Quality ingredients?

"Darkginger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So, where do the rest of you stand on this, and how easy do you find it to buy quality ingredients
where you live?

Jo

I live in the US and try to get the best quality food I can. I buy wild Alaskan salmon, organic,
grass fed and finished beef, pork and lamb, (I don't eat chicken), and organic eggs from uncaged
birds. Apart from the eggs I buy this stuff over the net, but a Whole Foods should open in this area
this year and I hope to be able to do more of my shopping there. There is a considerable premium, of
course, and I'm lucky to be able to manage it.

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking, Darkginger of Eircom.Net

url='http://www.eircom.net/'http://www.eircom.net/url said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of your way to make sure you
only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the intensively farmed (battery)
versions? Will you hunt out wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports
about carcinogens)? Are you concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed food
because it contains additives?

I eat vegetables (including legumes and such), eggs and fish. I buy ecological eggs to make sure
that they don't come from battery cages, or other horrible condition. I buy fish which can be found
locally, and now that I've heard they it's bad with farmed fish, I will try to avoid those too. As
far as vegetables go, I can't afford to buy anything but what's on sale a lot of the time, and I
sometimes buy products which I know I ought to not buy, but it's hard to keep all the things to
avoid, or to buy in stead, in mind. These days they have Mangoes very cheaply on sale in the
supermarket, and I *love* mangoes...

I make as much as possible from scratch, but that's as much an issue of money, and of taste, as it
is of health. I use low-fat dairy-free margarine, which I know have trans-fats, but dairy products
make me ill. I use vegetable oil for cooking, for health reasons.
--
Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18 ICQ# 251532856 Unreferenced footnotes: nut.house.cxcgiOpen ↗
bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN "There is scarcely a business or industry left that could understand the concept
of shame even if they looked it up in a dictionary." Eric Walker (AUE)

"Darkginger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of

your

Quoted message said:

way to make sure you only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the
intensively farmed (battery) versions? Will you hunt

out

Quoted message said:

wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports about carcinogens)? Are you
concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed food because it contains
additives?

I'm wondering, becuse I was alarmed to discover that something like 98% of all chickens sold in
the UK are still battery farmed, and I'm interested

to

Quoted message said:

see whether people who are interested in cookery are equally interested in the quality of
ingredients they use. Especially since starting to keep chickens last year, and discovering that
they're a lot more intelligent

than

Quoted message said:

I'd previously realised!

Personally, I've been guilty of buying cheap 'n tasteless chicken breasts etc. in the past, but
have resolved never to do it again. I'd rather eat meat etc. less often (because the free range,
organically produced

versions

Quoted message said:

are more expensive) than support the intensive farming methods that have given us BSE and cancer-
inducing salmon - not to mention the quality of

life

Quoted message said:

of the animal/fish in question.

Same goes for veggies, after starting to grow my own (again last year - it was a year of
revelations!), and discovering how much better they are when eaten fresh, in season.

So, where do the rest of you stand on this, and how easy do you find it to buy quality ingredients
where you live?

Jo

I'm with you on this one. If you are willing to shop carefully and (sometimes) pay more you will get
significantly higher quality food. Free range chickens, humanely-raised beef, pork, and lamb, no
veal (the free range veal just isn't very interesting, and as delicious as the milk-fed veal is I
cannot condone the way the critters are treated), organic whenever possible. Fortunately it is
pretty easy to get this kind of food here where I live in the US, but I am sure it is difficult in
many locations.

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the [censored] from my email address before using.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Darkginger said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of your way to make sure you
only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the intensively farmed (battery)
versions? Will you hunt out wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports
about carcinogens)? Are you concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed
food because it contains additives?

I shop mostly at my local co-op (at which I am a member-owner), though we're pretty fortunate
in that the better grocery stores here have surprisingly large sections for "natural" and
organic foods.

I still eat a fair amount of conventionally-grown food, because it's what you usually get when you
eat out or at someone else's house. But it's not what I prefer when I have a choice.

I feel safer buying at the co-op. I think conventional food producers do many things in the name of
economics that turn out to be really questionable for human or ecological health in the longer term.

I'm not in favor of genetically-modified organisms. I know growers have manipulated genetics for
centuries, but not on the scales that GMOs offer. I am not comfortable with the antibiotic load
present in many food animal, so I minimize how much meat I eat "outside." I will not buy irradiated
meat -- a relatively-untested "solution" that ignores the real problem of a tainted meat supply.

