I really don’t think there are any unwanted horses at least not that I’ve ever seen. I’ve seen some that someone may not want but theres always someone else that does. I’ve seen cases where someone gives away a horse and another turn around and sell it also. Thats why I always tell people don’t take a horse for free unless you make it clear their giving it away no strings attached. I never take free anything unless its clear I’m the new owner period.
[QUOTE=county;1876828]
I agree yoiur entitled to your opinion as all of us are and I’ve stated it many times. I accused you of nothing other then excatly what I said. You can choose to make my words something other then what they are if you want but that hardly means I said anything else.
Why am I pro slaughter. To me its not a why question its why not.
And yes I’ve worked in slaughter houses. Many people do which is a good thing for anyone that likes to eat meat. do[/QUOTE]
No one is trying to make your words mean something other then what they are. But you seem to take offense when someone has a different opinion than you!
Never answered the question - Why are you pro slaughter? Have you sent a horse to slaughter before?
I don’t think many people have worked at a slaughter house. Especially people who like animals! Why is it good to work at a slaughter house if you like meat?
I don’t like it if someones opinion is differant? look around and tell me you don’t see where I’ve been attacked for my opinion.
Why am I pro slaughter? Many reasons one is because I have no problem if someone wants to eat horse meat. People ingest tobbacco, alcohol, drugs, I have no problems with them ingesting protein.
Have I sent a horse to slaughter? No but I’ve sold some at auction and the buyer could have. I have eaten horse before as well as dog. Tasted fine I didn’t die or get sick.
Why is it good to work at a slaughter house if you like meat/ Well to earn a pay check comes to mind. Why is it good to work anywhere if you like meat?
Is your vehemently pro-slaughter stance due in large part to a desire to not have any “rights” taken away or given restrictions? Do you truly believe that slaughter is the best way to handle the “unwanted” horse population?
I understand that you believe that it is a right of these “horse owners” to take their horses to slaughter to get the last few bucks out of them and that making a living is paramount even if it is based upon the suffering, torture and death of sentient beings. Do you condone the poaching of tigers and rhinos (and the maiming of the corpse for some small part such as tiger penises or rhino horn for which there is a highly lucrative foreign market) if that is the only way that those poachers can earn enough money to feed their families?
I realize that selling horses to slaughter is not illegal. I’m not sure whether killing some of the exotics for strange body parts is illegal or not. But the end result is that by doing the killing the killer can afford to survive and have his family fed.
Regarding eating horse and dog and not getting sick - due to their own poor standards of hygiene the French are said to be excellent world travellers as they never get sick (Montezuma’s revenge etc) due to having built up an immunity to such germs. In other words, alot depends upon what you are used to eating.
Regarding eating horse and dog and not getting sick - due to their own poor standards of hygiene the French are said to be excellent world travellers as they never get sick (Montezuma’s revenge etc) due to having built up an immunity to such germs. In other words, alot depends upon what you are used to eating.
I am not sure whether to laugh or get angry…that is about as ignorant as it gets!:eek:
The French don’t have such a scitzophrenic relationship to things in life one can derive pleasure from, sex, eating or drinking, you name it.
The best prevention for the runs is a stiff apperitive and a similar degistive…booze…not dirt!
Alagirl- I’m surprised you’ve never heard that saying, originally attributed to a Frenchman, when discussing the fact that the French seem to be much hardier world travelers than Americans. I think it was originally about visiting Mexico in particular. (And I know of many Americans who do not get sick when visiting Mexico but it IS a huge joke here, particularly with Texas being practically next door to Mexico). The comment was made that the Americans tend to be so germophobic that leaving home always involves them getting sick. To which a Frenchman replied that the French never get ill travelling the world as they are used to a few germs in their environment(allowing dogs in some restaurants, allowing smoking in public). I guess it does sound as if I’m commenting on what they eat but wasn’t meant that way. Basically that the French live and enjoy life, germs and all, while Americans tend to be germophobes who can’t travel without taking anti-bacterial babywipes with them. I think the French have a much healthier outlook and probably on average do tend to be better world travellers than Americans.
