FACTORY FARMED ANIMALS TORTURED AND SLAUGHTERED TO FEED SO CALLED "COMPANION ANIMALS"

[Nath Miles]

It is becoming clear that as a society we are becoming more and more speciesist.

 

What do you think about those who feel it is completely ok to factory farm, torture and slaughter animals so as to feed them to sustain so called companion animals (dogs and cats) rather than having them put to sleep?

 

 

Does this not seem to be completely hypocritical?

 

Many prominent animal rights advocates struggle with this question.

With many feeling the best way forward is the one with the "least harm" to ALL animals.

If this is the case then it would appear that the "least harm" would then be to humanely put the huge over population of excess companion animals to sleep as to keep them alive and sustain them hundreds of animals would have to suffer and  die.

 

So why is it that our society has become so speciesist?

 

[Tammy McLeod]

Ahhh NOW we are getting to the crux of the matter, Red Dog. It would seem that you are a Winograd supporter. I also put it to you that you know Nath from Facebook, which is why you brought up Winograd in the first place and which is why you would also be jumping on the bandwagon of Nath's Facebook detractors and calling him a "troll". I have been reading Winograd's book Redemption, and find it littered with unsubstantiated claims and falsehoods and I also find his whole argument to be merely a "bandaid" in relation to the subject of pounds/shelters and companion animals. I suggest you read "Disposable Animals - Ending the tragedy of throwaway pets" by Craig Brestrup if you want a balanced argument in relation to shelters, companion animals and their treatment by society.

Also, if you're interested in vegan recipes for your dogs, I can supply you the recipe that I make up for my dogs. As I mentioned previously, I havent yet got my cat on vegan food, but, when I do, I'll happily supply you the recipe.

[Tammy McLeod]

Oh, and Red Dog... why do you label Nath as a "troll" just because he may have a different opinion to yours? Why not try seeing things from HIS side... you might just learn something new... ;0)

[red dog]

He's here to provoke people, that's pretty clear from the way he behaves ... and no, I don't recall Nath's name from FB but I've seen similar behaviour there and on other Internet forums. You spend hours writing serious replies, they come up with one-liners labelling people "crooks" etc., without providing any supporting evidence, next they send you pictures of women eating their own diarrhea and rude little "gifts" that you didn't ask for. I've seen it all, trust me.

[red dog]

1. Thanks for the recipes--they will help. 2. It's great that you want to get your cats on vegan food and are doing the research in consideration of all the conflicting information out there--me too. 3. I haven't read Brestrup's book yet but it's on my list.

4. What unsubstantiated claims and falsehoods have you found in Redemption? Since you're researching vegan food for your cats I assume you don't agree with Nath's "solution"--what exactly is your issue with Winograd?

[Tammy McLeod]

I can assure you, Red Dog, Nath is NOT here to provoke people, he's here to provoke thought perhaps. If he were solely here to provoke people, I'm sure he would have been booted out of here very quickly. Trust ME, I know this for a fact. I also know for a fact that he's not going to send you "pictures of women eating their own diarrhea and rude little "gifts" that you didn't ask for". You have a very vivid imagination, Red Dog. Perhaps you would like to stick to the conversation and provide some meaningful discussion instead of trying to discredit Nath.

[red dog]

I'm not imagining the harassment I've encountered on other boards and I recognize a certain posting style when I see it.

Where's the meaningful discussion? I'm still waiting for the evidence that Winograd is a crook with "ties" to breeders. What do these ties consist of?

[red dog]

I don't condone the sausage fundraiser, but I can understand why shelters would choose to rely on donated food or purchase less expensive food rather than the incredibly expensive vegan options on the market. As you say, there are only a few. Hopefully vegan dog and cat food will become more popular and shelters will start using it too.

However, none of this has any bearing on whether Nathan Winograd's ideas are good or bad--his main point as I understand it is that shelters should out-compete breeders so that more people will choose to rescue animals, rather than purchase them, when they're ready to add to their families. That doesn't result in more animals eating more dog/cat food of whatever kind--it results in more rescued animals being placed in homes, rather than landfills.

[red dog]

^ Veiled reference to Redemption by Nathan Winograd. If you read Winograd's ideas in context, it's clear he's doing most of the educating that should have been done 20-30 years ago. Why not thank him instead of attacking him? I don't see you educating anyone in this thread.

[red dog]

Well, then you should support your statements regarding "excess" animals and "warehousing." You're attacking a straw person, because Winograd and others who agree with him don't support any such thing.

I'm open to minimizing the use of animal products to feed my (rescued) babies and would assume many other no-kill supporters are too. If your real concern was the animals killed to feed dogs and cats, you would have posted practical suggestions for us. Otherwise, why not go to a website that focuses on human social justice issues and advocate the killing of all homeless humans who aren't vegan--in fact, why ask if they're vegan or not? Kill first, ask later.

[Tim Gier]

Nath:

In the US, it is estimated that there are as many as 150,000,000 domesticated dogs and cats. That's one "pet" for every two people in the country. By any measure, that's a lot of "pets". If every one of those "pets" were to eat only 1 ounce of chicken flesh per day, which seems like a modest enough amount, in the course of one year, we'd need to slaughter more than 1 Billion three pound birds to supply them. (I've run the numbers and you can trust me, it's 1 Billion birds.)

It would seem that we have a significant moral dilemma on our hands, whereby even though most animal advocates realize that keeping domesticated nonhumans is morally problematic (to say the least) they still advocate that we do so. Given what you've pointed out about how many others must die in order that some might live, we need to question our assumptions when it comes to whose lives we value and why.

Thanks again for calling our attention to this terrible problem. Solutions may not be easily forthcoming, but that doesn't mean that we ought to shy away from asking difficult questions.

[Nath Miles]

I have a number of sources about the narcistic Winograd.

Including

http://www.petpaccorruption.com/web-of-corruption/

http://www.peta.org/b/thepetafiles/archive/2010/11/15/no-kill-organ...

I could go on but its most likely futile, seems you have been sucked in by his propaganda.

[Nath Miles]

Its clear you have an agenda red dog and as you dont wish to rationally discuss things and instead choose to attack me.