"Processing" isn't a dirty word to me: there are many organic products which resemble "conventional"
foods, and I don't kid myself for a moment that "natural" cola isn't as processed as Coca-Cola, or
that something like Quorn (a mushroom-based meat substitute) isn't a manufactured food. I don't
consume either product, but that's more because I don't care for them, not because I object to the
processing involved.

Finally, I think organically-raised, locally-produced food just tastes better. It's raised with the
idea that nutrition and taste are more important than shipping without damage. And most producers
try to run their farms sustainably.

Yeah, I guess I care. :-)

sd

Darkginger said:

So, where do the rest of you stand on this, and how easy do you find it to buy quality ingredients
where you live?

Jo

I think that the food produced by farmers is the best available. IMO, test after test has shown that
organic does not mean better flavour or better quality, just more costly.

OTOH, I believe garden vegetables are far superior in flavor to supermarket fresh vegetables. At the
same time, processor frozen vegetables are usually far superior to home freezer vegetables for
flavor and texture. Canned vegetables should have their own name as they are often good though very
unlike the garden fresh taste of the vegetable itself.

Finally, it is the management of harvested products that produces the best quality food for one's
table. In our town there is one produce store that maintains high quality for vegetables and fruit
all year round. And just a block away is a butcher that is able to provide all red meat and poultry
as fresh as it ever was at my parent's home 60 years ago.

I will buy from any food source if the quality is consistently superior.

For me, only fifty miles from the ocean, living nearly on the banks of one of the world's top
salmon rivers, finding truly fresh fish is an impossible challenge !

Dennis

In article <[email hidden]>,

Peter Aitken said:

"Darkginger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of

your

Quoted message said:

way to make sure you only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the
intensively farmed (battery) versions? Will you hunt

out

Quoted message said:

wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports about carcinogens)? Are you
concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed food because it contains
additives?

I'm wondering, becuse I was alarmed to discover that something like 98% of all chickens sold in
the UK are still battery farmed, and I'm interested

to

Quoted message said:

see whether people who are interested in cookery are equally interested in the quality of
ingredients they use. Especially since starting to keep chickens last year, and discovering that
they're a lot more intelligent

than

Quoted message said:

I'd previously realised!

Personally, I've been guilty of buying cheap 'n tasteless chicken breasts etc. in the past, but
have resolved never to do it again. I'd rather eat meat etc. less often (because the free range,
organically produced

versions

Quoted message said:

are more expensive) than support the intensive farming methods that have given us BSE and cancer-
inducing salmon - not to mention the quality of

life

Quoted message said:

of the animal/fish in question.

Same goes for veggies, after starting to grow my own (again last year - it was a year of
revelations!), and discovering how much better they are when eaten fresh, in season.

So, where do the rest of you stand on this, and how easy do you find it to buy quality
ingredients where you live?

Jo

I'm with you on this one. If you are willing to shop carefully and (sometimes) pay more you will
get significantly higher quality food. Free range chickens, humanely-raised beef, pork, and lamb,
no veal (the free range veal just isn't very interesting, and as delicious as the milk-fed veal is
I cannot condone the way the critters are treated), organic whenever possible. Fortunately it is
pretty easy to get this kind of food here where I live in the US, but I am sure it is difficult in
many locations.

Peter,

Have you ever had range veal? :-)

While it is not the same as the tormented souls that make regualar veal, it can stand on it's own as
a superior beef... I bought a whole weanling range calf a couple of years ago and had it processed.

Some of the best beef I've ever, EVER had. It's in the plans to do it again as soon as I have the
freezer space, and I'm working on that. <G>

K.

--

Quoted message said:

,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<[email hidden]>,,<

cgi6.ebay.comeBayISAPI.dllOpen ↗

"Darkginger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of your way to make sure you
only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the intensively farmed (battery)
versions? Will you hunt out wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports
about carcinogens)? Are you concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed
food because it contains additives?

No, I avoid processed food because it tastes like [censored].

Quoted message said:

I'm wondering, becuse I was alarmed to discover that something like 98% of all chickens sold in
the UK are still battery farmed, and I'm interested to see whether people who are interested in
cookery are equally interested in the quality of ingredients they use. Especially since starting
to keep chickens last year, and discovering that they're a lot more intelligent than I'd
previously realised!