“Alot depends upon what you are used to eating” should have been a separate comment and refers to County’s comment of having eaten dog and horse and not getting sick. I had a dog that when fed cooked venison steak got violently ill. The vet said it was because the dog was not used to game meat and if fed it often enough would get used to eat and be able to keep it down. I’ve known people who were vegetarians that became violently ill when they ate meat in a casserole.
But no - I didn’t mean the French ate wierd things. Just that they are able to cope with a dog under the table in a restaurant, or someone smoking a cigaret at an outdoor cafe. Heck, they probably don’t have anti-bacterial soap dispensers at every gas station nor do you find alot of them opening doors with their elbows. Compared to most of the world the average American is a germophobe.
Sorry- not meant as an insult to the French, just written badly.
Sounds much better in the second version…I can whole heartedly agree to that! :yes: 
Don’t know if this could get further off-topic, but…
You make a valid point. Americans are germophobes. The French probably aren’t fully brain-washed enough to use anti-bacterial soap. Only Americans would buy into that rubbish.
Did you know that triclosan, the active ingredient in anti-bacterial soap, is considered by our own CDC to be very dangerous? Yes, it’s true. The EID journal has published numerous reports on the many dangers of triclosan, yet Americans buy up the soap thinking they are doing themselves a big favor.
Curious, isn’t it?
PP you keep getting legal things and illegal things mixed together for some reason. Slaughter of livestock in this country is legal. Not sure about Lions and Tigers and Bears in others at all but thinking what you described is illegal in most countries just as dealing drugs is.
Ant I thought were not supposed to bring up any animals except horses? Rules just keep going back and forth here.
RE: The French- My brother lived there for a number of years while working for a big advert. firm. He said the first 6 months were hell for him between food poisoning type illness, allergies gone berserk. And then- amazingly he was the healthiest he’s ever been in his life- dogs in restaurants, cigarette smoke in cafes and of course, a nice glass of wine on a regular basis. He joked that it was akin to “the bubble boy” finally come out of his bubble and finding there was so much that he’d been afraid of only to discover not only wouldn’t it kill him, it made him feel great.
Personally, I’ve found most horse people to be much less paranoid about germs (yes you can bite into a carrot after your gelding has bitten it without dying of horse germs).
County- Not sure of the legality of hunting some of the more exotics as I said. I know that on the game preserves they are protected. I was using that example more as a question regarding the “they do it to support their family” argument concerning sending the old horse to slaughter rather than just having it put down. No, it is not illegal but it is a reprehensible act to many in the US esp when it is done solely for the pittance to be gained on the suffering of another. I’m just asking if you find it also equally acceptable to say that killing a rhino for a culture half a world away that will pay huge amounts of money for that item is also made less onerous if it is all that stands between the poacher’s family and starvation.
Same goes for the Japanese whale hunters and the baby seal hunters. I don’t think either is illegal but both are socially reviled by many. Perhaps that is the way these hunters support their families. Does it make the act any less reprehensible (or any more acceptable)?
Do you feel that “making a living” and supporting your family is paramount? The pain and suffering of other beings doesn’t matter if it means money in the pocket? Does the legality matter? From what I’ve read about the transporters obviously a few laws were ignored in making their living. Does the legality matter only if you get caught.
Not sure how to put this so you understand, transporting livestock and selling it in this country is legal. I have no problem with it be it cattle, hogs, or horses. We eat meat, other countries eat meat,no the system is not perfect and never will be. I don’t place horses above any other species of livestock so therefore I’m not going to run around yelling the sky is falling because we slaughter horses. As far as what they do with lions and tigers, and bears in other countries I do not know. And frankly I really don’t care.
