image

itsasecrettoeverybody:

Of all the convoluted rationalizations for eating meat in an age when eating meat is not at all necessary for our survival or health, many people today are borrowing a popular slogan I like to call “the personal choice self deception.” It goes something like this: “My decision to eat meat is a personal choice.” And it is usually followed by a statement sympathetic to their vegan and vegetarian friends, acknowledging that they too are making personal choices that are right for them. Sounds great on the surface, but it’s what lurks beyond the surface that I find deeply disturbing for five key reasons.

1. Eating is a communal, multi-cultural activity until the vegan sits down at the table

First, let’s take a closer look at what personal means in the context of the highly social human activity of eating. Personal food choices had never been discussed at the dinner table until a growing number of vegans and vegetarians — by their very presence at the table — question the legitimacy of eating animals. A person who tells you that their meat eating is a personal choice is really telling you “stay away.” They don’t want you to question their highly-coveted moral beliefs or perhaps they object to exposing their unexamined moral quandary over how one can justify using and killing animals for food in an age when it is completely unnecessary. In other words, They have made this issue personal precisely in response to you making it public.

2. There is no free choice without awareness

The irony is that while meat eaters defend their choice to eat meat as a personal one, they will nonetheless go to great lengths to defend it publicly when confronted with a vegan or vegetarian. Like some apologetic white liberals who defend themselves by defiantly exclaiming to a new black acquaintance, “But I have black friends too!”, some meat eaters will go to great lengths to explain how intimately they understand veganism since they have vegan friends, have already heard and evaluated their reasons for going vegan and respect them dearly.

They’ve considered being vegan carefully, they will assure you, and have concluded that it’s just not for them. But instead of arriving at some novel new understanding of why humans should eat meat, they simply revert back to the traditional arguments that are all pretty much centered around what social psychologist Melanie Joy calls the three N’s of justification: eating meat is normal, natural and necessary. (1) But their reasoning reveals the fact that they have sorely overlooked the big idea behind veganism which author Jenny Brown points out so eloquently in her book The Lucky Ones: “We can become prisoners of our earliest indoctrinations or we can choose to look critically at our assumptions and align our lives with our values. Choosing to live vegan is how we re able to do that best.” (2)

3. The choice has a victim and the victim is completely ignored

Let’s take a look at the issue from the animal victim’s perspective which has been completely denied by the meat eater’s unexamined assumption that animals have no interest or understanding of the value of their individual lives. Does the animal who is being bred, raised and slaughtered for someone’s food care if the person who is eating meat has given the prospect of becoming vegan any serious moral consideration? Of course not.

The notion that these conscious meat eaters think they have done their due diligence by examining the pros and cons of eating animals means nothing for those that value their lives as we do. The fact is the animals we raise for meat have at least as much of an interest in staying alive, avoiding pain and suffering and seeking pleasure as these meat eaters’ pets. As activist Twyla Francois so aptly puts it: “All animals have the same capacity for suffering, but how we see them differs and that determines what we’ll tolerate happening to them. In the western world, we feel it wrong to torture and eat cats and dogs, but perfectly acceptable to do the same to animals equally as sentient and capable of suffering. No being who prides himself on rationality can continue to support such behaviour.”

4. Many personal choices we make have dire consequence for ourselves and others

Now let’s take a closer look at the meaning of choice itself. The act of making a choice implies that the actor has free will and awareness of the options and their consequences. In the spirit of justice, we live in a society where our actions and choices are governed by what society deems acceptable. We can make a personal choice to maim, rape or kill someone, but these actions will have consequences that serve as a deterrent. It is generally accepted in a democratic society that we are free to do what we want as long as it doesn’t harm anyone else or infringe on the same rights and freedoms of others.

Yet, for the meat eater, the choice of eating animals is completely disconnected from this concept of justice since justice does NOT for them apply to other species, only to humans (how convenient). In other words, there are no visible, negative consequences to eating meat. The victims remain invisible and silent to those who eat them, and that is perhaps the greatest deception of all.

5. Atrocities are never personal

In reality, the choice to eat meat negates the very meaning of choice because the animal that had to be killed to procure the meat had no choice in the matter at all. And the notion of characterizing such a choice as a personal one is even more problematic since the choice required the taking of another’s life, not a personal sacrifice. Nothing could be more public than the taking of a sentient life that cares about his own life, particularly when the act is not necessary and therefore not morally defensible.

