Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten?

> >> hi, i'm vegan but not pushy,
> >
> >
> > Vegans ARE pushy. It goes hand-in-hand with marginalization and
alienation.

all vegans are not pushy
all meat-eaters are not pushy

> >
> >> just like to focus on facts and understanding.
> >
> >
> > Ha! That's funny given your lack of facts and understanding in our last
> > go-round.

what specific statement do you have information to suggest is incorrect?

> >
> >> see my posts further down the listing...
> >> i'd say the animals which supply the greatest amount of nutrition for
the
> >> amount of suffering would be.....truly grass-fed cattle, fish, some
> >> hunted
> >> animals.
> >
> >
> > *Some* hunted animals? Which ones?
> >
> >> As well as grass-fed cattle and hunted deer not suffering as much
> >> compared
> >> to other animals, and specifically compared to factory-farmed animals,
> >> they
> >> are also pretty big and provide a lot of nutrition for their death
> >
> >
> > "Pretty big" is quite relative. I've seen hogs (domestic) which are
> > quite a bit larger than deer; domestic hogs are also usually larger than
> > their wild/feral cousins.
> >
> >> the animals which go thru the worst suffering would be veal calves
> >
> >
> > Any evidence of this claim? FYI, most of the veal raised in the US is
> > raised on Amish and Mennonite farms, under the kind of "green" practices
> > you would otherwise support. Contrary to the prattle from AR groups, US
> > veal is not raised in tiny crates, in the dark, etc.

veal are kept in individual stahls see the "info and links" post where the
veal industry says this themselves
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:07:22 -0400, "Jon Janssen" <notmyaddress RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:

>
><dh_ld RemoveThis @nomail.com> wrote in message
>news:1j8cmvs8ne4gvjn4u3f84qaf3jfr82q0sv@4ax.com...
>> On 14 Sep 2003 23:09:52 -0700, xjukx RemoveThis @yahoo.com (Michael David) wrote:
>>
>> >I'm not a vegetarian, and don't plan to be anytime soon.
>>
>> You can contribute to decent lives for farm animals, but
>> not by being veg*n.
>
>eating animal products almost requires that animals will be killed, though
>Dave. except for maybe chickens and cows that are the very very small
>minority held on small family farms.... but no profit farm is going to pay
>money to feed and house animals that don't produce products that can be
>sold.... cows are killed when the production of their milk drops to a point
>where it's a better investment to replace them with 'new' cows.

Even so, they get *much* more life than they would if people didn't
raise them at all.

>though
>very good if you can find products from small family farms, and use them
>instead of ones held in factory farms
>
>(end)
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

dh_ld.TakeThisOut@nomail.com wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:07:22 -0400, "Jon Janssen" <notmyaddress.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote:

>>eating animal products almost requires that animals will be killed, though
>>Dave. except for maybe chickens and cows that are the very very small
>>minority held on small family farms.... but no profit farm is going to pay
>>money to feed and house animals that don't produce products that can be
>>sold.... cows are killed when the production of their milk drops to a point
>>where it's a better investment to replace them with 'new' cows.
>
>
> Even so, they get *much* more life than they would if people didn't
> raise them at all.

So what? That is meaningless.
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"Jon Janssen" <notmyaddress.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote
>
> "Dutch" <no.DeleteThis@email.com> wrote

> > That might be true in western urban areas, but not everywhere. Also
the
> > poster doesn't wish to stop eating meat.
>
> one has the choice to eat less meat, even if they don't stop eating
all meat

One also has the choice to eat and otherwise consume less of other
things. Meat is YOUR obsession, not his.

> > > free-range only requires 'access to the outdoors',
> >
> > It actually only requires access to open areas, which may be in
barns.
> >
> > > and this can be done in a
> > > way that doesn't improve the lives of the animals much.
> >
> > The ability to move around, forage, and have free interaction with
other
> > members of it's species is surely an improvement over being penned
up
> > all the time.
> >
> > > gardened food is the best and can cause zero harm to any animals,
> >
> > Possible, at least any large ones if the garden is small enough and
you
> > can spare the time to tend it by hand, but tiny animals will always
be
> > killed.
>
> insects you mean?

Insects, spiders, worms, voles, moles, mice, toads, there are millions
of different small animal species.


> > and there
> > > are other food comparisons that are clear... such as foi gras or
veal
> > > compared to apples, to use 2 extremes
> >
> > When did you measure the impact on animals of pesticides in apple
> > orchards ?
>
> to be clear, compare apples from trees that are not sprayed with
anything

Not many of those around, they get ravaged by pests.

