Well if we are rolling up sleeves *rolls up the sleeves of my Totoro hoodie*
~ Domesticated hens only produce so many eggs due to the fact that they are both genetically engineered to produce many more eggs than is natural and are usually subjected to near-constant lighting and fed high protein feed to increase egg production so they produce over 300 eggs a year which is massively detrimental to their health. This is not an argument for consuming eggs but is an argument against breeding these animals into existence in the first place to exploit and slaughter for profit. I mean just the simple act of continuing to bring them into existence, never mind the brutal exploitation, abuse and slaughter is an act of cruelty in itself due to how much they suffer from these abnormal bodies.
~ Also, when it comes to the actual eggs, chickens will cannibalize their own eggs and this is an incredibly important practice (especially in domestic chickens that have been bred to produce so many more eggs than natural or healthy) that gives back vital nutrients to their system lost during egg production and laying. Producing eggs involves a massive loss of lots of calcium and puts massive pressure on the hen’s body a reason why these genetically engineered hens so young aside from slaughter. Also taking a hens egg away sends the signal to her body to make a replacement. So the more eggs used for human consumption the more eggs the hens will produce which is not good for their body and health at all. Solution? Stop breeding these animals into these bodies that they suffer so greatly from because you want to eat their eggs. And if you’re looking after rescued hens leave the eggs to them to cannibalize instead of taking them away to encourage ore egg-laying. And make sure they are safe from predators which would try to kill them regardless.
~ Its actually only because of genetic manipulation via intensive breeding practices in order to maximize profit. that has resulted in dairy cows now producing so much more milk than is natural, and at the incredible detriment to their health. This, coupled with the fact these cows are required to give birth to one calf annually so are forcibly inseminated repeatedly so that they can produce such high levels of milk for 10 months of the year. Of course, the solution to this issue is not to continue doing this but to stop artificially and forcibly breeding them into existence into these genetically engineered bodies to brutally exploit and slaughter for profit.
It’s also worth recognizing that issues you raise only occur both, from the living conditions these animals are kept in, their genetically engineered bodies, and the fact that they are only “milked” twice a day instead of the five to six times a day a calf would ween from her. This adds to the accumulation of milk accumulate in the udder which greatly enlarges the udder and leads to lameness in her hind legs and predisposes her to mastitis and many other serious health issues. And of course, the average dairy cow now completes less than four forced lactations before she is then brutally slaughtered because she stops being profitable either because of low milk yield, infertility or diseases caused by living conditions and the incredibly large strains forced on her body in order to produce so much milk. This is horrifically cruel.
~ There’s no such thing as “ethically produced” animal flesh, milk, or eggs as bringing an animal into existence for the sole purpose of needlessly exploiting and brutally slaughtering them in their young is not ethical under any circumstance. When it comes to animal agriculture, in all farms, regardless of the size of the farm, location, or the labels used (”free range” “organic” “grass fed” etc) animals live their too-short lives trapped in genetically engineered bodies that are ravaged by their size and forced overproduction of babies and milk till they are “spent” and are slaughtered for profit, all for needless human pleasure.
Its also worth noting that many of the cruelest practices industrial factory farming takes place on smaller local farms, these include forced impregnation, stealing babies away from mothers, routine mutilations without anesthetic, murder of newborns and young animals (including using methods such as bludgeoning and maceration), horrendous living conditions, denial of important instinctive behaviors and preferences and brutal transport and slaughter conditions. And of course, these animals all end up in the same slaughterhouses at a fraction of their lifespans and there is no “ethical” way to needlessly slaughter a sentient being that doesn’t want to die. While buying from a local farm might be slightly better than buying from a factory farm, it’s still just trying to find the right way to do the wrong thing.