When 60 billion land animals and another approximate 60 billion marine animals are killed every year across the planet for “personal” food choices made by a single species that are based on palate pleasure alone, eating meat ceases to be a matter of personal choice; (4) it becomes a social justice movement to protect the rights of animals. To deny animals the right to live their lives according to their own interests is wrong and to attempt to defend our choice to eat them as a personal one is delusional.

See Seven Reasons Why Man Has NOT Evolved to Eat Meat

Vegan Starter Kit

image

New Hampshire, Wyoming and Nebraska are the latest states to introduce ALEC backed Ag-Gag laws aimed at preventing employees, journalists or activists from exposing illegal or unethical practices on factory farms. Lawmakers in 10 other states introduced similar bills in 2011-2012.  The laws passed in three of those states: Missouri, Iowa and Utah.  But consumer and animal-welfare activists prevented the laws from passing in Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York and Tennessee.

In all, six states now have Ag-Gag laws, including North Dakota, Montana and Kansas, all of which passed the laws in 1990-1991, before the term “Ag-Gag” was coined.

Wyoming’s HB 0126 is the perfect example of a direct link between an undercover investigation of a factory farm and the introduction of an Ag-Gag law. The bill was introduced after nine factory workers were charged with animal cruelty following an undercover investigation by the Humane Society of the United States. HSUS activists videotaped workers kicking live piglets, swinging them by their hind legs and beating and kicking mother pigs. State Rep. Sue Wallis and Senator Ogden Driskill introduced the bill which would make it a criminal act to carry out investigations that exposed the cruelty at Wyoming Premium Farms.

The idea behind the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act is to make it illegal to “enter an animal or research facility to take pictures by photograph, video camera, or other or other means with the intent to commit criminal activities or defame the facility or its owner.”

(Source: action4animals, via angryvegan)

inothernews:

Let me guess: it’s all the dolphin’s fault that you keep it in captivity then allow little children—less than six inches away from the pool that you keep it in—to wave food in its face .
Perhaps you’ve also named the dolphin “Lawsuit.”
Normally I blog picture only posts on… Who What Where Why How.

Normally I blog picture only posts on… Who What Where Why How.

(via fuckyeahcompassion)

dogjournal:

CARE PACKAGES FOR MILITARY DOGS - “No one can tell you a dog is man’s best friend like Alan Meeks. While serving in Vietnam, Meeks was saved twice by his German shepherd war dog, Artus — all within eight months…“I’m here today because of my dog. He was a good boy,” he said.”
A Vietnam Veteran named Alan Meeks is working along with a non-profit organization called the U.S. War Dog Association, Inc. to send care packages to military dogs overseas and to promote the dogs’ overall welfare. Meeks still remembers his dog, Artus, who saved his life on two occasions. Here’s more from the Kokomo Perspective:

The organization also works to send packages overseas to war dogs and their handlers and to buy equipment for the dogs.
“The military doesn’t always have all the equipment for military dogs. It just depends what unit they’re in, but we’ll buy cooling vests or goggles or booties for their feet,” he said. “We’ll also send out care packages with dog treats, dog toys, things like that.”
Last year, 16,000 packages were sent.

Military dogs in the Vietnam War era have a tragic history. Although some of the dogs were adopted, approximately 296 were killed in action, 600 died from medical issues, and over 2,500 ended up being euthanized. Today, advocates have succeeded in promoting legislation that ensures military dogs will not be put to sleep for unnecessary reasons. Click here for the full story, and here to learn more about the U.S. War Dog Association.

dogjournal:

CARE PACKAGES FOR MILITARY DOGS - “No one can tell you a dog is man’s best friend like Alan Meeks. While serving in Vietnam, Meeks was saved twice by his German shepherd war dog, Artus — all within eight months…“I’m here today because of my dog. He was a good boy,” he said.”

A Vietnam Veteran named Alan Meeks is working along with a non-profit organization called the U.S. War Dog Association, Inc. to send care packages to military dogs overseas and to promote the dogs’ overall welfare. Meeks still remembers his dog, Artus, who saved his life on two occasions. Here’s more from the Kokomo Perspective:

The organization also works to send packages overseas to war dogs and their handlers and to buy equipment for the dogs.