> > Where did you get your information on the current practises in veal
> > farming ?
>
> see my posts below "info and links"

I'm not going search your posts, your information is always biased
anyway.

> > > so there are some helpful
> > > differences that can be used to reduce the harms of one's diet...
even
> > for
> > > vegans too
> >
> > It helps to be sure you have facts, not the opinions of anti-meat
> > extremists.
>
> it's good to have facts from any source, and be free of misinformation
from
> any source

How do you judge what is fact and what is misinformation?
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"Jon Janssen" <notmyaddress.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote

[..]
> > >> the animals which go thru the worst suffering would be veal
calves
> > >
> > >
> > > Any evidence of this claim? FYI, most of the veal raised in the US
is
> > > raised on Amish and Mennonite farms, under the kind of "green"
practices
> > > you would otherwise support. Contrary to the prattle from AR
groups, US
> > > veal is not raised in tiny crates, in the dark, etc.
>
> veal are kept in individual stahls see the "info and links" post
where the
> veal industry says this themselves

The word is stall, STALL, not "stahl". Stalls are not crates.
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

Bong Janssen wrote:
>>>>hi, i'm vegan but not pushy,
>>>
>>>Vegans ARE pushy. It goes hand-in-hand with marginalization and
> alienation.
>
> all vegans are not pushy

They are pushy.

> all meat-eaters are not pushy

Correct.

>>>>just like to focus on facts and understanding.
>>>
>>>Ha! That's funny given your lack of facts and understanding in our last
>>>go-round.
>
> what specific statement do you have information to suggest is incorrect?

Review the thread and see the number of times I corrected your wild
claims. You even wussed out and cut your losses rather than continuing
to be corrected.

<snip>
>>>Any evidence of this claim? FYI, most of the veal raised in the US is
>>>raised on Amish and Mennonite farms, under the kind of "green" practices
>>>you would otherwise support. Contrary to the prattle from AR groups, US
>>>veal is not raised in tiny crates, in the dark, etc.
>
> veal are kept in individual stahls see the "info and links" post where the
> veal industry says this themselves

Stalls are not crates. Stalls are hardly inhumane. Most animal shelters
run by humane activists have policies about keeping animals separated
(in CAGES, no less). Diseases spread quickly when animals can contact
each other. This is especially true when they're young, as veal calves
are, and haven't developed immunity to disease. You don't want the veal
calves to get sick, do you?
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"usual suspect" <no.DeleteThis@foot.rub> wrote in message
news:NPiab.44503$834.26538@twister.austin.rr.com...
> Bong Janssen wrote:
> >>>>hi, i'm vegan but not pushy,
> >>>
> >>>Vegans ARE pushy. It goes hand-in-hand with marginalization and
> > alienation.
> >
> > all vegans are not pushy
>
> They are pushy.

Except when your name's Usual Suspect?
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

Pendejo Viejo wrote:
>>>all vegans are not pushy
>>
>>They are pushy.
>
> Except when your name's Usual Suspect?

I am not *a* vegan. My diet may be called that, but I prefer it being
called vegetarian; I do not identify myself by my diet in any event.
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"usual suspect" <no.RemoveThis@foot.rub> wrote in message
news:G2qab.51894$jV1.31847@twister.austin.rr.com...
> Pendejo Viejo wrote:
> >>>all vegans are not pushy
> >>
> >>They are pushy.
> >
> > Except when your name's Usual Suspect?
>
> I am not *a* vegan. My diet may be called that, but I prefer it being
> called vegetarian; I do not identify myself by my diet in any event.

You did identify yourself as vegan, yet you were rarely pushy. Now you're
claiming that all vegans are pushy, now you don't declare yourself as being
one.

I think that is at least strange, and probably hypocritical.



>
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

Zakhar wrote:
>>>>>all vegans are not pushy
>>>>
>>>>They are pushy.
>>>
>>>Except when your name's Usual Suspect?
>>
>>I am not *a* vegan. My diet may be called that, but I prefer it being
>>called vegetarian; I do not identify myself by my diet in any event.
>
> You did identify yourself as vegan,

Yes.

> yet you were rarely pushy.

Because I was not, in fact, *a* vegan. My political point of view is
conservative. My religion is best defined as conservative (though quite
tolerant). I never accepted a premise that animals deserve "rights" or
that humans should be banned from hunting them, using them in research,
or anything like that.

> Now you're claiming that all vegans are pushy,

Yes, I learned what they're really like, which is why I no longer call
myself by that name. Go back to some of the war threads at afv. You will
find that I realized "vegan" is not a broad term, but that vegans are
leftist radicals -- and a monolith.