County- I’m asking if you consider it alright to “earn a living” even if it involves the torture and murder of other beings? Obviously, legal vs illegal is a major sticking point for you. Therefore, I would assume that you, being pro-slaughter as a way for people to make “a living” even if it requires the abuse and pain, would also be pro-seal hunt in Canada, which as far as I can see is still legal. Quite possibly those men clubbing those baby seals to death and skinning them, sometimes while still alive (sounds alot like a horse slaughter plant), are earning the majority of their families income for the year during the seal hunt period.
Can you honestly say that you are pro-seal hunt just because it is legally sanctioned? I see no difference between the seal slaughter and the horse slaughter. Both legal, both based upon unbelievably cruel and inhumane treatment of another being.
And as to the legality of the transporters of horses- I think it has been pretty well determined that in a number of cases involving accidents of horse transports- legality is still dubious. But I assume Mr. Ramey was “just making a living” skirting along on the edge of legal.
oh for crying out loud - if you feel that strongly about using other living beings, i’ll assume you don’t own a horse.
they horse don’t come out of the cabbage patch, you know. it’s the end product of an industry - one that you support and continue to finance by being a horse owner. no matter what your protestations about how “you” are somehow better because you don’t use a bit, or leather tack, or whatever example you want to you so cling to the moral high ground -if you are that concerned - you shouldn’t own one.
Please, don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
apologies for errors -0 typing one–handed.
PP if you actually can’t figure out the answers to your questions its because IMO you have blinders on and really aren’t paying attention. Or maybe your just looking for a fight like so many people om COTH seem to do.
Has the term common sense ever reached you?
How do I contribute to the slaughter industry by saving an horse from the kill buyer? I suppose in the same way I am contributing to the unwanted dog population by having 4 rescue dogs.
J Swan- I never said I didn’t believe in using other living things but I think I’ve said that I find taking the life of other living beings is morally and ethically reprehensible. Particularly if the only reason to take said life is for pocket change.
County- I don’t have blinders on. I realize that there are reasons to euthanize unwanted animals same as I realize animal testing is necessary. I have a problem with people who can justify the abhorrent abuse, neglect and torture associated with the slaughter industries merely because it is legal, “it’s a job” and “they pay me to do it”.
Unfortunately, different cultures, religions and even socio-economic groups view animals in different ways and to get unanimous agreement on anything involving animals is a moot point.
Answer the question- do you feel that as long as it is legal (or appears to be legal) and it can be justified as income EVERYTHING within those parameters is or should be done? YES or NO.
County- Which part of horse slaughter should be common sense?
Please enlighten me. Obviously you have far greater intellectual capacity than one such as I so perhaps you can attempt to impart some of your vast wisdom to me. It appears that my “common sense” is completely impaired but I honestly would like to hear the common sense approach to slaughter.
You beleive what you want PP but fact is the majority of people here and in this country support slaughter. They do so everey time they eat and buy meat. That fact may upset you but its still a fact.
And I think the common sense deal went right over your head
[QUOTE=county;1886327]
You beleive what you want PP but fact is the majority of people here and in this country support slaughter. They do so everey time they eat and buy meat. That fact may upset you but its still a fact.[/QUOTE]
But a majority do not support the slaughter of horses. Poll after poll comes out with those results. Yes, it is still legal, but that is changing. Enslaving human beings was legal for centuries and a source of profit for those doing it, too. It became illegal due to a growing tide of public opinion against it. While I am not equating these 2 things in terms of seriousness, since I know some of you will accuse me of that, the process taking place to change them is the same. The law reflects society and its opinions - if the majority of citizens decide something is morally wrong, the law will most likely follow. Happened with slavery, happened with women not having the vote, happened with segregation, happened with animal abuse. Society forced the law to change and evolve through its outrage at seeing things the majority of Americans thought were unfair/unconscionable.
I don’t see where I said any differantly. I personally don’t think the Senate will pass it and if they did I can’t imagine Bush biting the hand that feeds him. But I do beleive the day will come its banned at some point. I’ve said that many times.
Prozac Puppy - you’re much too intellectual for this conversation. :winkgrin: Those who understand your points probably already agree with you.