~ Aaahh…The “but they have it better than in nature” argument. its a weird argument but one I see often..the facts are that this isn’t an either/or situation where either the animals we needlessly farm and eat die a violent, harrowing death in nature (after a violent, traumatic life..hmm reminds me of the life of farmed animals), or they have a comparably “easy” life and a “better” death on farms. These farmed animals would never have been born in the wild in the first place as they are artificially bred in mass numbers into existence specifically to be exploited on farms for human pleasure and profit. Animal agriculture does not save them from the brutalities of nature and possible horrible death. These animals are not being rescued or saved or protected, they are bred by humans to be killed by humans without a fighting chance. This hypothetical nature scenario is a false premise and does not justify the needless breeding, exploitation and brutal slaughter of animals for food.
~ @acti-veg has a great article about this here. But in short, Lions and other animals need to kill for survival, without it they would die. Humans killing animals for food is cruel and unnecessary because we know that we have no biological need to consume animal flesh, milk, eggs or honey. Other species do a lot of things we don’t do, why pick one thing wild animals do that you want to copy and disregard the rest? I doubt you would defend that same line of logic when it comes to other violent actions by saying, “yeah but animals do it in the wild” would you?
~ How do you justify needlessly taking the life of another sentient being that doesn’t want to die for your own personal pleasure, and at a fraction of their lifespan? I mean you could argue that the act of taking their life is even crueler if they have a happy life beforehand. But regardless of the fashion of the slaughter, there isn’t a justification for taking that life. It is still needlessly taking the life of a sentient being, for your own personal pleasure. If somebody killed your companion animal, I doubt you’d say “that’s fine because you did it painlessly”? Though maybe you might. But I know that most people would very much be against that. I am interested though in how you slaughter animals “painlessly”?
~ Yeah no, the exploitation of, and slaughter of other sentient beings when its avoidable is always wrong. Dog, pig, chicken, sheep, cat, horse, etc.
~ Please, tell me how it was creepy?
~ Wait..wait…are you comparing plants to animals?? You’re trying to say that the stem of a plant is the same as the butchered limb of a chicken? You are seriously trying to use the “plants feel pain? Of course plants arent living organisms, they are, just like bacteria and fungi. What they aren’t though is sentient. And it is sentience which is the issue here. Plants lack nerves or a central nervous system, brain or anything else that neuroscientists know to cause sentience. Because of this, they cant respond to stimuli in any deliberate way (what they do have are non-conscious reactions, and it’s these reactions you’re talking about). Unlike animals (sentient beings) plants absolutely lack the ability or potential to experience pain/suffering or have sentient thoughts, so there isn’t an ethical issue with eating them because of this. There is the same level of an ethical issue as someone cleaning a worktop and killing bacteria. And I’m pretty sure nobody is abstaining from cleaning their house or taking medication because they are killing bacteria in the process.
Sentience: The capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.
Animals = Sentient
Plants = Not sentient
But let’s say we lived in an alternate universe where we discovered that plants actually have something akin to what we understand as “sentience” and so could feel pain. The difference , In this case,is that we need to eat plants to survive, but we don’t have to eat animals. In fact, it’s incredibly harmful to human health. Also, more plants are used for animal flesh/milk/egg production than for plant production because the animals farmed are fed plants. So if we lived in this alternate universe it would still be better to minimize plant usage by feeding humans directly with them, rather than feeding many more plants to animals to then eat ourselves.
~ Food chains help maintain natural ecosystems and natural population sizes of wild animals, and they help maintain the natural ecology of areas of the world where they exist and are fundamental to the survival of those ecosystems. What we do to animals when we forcibly artificially breed them into genetically engineered bodies they suffer so greatly in, to exploit and slaughter needlessly has nothing to do with a food chain. Nor does it resembles anything like you would see in the wild. It has nothing to do with helping to maintain healthy population sizes or maintaining the ecology of environments and is actually actively incredibly detrimental to them. What we do to these animals could not be further detached from any sense of the food chain.
~ Yes, let’s use nature as a justification for our violent actions., who needs morality when it comes to humans copying actions we see in nature! Another species does it? That’s A-okay for us as humans to also do!