> now you don't declare yourself as being one.

Because I'm not. I do not believe in animal rights and in fact have an
aversion to that topic. I favor the use of animals in research, I am
pro-hunting, pro-fishing, and I wouldn't kick people out of my house,
restaurant, or any place simply because they wanted to feed a baby
something that I don't eat.

> I think that is at least strange,

Not at all. Think of it as semantics. I can call my diet whatever I
want, and you may still prefer to call such a diet "vegan." That doesn't
make *me* vegan, because veganISM is a crusade based on AR. As noted so
many times, I do not believe in or support or even condone AR.

> and probably hypocritical.

Absolutely not. My diet has no role in my politics; my political views
have no role in my diet. VeganISM is about a political point of view
which is completely alien to me. I am not *a* vegan.
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

I wrote:
> Because I'm not. I do not believe in animal rights and in fact have an
> aversion to that topic.

Second sentence should read: "I do not believe in animal rights and in
fact have an aversion to that POINT OF VIEW."
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"usual suspect" <no RemoveThis @foot.rub> wrote in message
news:Vxqab.51911$jV1.22415@twister.austin.rr.com...
> Zakhar wrote:
> >>>>>all vegans are not pushy
> >>>>
> >>>>They are pushy.
> >>>
> >>>Except when your name's Usual Suspect?
> >>
> >>I am not *a* vegan. My diet may be called that, but I prefer it being
> >>called vegetarian; I do not identify myself by my diet in any event.
> >
> > You did identify yourself as vegan,
>
> Yes.
>
> > yet you were rarely pushy.
>
> Because I was not, in fact, *a* vegan. My political point of view is
> conservative. My religion is best defined as conservative (though quite
> tolerant). I never accepted a premise that animals deserve "rights" or
> that humans should be banned from hunting them, using them in research,
> or anything like that.

vegan, Vegetarian who eats no foods of animal origin whatever, including
fish, eggs, and milk.


>
> > Now you're claiming that all vegans are pushy,
>
> Yes, I learned what they're really like, which is why I no longer call
> myself by that name. Go back to some of the war threads at afv. You will
> find that I realized "vegan" is not a broad term, but that vegans are
> leftist radicals -- and a monolith.

Crap. Leftist radicals, are leftist radicals. Vegans are vegans.

You are trying to redefine a word to suit your political agenda.

>
> > now you don't declare yourself as being one.
>
> Because I'm not. I do not believe in animal rights and in fact have an
> aversion to that topic. I favor the use of animals in research, I am
> pro-hunting, pro-fishing, and I wouldn't kick people out of my house,
> restaurant, or any place simply because they wanted to feed a baby
> something that I don't eat.

Nothing non-vegan there.


s at least strange,
>
> Not at all. Think of it as semantics. I can call my diet whatever I
> want, and you may still prefer to call such a diet "vegan." That doesn't
> make *me* vegan, because veganISM is a crusade based on AR. As noted so
> many times, I do not believe in or support or even condone AR.

I agree you can call your diet what ever you want. What you can't do is call
ALL vegans pushy.

>
> > and probably hypocritical.
>
> Absolutely not. My diet has no role in my politics; my political views
> have no role in my diet. VeganISM is about a political point of view
> which is completely alien to me. I am not *a* vegan.

vegan, Vegetarian who eats no foods of animal origin whatever, including
fish, eggs, and milk.

>
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten? 

"usual suspect" <no DeleteThis @foot.rub> wrote in message news:Vxqab.51911$jV1.22415@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> Yes, I learned what they're really like, which is why I no longer call
> myself by that name. Go back to some of the war threads at afv. You will
> find that I realized "vegan" is not a broad term, but that vegans are
> leftist radicals -- and a monolith.
>
Then why did you earlier criticise Jon for stereotyping
vegans, and complain that such a trait suggests an
immature World view?

[You know not what you speak. Probably why they
kicked you out of UCLA: stereotyping as you do
suggests an immature worldview and a strong
tendency towards bigotry (after all, you lump all in the
same boat -- disgusting hypocrites, leftists, etc, none
of which I am -- regardless of knowing individuals).
usual suspect Date: 2002-05-22

And why did you write, again to Jon,
[*You* lied. You said all vegans are leftwingers.
And your incoherent views on "axiomatic/dogmatic"
views of any group are valid only of monoliths.
Vegans are not a monolithic community (though
trolls seem to be).
usual suspect Date: 2002-05-10

When are you going to stop lying?
 >> Stay informed about: Which animals suffer most, per pound eaten?