A quibble over the use of a word

September 14, 2006

C,mon you guys, have a go at this letter/article! Posted by biodiversivist at 1:14 PM on 13 Sep 2006 The word murder generally applies to people killing other people. 99.9 percent of all violent deaths to human beings are wrought by other human beings. The individual human being we look at in the mirror every morning is cooperative, caring, and kind. As a species however, our propensity and capacity to cooperate as a group to go after other groups is nothing short of monstrous. The fossil record indicates that this has apparently been true for many thousands of years now. Using the word "murder" to describe the act of a human killing a non-human does not sit well with me. It is a special word that shocks and should be reserved for when

one human deliberately takes the life of another. The use of it by animal rights activists to describe the killing of a farm animal is demeaning people. It puts farm animals on the same level as my children. Using that term in such a manner may be counterproductive. It also isn't used when one animal "murders" another, for food, out of anger, or just for fun. Animals kill each other for all of those reasons. Can you murder a chicken? One of my daughter's roosters was just "murdered" for fun by our neighbor's Australian shepherd. When she came home from school and heard the sad news, her voice broke as memories washed over her. She raised this chicken from an egg. She stopped short of crying, although it would have been fine, even healthy, if she had. Her voice broke again when she read his eulogy as we buried him in our (ever-growing) pet cemetery. I will admit, I am just glad it

wasn't Bumblebee. That death is going to hurt a lot more, but she will deal with it because I have taught my children that death is a part of life, which does not in any way diminish how much we both enjoy her pets. I have always taught my daughters not to get too attached to their pets because these pets are going to die -- all of them. They don't have human life spans. I cried over my share of pet deaths as a child. I recall watching the late Steve Irwin cry inconsolably on camera over the death of an alligator he had grown up with, and another time over the death of his dog. In my opinion, strong attachments are best reserved for other people in your life. The guy with the dog in the pickup truck may not be the optimal relationship. People have a natural tendency to create emotional attachments to people, places, and things. My youngest daughter still relishes the touch and smell of the

ratty remnants of her beloved baby blanket. I suspect those remnants will one day go to college in one form or another. Pets do not worry about their future, any more than baby blanket remnants do. They do not create religions to deflect the fear and anxiety created by the knowledge that their demise is inevitable. Animals don't have the computing power to see that far into the future. One downside to our level of intellect is that no other creature has the capacity to mentally suffer like humans can. Mental illness, depression, anxiety are all suffered on a uniquely human scale. You will note that the recent discussions of animal rights here on Gristmill immediately spilled over into discussions of veganism. Veganism and animal rights are much more closely related than animal rights and environmentalism. I would describe the relationship like this: environmentalism -- vegetarianism -- veganism -- animal rights. Veganism is the direct link to animal rights. Veganism is a step beyond vegetarianism. As such, you could call it a more extreme version of it. My oldest daughter's closest childhood friend (her two movies) was raised vegan. We know the family well and like them a great deal. They are not vegan to save the planet. They are vegan out of respect for animals, to enhance their own personal health, and to be a part of the vegan community (it is their thing; that is their monkey troop). They don't eat dairy or wear shoes made of leather out of respect for the animal. The preservation of nature has nothing (or at least very little) to do with their decision to live this lifestyle. That is not to be generalized to all who have decided to go vegan. It just demonstrates that veganism is not necessarily strongly connected to environmentalism. You

will also note that words like belief, conversion, convert, and morality have started to fly. Veganism has too many of the trappings of religion for my tastes. It is also hierarchical. That holier than though aspect was expressed in this Simpsons' episode: Lisa: Oh, the earth is the best! That's why I'm a vegetarian.Jesse: Heh. Well, that's a start.Lisa: Uh, well, I was thinking of going vegan.Jesse: I'm a level 5 vegan -- I won't eat anything that casts a shadow. My family eats very little meat. Another way to put meat eating into perspective is to realize that one beef cow supplies enough beef annually for seven average beef-eating Americans. From a hunter-gatherer perspective, the idea that just one animal that size supplies seven 140-pound, upright-walking omnivores for a year is extremely efficient. Once again, it comes down to the huge numbers of human beings this planet is groaning to support. My drinking of a few cups of brown