“The military doesn’t always have all the equipment for military dogs. It just depends what unit they’re in, but we’ll buy cooling vests or goggles or booties for their feet,” he said. “We’ll also send out care packages with dog treats, dog toys, things like that.”

Last year, 16,000 packages were sent.

Military dogs in the Vietnam War era have a tragic history. Although some of the dogs were adopted, approximately 296 were killed in action, 600 died from medical issues, and over 2,500 ended up being euthanized. Today, advocates have succeeded in promoting legislation that ensures military dogs will not be put to sleep for unnecessary reasons. Click here for the full story, and here to learn more about the U.S. War Dog Association.

(via angryvegan)

"Veganism is not elitist, what is elitist is the thought that your palate pleasure and convenience justify the suffering and death of another sentient being."

Gary L Francione is the Distinguished Professor of Law and Nicholas deB. Katzenbach Scholar of Law & Philosophy at Rutgers School of Law-Newark.[1]

His work has focused on three issues: the property status of animals, the differences between animal rights and animal welfare, and a theory of animal rights based on sentience alone, rather than on any other cognitive characteristics.

(via vegan-because-fuck-you)

iclosemyeyestoseewhatsreal:

Every year 5 people are killed by Shark attacksEvery year 6 people are killed by Roller CostersEvery year 30 people are killed by AntsEvery year 40 people are killed by JellyfishesEvery year 60 people are killed by Hot DogsEvery year 340 people are killed by BathtubsEvery year 350 people are killed by falling out of their bedEvery year 6,000 people are killed by TextingEvery year 30,000 people are killed by Obesity So why is there so much hate about those sharks that we can justify killing 75,000,000-125,000,000 of them a year? 50,000,000 of those are “bycatch” while fishing for other fish… they are thrown back into the sea dead. The other 25,000,000-75,000,000 are caught for their fins… and thrown back into the sea dead.Maybe we should burn a Hot-Dog stand, smash a bed or throw away our mobiles?! 

I love this approach to argue for a vegan and/or more active life style. Nicely done!

iclosemyeyestoseewhatsreal:

Every year 5 people are killed by Shark attacks
Every year 6 people are killed by Roller Costers
Every year 30 people are killed by Ants
Every year 40 people are killed by Jellyfishes
Every year 60 people are killed by Hot Dogs
Every year 340 people are killed by Bathtubs
Every year 350 people are killed by falling out of their bed
Every year 6,000 people are killed by Texting
Every year 30,000 people are killed by Obesity 

So why is there so much hate about those sharks that we can justify killing 75,000,000-125,000,000 of them a year?
50,000,000 of those are “bycatch” while fishing for other fish… they are thrown back into the sea dead. The other 25,000,000-75,000,000 are caught for their fins… and thrown back into the sea dead.
Maybe we should burn a Hot-Dog stand, smash a bed or throw away our mobiles?! 

I love this approach to argue for a vegan and/or more active life style. Nicely done!

(via fuckyeahcompassion)

In organized cockfights, razor-sharp knives are often attached to the limbs of the fighting birds. In this gambling fight Jose Luis Ochoa, 35, was declared dead in Tulare County, central California some two hours after being injured.

Imagine that… a dude was killed by birds equipped to kill each other. WILD.

Now Louisiana, the last US state, has banned cockfighting. Truly remarkable. 

star-bellied-boy:

“A picture speaks a thousand words”

star-bellied-boy:

A picture speaks a thousand words”

(via quadfins-deactivated20121003)

"We once had a chimp who could sort photographs of apes and human beings into two piles. Apes on one pile, humans on the other. The only trouble was, every time she got to her own picture, she put it on the pile with the human beings."

Dr. Geoffrey H. Bourne, Yerkes Primate Research Center. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations by Leonard Levinson, 1971. (via ingridrichter)

(via from-meat-to-bean)

Walmart cruelty information…
If you are like me, and don’t need to see something to believe its happening, don’t watch this video. Otherwise, its disturbing, be warned. Good info at the end though.

Walmart cruelty information…

If you are like me, and don’t need to see something to believe its happening, don’t watch this video. Otherwise, its disturbing, be warned. Good info at the end though.

(Source: myvegansoul, via fuckyeahcompassion)