevention and treatment, responsible care, humane handling, and, when
necessary, humane euthanasia.

Animal rights is a philosophical view and personal value characterized by
statements by various animal rights groups. Animal welfare and animal rights
are not synonymous terms. The AVMA wholeheartedly endorses and adopts
promotion of animal welfare as official policy; however, the AVMA cannot
endorse the philosophical views and personal values of animal rights advocates
when they are incompatible with the responsible use of animals for human
purposes, such as companionship, food, fiber, and research conducted for the
benefit of both humans and animals.

http://www.avma.org/policies/animalwelfare.asp
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
There was a time when the only reason why I would not eat
meat was because of cruelty of factory farming. Realizing as how
difficult it is to change the practices of an industry protected by
wink-wink government regulations, I decided not to eat any meat no
matter how it was produced.

Nah. Meat grosses you out so you're trying to justify not eating it.