tainted liquid in the morning is destroying jungles and bird migrations. Moderate your consumption of meat and rest easy; we are no more going to convince 6 billion people to forgo the pleasure of eating meat when it's available, or sweets for that matter, than we are of having sex. You will note that we haven't stopped having sex. We have just found ways to decouple it from baby making in most instances. We need to find ways to decouple meat consumption from ecological destruction. And of course moderation in meat eating is a good thing, for lots of reasons, and convincing others of that is already a big part of the solution. The average American eats about twenty pounds less beef than they did a decade of so ago. Peter H

The all-new Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.

September 14, 2006

ok peter, i wrote this little note to that columnist.

[new]title of my subject

Excuses to Continue Hedonistic Behaviour

So what do you call it?

Passed away, put to sleep, put away

You can call it all the euphemisms that you want but obviously this is

an attempt

on your mind to soften the fact that you are an accomplice to the

murder of a being that wanted to live up until the time

that you so selfishly felt like having it for dinner.

with this logic, if someone kills your beloved pet for food, then

there should be

no consequence right? it's not murder.

oh that's right, you only humans are deserving of love.

Animals have one life, you have a million excuses. Meat is delicious?

That is your opinion.

It smells like rotting flesh to me.

Close your eyes and imagine that you are that cow as its throat is

about to be slashed

maybe a hair of compassion will grow on your body.

In some countries, men do not go to jail for

killing their wives, because they are property or inferior. It is

not murder.

Must be nice to be the superior human, unless it is you that is

about to be someones supper,

have you ever noticed that when an animal kills a human, there is

outrage, alarm, fear, and revenge by our society.

I am talking about Bears, Alligators, Elephants et cetera.

Then, the animal who ironically was just defending himself/herself

has to be killed, or shall i say put away.

Now isn't that a double standard? When we eat them it is just a meal,

when they eat us, it is the end of the world.

I bet you are earth friendly though.

Are the animals that you eat, " free range " up until you eat them?

is the slaughter house solar paneled?

are the bullets used to kill animals, made from earth friendly

recyclable materials?

Your attempt at making humans the superior ones, in order to justify

your actions is called speciesim,

The believe that humans are the big shit of the earth.

If we are so intelligent, then why is it we are destroying the very

earth that we depend on? Not very smart is it?

We are too busy fighting over petroleum and land when our earth is

melting right before our eyes.

I have never eaten an animal, because of me, 94 animals got to live

this year.

My pillow is very comfortable at night. Is yours?

Water required to produce:

500g of lettuce 96 litres

500g of tomatoes 96 litres

500g of potatoes 100 litres

500g of wheat 105 litres

500g of carrots 137 litres

500g of apples 204 litres

500g of chicken 3,400 litres

500g of pork 6,790 litres

500g of beef 21,700 litres

Truly man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds theirs. We

live by the death of others: we are burial places! I have from an

early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men

such as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on the

murder of men.

~ Leonardo da Vinci (Renaissance painter, architect, engineer,

mathematician and philosopher, 1452 - 1519)

-anouk

, peter VV <swpgh01 wrote:

>

> C,mon you guys, have a go at this letter/article!

> Posted by biodiversivist at 1:14 PM on 13 Sep 2006

>

> The word murder generally applies to people killing other

people. 99.9 percent of all violent deaths to human beings are wrought

by other human beings. The individual human being we look at in the

mirror every morning is cooperative, caring, and kind. As a species

however, our propensity and capacity to cooperate as a group to go

after other groups is nothing short of monstrous. The fossil record

indicates that this has apparently been true for many thousands of

years now.

