Guest guest Posted December 29, 2008 Report Share Posted December 29, 2008 Dear Merritt, I am sick of this stupid theories and senseless arguments that some animal activists are advocating to feed their pets all vegan food. They are simply trying to alter the mechanism nature bestowed on carnivores. Dogs will be dogs. And cats will be cats. Let's see it from another angle. As compassionate human beings, should we destroy and devour any life form to keep ourselves alive? If not, should we not discard taking plants or vegetables on our diet because they are born out of plants? That trees or plants have life too? is very correct in identifying that rich and so called vegan donors for AR or AW charities are now calling the shots and it is in the interest of such free flowing funds, some of the half baked pet lovers are propagating theories that science of evolution have no relevance to modern times. I appeal to all concerned to stop this intellectual masturbation on ' vegan food for dogs' and to accept the law of nature with reference to animal physiology. Wishing you all a HAPPY NEW YEAR. With sincere regards Raja Chatterjee On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:50 AM, Merritt Clifton <anmlpeplwrote: > >First, lions are different from dogs. None of us who are interested in > >animal welfare or AR would ever put a lion in a zoo. > > This categorical statement overlooks that much of the Indian > animal welfare and animal rights community has spent much of the past > decade working to relocate lions confiscated from circuses and other > private exhibitors to the Animal Rescue Center network established > primarily on the premises of major Indian zoos. > > The momentum toward doing so was largely instigated by Maneka > Gandhi, the founder of People for Animals. Is there anyone under > the illusion that Mrs. Gandhi has not been wholly committed to animal > welfare and animal rights for at least the past 25 years? > > Doing what is best for real animals in the real world is > seldom the same thing as doing what might be ideal in an ideal world. > > Which brings us back around to the alleged phenomenon of > vegan dogs. I happen to have met quite a number of them over the > years. I also happen to have watched to see what they spent their > time doing when not gobbling down their vegan prepared meals -- which > of course they ate with great gusto, because most dogs eat most of > their meals with great gusto, no matter what they consist of. > > I have managed to witness quite a number of these dogs in the > act of eating cat poop & sometimes the poop of non-vegan dogs. One > might argue that poop is vegan, because nothing was killed to > produce it, but the major attraction of the poop of other carnivores > to dogs is the portion of the content consisting of only partially > digested animal protein. > > A vegetarian & even vegan diet is quite appropriate to > humans, because we are basically glorified leaf-eating monkeys, but > dogs are carnivores by descent, scavengers by nature, and will > consume animal byproducts any time they can, even if they have to > practice coprophagia to do so. > > -- > Merritt Clifton > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE > P.O. Box 960 > Clinton, WA 98236 > > Telephone: 360-579-2505 > Fax: 360-579-2575 > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com> > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; > for free sample, send address.] > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 1, 2009 Report Share Posted January 1, 2009 Hi Rajada, Great to see you writing on AAPN. Well, I want to consider your arguments. To begin with, I do not see ANY debate as being senseless or stupid or irrelevant. This is maybe because I have debated formally and informally at all levels, school, college, university, workplace, local, national and international. And one of the world's greatest debaters, Carl Sagan wrote, " There is no such thing as a dumb question. " He was a terrific speaker, inspirational and uplifting and after each speaking session, he would take questions from the audience and people would ask him all kinds of questions regarding miracles and flying saucers and God and civilizations under the sea and extraterrestrials and all kinds of things. His greatness lay in the fact that he attempted to answer as many questions as he could and never made the questioner feel silly or awkward. That is a great quality to have for someone trying to influence public policy, something which we should always keep in mind when debating issues on AAPN. Regarding vegan pets, both sides have made their points, rationally and reasonably. One of the cardinal principles of the Carl Sagan method is to look for evidence. Where is the evidence, one way or the other? In this debate on vegetarian/vegan pets, the evidence in my opinion, lies overwhelmingly and comprehensively in favour of those favouring a non vegetarian diet for pets. Regarding human diets, I think evidence is 50:50, and you could align either way. It is upto you and whichever side you take, I am willing to live with it. Now for your argument on sentience in plants and them having life. Many non vegetarians make this argument and I'll take it. Many scientists and philosophers have considered this over the ages.The bedrock of this debate is minimizing suffering, right? Where is the evidence that a plant suffers as much as an animal when it is killed and eaten? I simply have not come across any. The most valiant attempt to place plants on a level