[SFBAVEG] where should i draw the line?

[Guest guest]

Hi there,

 

I find it a lot easier to be vegan than vegetarian or

pesco-pollo-tarian--that way I can always argue my case for veganism

without that pesky feeling of hypocrisy getting in the way. But that's

just me. I wish I had more time to get into it, but I'm sure you'll get

a lot of responses on this one...

 

Personally, I think it's not cool to rip any animal out of the mud/water

(or farmed shellfish environment) and let it suffocate/ be boiled/ eaten

alive. Here is some stuff from the Web that may help you with your decision:

 

Can shellfish feel pain?

 

Yes. Scientists have proved beyond a doubt that fish, lobsters, crabs,

and other sea dwellers feel pain. Lobsters bodies are covered with

chemoreceptors so they are very sensitive to their environments. Boiling

lobsters alive is particularly cruel. A lobsters ideal body temperature

is between 38 and 42 degrees Fahrenheit; when lobsters are packed on

ice, they sometimes " drop " a claw in order to conserve body heat. As

many people have discovered, when dropped into boiling water, lobsters

will frantically scrape the sides of the pot in a futile attempt to

escape. If grocery stores kept live pigs or chickens crammed together in

filthy glass tanks with accompanying recipes suggesting that the animals

be dropped into a pot of scalding water, consumers would be outraged.

These acts are equally deserving of outrage when perpetrated on

shellfish. (from Ask Carla:

http://www.askcarla.com/ac/tempfaq/QuestionAndAnswer.asp?QuestionAndAnswerID=359\

)

 

Fish (including shellfish) can accumulate extremely high levels of

chemical residues, as much as 9 million times that of the water in which

they live. Fish flesh may store contaminants such as PCB's, strongly

suspected of causing cancer, nervous system disorders, and fetal damage;

dioxins, also linked to cancer; radioactive substances like strontium

90; and toxic metals like cadmium, mercury, lead, chromium, and arsenic,

which can cause health problems ranging from kidney damage and impaired

mental development to cancer. (from PETA:

http://www.peta.org/mc/facts/fswild4.html)

 

-Josh

http://www.technotofu.com

 

 

 

energyandfun wrote:

 

> Hi, I am a recent convert to vegan diet. I am not all the way there

> yet, but making strides. I am not doing it for health concerns and am

> not interested in health claims regarding a vegan diet.

>

> What I am interested in is animal rights. I am most concerned about

> the suffering that animals go through when being raised for food in

> operations such as factory farms. Seeing and understanding this kind

> of suffering is new to me.

>

> When this type of treatment was called to my attention some 6 months

> ago while eating in a small cafe in Palo Alto, I made a decision to

> learn more and to work on changing my diet and behavior immediately.

>

> Where I am now is back to thinking about including some animals in my

> diet. If I do it, I do not want to cause suffering, but do clams

> suffer? Do oysters? I would think that they do not because they lack

> a nerve center of sufficient development to " feel " pain or to

> understand suffering.

>

> One of the reasons I want to do this is selfishness. It would make

> the lifestyle easier if I could eat these types of lower animals, as

> it would help to vary the available diet and make it a bit more

> interesting and pleasurable. The less selfish side of the same

> argument is that it would also make it easier to gain new converts.

> Those who are also interested in alleviating suffering and can

> clearly understand it in terms of a dog, pig, chicken, fish, but who

> like me, begin to question things when talking about clams need a

> place to go that is not hostile and militant against them.

>

> I am looking for help in understanding this and am wondering what you

> all think.

>

> Thanks

>

>

>

> *

[Guest guest]

On 11/11/03, energyandfun <tykthemoon wrote:

 

> Where I am now is back to thinking about including some animals in my

> diet. If I do it, I do not want to cause suffering, but do clams

> suffer? Do oysters? I would think that they do not because they lack

> a nerve center of sufficient development to " feel " pain or to

> understand suffering.

 

suffering also exists in the macro sense. while an individual oyster

or prawn may or may not experience pain, the process of farming them

on a scale fit for human consumption will undoubtedly result in loss

of habitat and pollution. you can't disrupt one part of the ecosystem

without examining how it will harm the rest of it.

 

so it really depends on how you define your ethics. are your ethics

limited to pain caused to a single organism, or do your ethics

take into account your personal contribution to larger systems?

 

another thing to consider is that the arguments you've used are

exactly what others will argue to justify the killing of higher

animals. or even humans of other races. generally speaking, the

capacity that another living being has to experience suffering is

unknowable to you. it's impossible to extrapolate a subjective

experience based on biology or appearances.

 

> The less selfish side of the same argument is that it would also

> make it easier to gain new converts. Those who are also interested

> in alleviating suffering and can clearly understand it in terms of a

> dog, pig, chicken, fish, but who like me, begin to question things

> when talking about clams need a place to go that is not hostile and

> militant against them.