> Using the word " murder " to describe the act of a human killing a

non-human does not sit well with me. It is a special word that shocks

and should be reserved for when one human deliberately takes the life

of another. The use of it by animal rights activists to describe the

killing of a farm animal is demeaning people. It puts farm animals on

the same level as my children. Using that term in such a manner may be

counterproductive.

> It also isn't used when one animal " murders " another, for food,

out of anger, or just for fun. Animals kill each other for all of

those reasons.

>

> Can you murder a chicken?

September 14, 2006

Anouk, I love it. You are a star. Thank You. The Valley Vegan...............Anouk Sickler <zurumato wrote: ok peter, i wrote this little note to that columnist. [new]title of my subjectExcuses to Continue Hedonistic BehaviourSo what do you call it?Passed away, put to sleep, put awayYou can call it all the euphemisms that you want but obviously this isan attempton your mind to soften the fact that you are an accomplice to themurder of a being that wanted to live up until the timethat you so selfishly felt like having it for dinner. with this logic, if someone kills your beloved pet for food, thenthere should beno consequence right? it's not murder. oh that's right, you only humans are deserving of

love.Animals have one life, you have a million excuses. Meat is delicious?That is your opinion.It smells like rotting flesh to me. Close your eyes and imagine that you are that cow as its throat isabout to be slashedmaybe a hair of compassion will grow on your body. In some countries, men do not go to jail forkilling their wives, because they are property or inferior. It isnot murder.Must be nice to be the superior human, unless it is you that isabout to be someones supper,have you ever noticed that when an animal kills a human, there isoutrage, alarm, fear, and revenge by our society.I am talking about Bears, Alligators, Elephants et cetera. Then, the animal who ironically was just defending himself/herselfhas to be killed, or shall i say put away.Now isn't that a double standard? When we eat them it is just a meal,when they eat us, it is the end of the world.I bet you are

earth friendly though. Are the animals that you eat, "free range" up until you eat them?is the slaughter house solar paneled? are the bullets used to kill animals, made from earth friendlyrecyclable materials?Your attempt at making humans the superior ones, in order to justifyyour actions is called speciesim,The believe that humans are the big shit of the earth. If we are so intelligent, then why is it we are destroying the veryearth that we depend on? Not very smart is it? We are too busy fighting over petroleum and land when our earth ismelting right before our eyes.I have never eaten an animal, because of me, 94 animals got to livethis year. My pillow is very comfortable at night. Is yours?Water required to produce:500g of lettuce 96 litres500g of tomatoes 96 litres500g of potatoes 100 litres500g of wheat 105 litres500g of carrots 137 litres500g of apples 204

litres500g of chicken 3,400 litres500g of pork 6,790 litres500g of beef 21,700 litresTruly man is the king of beasts, for his brutality exceeds theirs. Welive by the death of others: we are burial places! I have from anearly age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when mensuch as I will look on the murder of animals as they now look on themurder of men.~ Leonardo da Vinci (Renaissance painter, architect, engineer,mathematician and philosopher, 1452 - 1519)-anouk , peter VV wrote:>> C,mon you guys, have a go at this letter/article!> Posted by biodiversivist at 1:14 PM on 13 Sep 2006 > > The word murder generally applies to people killing otherpeople. 99.9 percent of all violent deaths to human beings are wroughtby other human beings. The individual human being we look at in themirror every morning is

cooperative, caring, and kind. As a specieshowever, our propensity and capacity to cooperate as a group to goafter other groups is nothing short of monstrous. The fossil recordindicates that this has apparently been true for many thousands ofyears now. > Using the word "murder" to describe the act of a human killing anon-human does not sit well with me. It is a special word that shocksand should be reserved for when one human deliberately takes the lifeof another. The use of it by animal rights activists to describe thekilling of a farm animal is demeaning people. It puts farm animals onthe same level as my children. Using that term in such a manner may becounterproductive.> It also isn't used when one animal "murders" another, for food,out of anger, or just for fun. Animals kill each other for all ofthose reasons.> > Can you murder a chicken? To send an

email to -