somewhat at par with animals was made by Peter Tomkins and Christopher Bird in a book called 'The Secret Life of Plants' where they made all kinds of assertions regarding the sentience of plants. I have this book and it is interesting no doubt, well worth a read. Borrow it from me the next time we meet. But since this book was published, its findings and assertions have almost totally been refuted by other scientists. Personally, I would love to see more evidence on the plant sentience front but there aren't any convincing ones. (For example, claims like music enhances the growth of plants etc.) If you have something, do share it with me by all means. I like plants very much, I have a Touch Me Not plant and it amuses me a lot when I touch it and it shrinks its leaves. But even that level of observable sensitivity is way beyond that of an animal that is killed for food, even a snail or any insect. And you have seen the film 'Earthlings' and know how much suffering is involved in raising animals for slaughter in artificial conditions. I am glad this debate came up, for I was able to weigh the evidence on meat eating one way or the other, and stand enriched. Maybe you have a different view. That's OK by me. Well I think I will now take a break from debating and go to the nearest liquor shop and get a can of Carlsberg beer and drink as much as I can to prepare myself for the next debate. Wishing you a very Happy and a very drunken New Year. Best wishes and kind regards, On 12/30/08, raja chatterjee <rajachatterjee1 wrote: > > Dear Merritt, > > I am sick of this stupid theories and senseless arguments that some animal > activists are advocating to feed their pets all vegan food. They are simply > trying to alter the mechanism nature bestowed on carnivores. Dogs will be > dogs. And cats will be cats. > > Let's see it from another angle. As compassionate human beings, should we > destroy and devour any life form to keep ourselves alive? If not, should we > not discard taking plants or vegetables on our diet because they are born > out of plants? That trees or plants have life too? > > is very correct in identifying that rich and so called vegan > donors for AR or AW charities are now calling the shots and it is in the > interest of such free flowing funds, some of the half baked pet lovers are > propagating theories that science of evolution have no relevance to modern > times. > > I appeal to all concerned to stop this intellectual masturbation on ' vegan > food for dogs' and to accept the law of nature with reference to animal > physiology. > > Wishing you all a HAPPY NEW YEAR. > > With sincere regards > > Raja Chatterjee > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:50 AM, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl<anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>>wrote: > > > > >First, lions are different from dogs. None of us who are interested in > > >animal welfare or AR would ever put a lion in a zoo. > > > > This categorical statement overlooks that much of the Indian > > animal welfare and animal rights community has spent much of the past > > decade working to relocate lions confiscated from circuses and other > > private exhibitors to the Animal Rescue Center network established > > primarily on the premises of major Indian zoos. > > > > The momentum toward doing so was largely instigated by Maneka > > Gandhi, the founder of People for Animals. Is there anyone under > > the illusion that Mrs. Gandhi has not been wholly committed to animal > > welfare and animal rights for at least the past 25 years? > > > > Doing what is best for real animals in the real world is > > seldom the same thing as doing what might be ideal in an ideal world. > > > > Which brings us back around to the alleged phenomenon of > > vegan dogs. I happen to have met quite a number of them over the > > years. I also happen to have watched to see what they spent their > > time doing when not gobbling down their vegan prepared meals -- which > > of course they ate with great gusto, because most dogs eat most of > > their meals with great gusto, no matter what they consist of. > > > > I have managed to witness quite a number of these dogs in the > > act of eating cat poop & sometimes the poop of non-vegan dogs. One > > might argue that poop is vegan, because nothing was killed to > > produce it, but the major attraction of the poop of other carnivores > > to dogs is the portion of the content consisting of only partially > > digested animal protein. > > > > A vegetarian & even vegan diet is quite appropriate to > > humans, because we are basically glorified leaf-eating monkeys, but > > dogs are carnivores by descent, scavengers by nature, and will > > consume animal byproducts any time they can, even if they have to > > practice coprophagia to do so. > > > > -- > > Merritt Clifton > > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE > > P.O. Box 960 > > Clinton, WA 98236 > > > > Telephone: 360-579-2505 > > Fax: 360-579-2575 > > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com> <anmlpepl% > 40whidbey.com> > > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org > > > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing > > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, > > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the > > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations. > > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year; > > for free sample, send address.] > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.