 

this is true in general for just about everyone. we all tend to identify

first with ourselves then our family or closest peers, then our nation

or locale, then our race, and so on. we tend to identify more with cats

and dogs because they hang out with us and have cute little adorable

furry faces and big eyes. we care for them because they remind us of

ourselves.

 

regardless, i still have tremendous respect for the committed meat

eater who decides one day to give up eating cows and pigs. they are at

least making a difference and moving us in the right direction on a

global scale. just as long they don't call themselves " vegetarian " .

 

--

 

steve simitzis : /sim' - i - jees/

pala : saturn5 productions

www.steve.org : 415.282.9979

hath the daemon spawn no fire?

[Guest guest]

When it comes to whether other beings feel pain, the burden of proof

should fall on those who believe that other beings do not feel pain.

Why? A cursory look at the past will turn up all sorts of situations

where humans assumed some other species 1)did not exist or 2)could not do

something--only further research overturned that assumption. The

organisms found living comfortably in searing temperatures at the bottom

of the ocean provide one recent example; they live in conditions formerly

believed to be uninhabitable. The conditions *are* uninhabitable--for

humans.

 

Primates other than humans have been judged incapable of reasoning,

incapable of speech--all those assertions have been based on assumptions

and bad research. Better research reveals the opposite.

 

Many humans believe that other species are " dumb. " Their evidence?

Brain size. Yet, we know that a silicon chip is far smaller and far

faster than a human brain; it can calculate faster, use information more

efficiently, and so on. It can beat humans at their own game (e.g.,

chess). We should, therefore, realize that small brain size is not a

factor in intelligence.

 

Given that every human assumption about the limits and incapabalities of

other species is overturned when good research is conducted, I would ask

what is the evidence that clams do not feel pain? I do not know of any

such evidence, for that evidence would need to reflect an appreciation for

the multifarious ways that nature has arranged for different species to

accomplish similar ends. Therefore, if clams (or other beings) are found

to be missing what humans have in the way of nerve endings, that does not

indicate that clams (or other beings) do not feel pain, for they may have

and use some other apparatus that serves the same end. Unless and until

we eliminate that possibility, we should assume that clams (and other

species) feel pain.

 

Humans so regularly see all other species through human eyes, only to be

surprised by the capabilities of other species, that I believe we should

change our tactics--assume that all life can do what we do, and experience

life fully, until proven otherwise with very good research. And, further,

that research must be done in a way that does not subject the other

species to pain we assume they feel.

 

Once that research is done, I suppose one could eat clams and other

animals if we learn that they do not feel pain, if that is one's criteria

for what to eat. But, if that's one's criteria, how does one deal with

the devastation that transcends an organism (see earlier posting)? And,

how can one then justify eating plants, given that some evidence indicates

plants feel pain--and given that the burden of proof is on those who would

claim the otherwise?

 

Sam

[Guest guest]

Here's my reason for not eating shellfish.

 

When I was a kid, we lived at the beach. About once a week or so, my

sister and I would take a bucket and shovel down to the shore, and we'd

harvest some clams for dinner. The strategy goes something like this:

 

Wait for a wave to go out. Look where the bubbles pop in the sand, showing

the location of breathing holes for the clams. Stomp your foot down -

hard - once on the sand near the holes, and note where a spurt of water

shoots up - you just knocked the breath, so to speak, out of a clam that's

near the surface.

 

Now, here's the important part: hurry up and dig like crazy in that

location, because the clam will try to escape. Seriously, they'll start

burrowing deeper into the sand to get away from you.

 

Track down clam, dump into bucket, wait for next wave, repeat until

bucket's full.

 

Quite honestly, this clammy behavior bothered me even as a (meat eating)

kid, and it sure doesn't sit too well with my veggie-oriented self all

these years later.

 

Now, I don't know much about how developed a clam's nervous system is, and

I'm not very religious or philosophical, so I tend to let the fuzzier

questions about vegetarian ethics be debated by others. All I know is, if

a critter is actively trying to escape from me, I don't exactly feel

comfortable chasing it down and eating it, even if I can rationalize that

maybe it's just instinct and probably not conscious thought that's

spurring the escape attempt.

 

As with everything else in life, you have to follow your own moral

compass. This is just why I choose to do what I do.

 

Cheers,

-Kim

 

 

 

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, energyandfun wrote:

 

> Where I am now is back to thinking about including some animals in my

> diet. If I do it, I do not want to cause suffering, but do clams

> suffer? Do oysters? I would think that they do not because they lack

> a nerve center of sufficient development to " feel " pain or to

> understand suffering.