Personally, I've been guilty of buying cheap 'n tasteless chicken breasts etc. in the past, but
have resolved never to do it again. I'd rather eat meat etc. less often (because the free range,
organically produced versions are more expensive) than support the intensive farming methods that
have given us BSE and cancer-inducing salmon - not to mention the quality of life of the
animal/fish in question.

Same goes for veggies, after starting to grow my own (again last year - it was a year of
revelations!), and discovering how much better they are when eaten fresh, in season.

So, where do the rest of you stand on this, and how easy do you find it to buy quality ingredients
where you live?

It's pretty easy to buy quality ingredients here (Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA), but I usually go to the
grocery store and buy whatever they have without thinking about the source. I don't like canned
vegetables (except tomatoes), so I buy only "fresh" or frozen.

I shop at a high-end grocery store; it has organic stuff available, which I buy if it looks as good
as the "inorganic" stuff and is comparable in price.

In the summer I have a garden with tomatoes, black raspberries, and whatever else strikes my fancy
(last year: jalapenos). Herbs in pots on the patio. I garden organically, for the most part, but I
don't insist that the tomato starts be organic (but I favor the heirloom tomato Brandywine).

Once or twice a year I splurge on a USDA prime standing rib roast, which I get at a local butcher
shop. If I feel like, e.g., whole fish baked in a salt dome, I go to the fishmonger rather than the
grocery store. Veal comes from the butcher rather than the grocery store, because it's just better.

The butcher and fishmonger are difficult to get to and park at; one rush hour trip took 40 minutes
for about a five-mile drive. I really have to be motivated to go there rather than make the 10-
minute drive to the grocery store.

I feel I'm pretty middle-of-the road about the source of my food, and above average on quality.

Cindy Hamilton

Darkginger said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of your way to make sure you
only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the intensively farmed (battery)
versions? Will you hunt out wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to recent reports
about carcinogens)? Are you concerned about methods of veal production? Do you avoid processed
food because it contains additives?

I live in the United States, in NJ just outside Philadelphia. I am not obsessive about my food
purchases. I tend to avoid frozen foods. I do not eat fish much so getting the best seafood is not
an issue for me, but if I wanted, I could get a wide variety of seafood because I live in a
coastal state.

My taste in food tends to be toward inexpensive items. For example, I have no great desire to buy
prime cuts of meat. I buy cheap cuts of meat such as chuck steaks, and chicken legs when I shop. If
I am near a farmer's market where free range chicken is available, I will buy some, but I definitely
do not go out of my way to do so. During the summer season, I make it a point to buy locally grown
produce as much as possible. I am not a fan of produce that's in season in the fall and winter so I
have no concern about buying items such as squash in season.

Sadly, the quality of our food is likely to decline. Specialty items such as free range meats and
organic produce will increase in price and become more difficult to find in stores. In another three
or four decades, I suspect we'll eat a lot less meat and chicken, simply because produce is a lot
more efficient to grow and distribute than animal products are. Being a carnivor, that prospect does
not sit well with me.

We keep losing farm acrage. Every day, more and more farms are converted to housing developments
and/or strip malls. We continue to lose farm acreage at a time when the world's population is
growing at a considerable rate. At some point, we will get to a point where the two situations
(declining farm acreage and increasing population) will reach a nexus and than the consequences of
those problems will make themselves known, even in prosperous countries such as the United States
and Canada.

sd said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Darkginger said:

How much does it bother you where you food comes from? Do you go out of your way to make sure
you only buy free range chicken and eggs, or are you content to eat the intensively farmed
(battery) versions? Will you hunt out wild salmon rather than farmed (or did you, prior to
recent reports about carcinogens)? Are you concerned about methods of veal production? Do you
avoid processed food because it contains additives?

I feel safer buying at the co-op. I think conventional food producers do many things in the name
of economics that turn out to be really questionable for human or ecological health in the
longer term.

*snickers* tell it to the applegrowers. Seriously, organically grown apples, at least, are far
more of a risk to your health than pesticide-covered ones. Apple rust is proven to be far, far
more carcinogenic than any pesticide applegrowers use. So, buying organic apples is a [censored] shoot.
Wish I knew as much about other organic products, but I only know people who grow apples on a
professional basis.

the temptation to make fun of people who think because it is natural it is automatically better for
you is mounting...

fwiw, most genetically engineered products are better for you than their counterparts (think
corn)... of course, they do about nothing for biodiversity...

Lena

In article <[email hidden]>,

Lena B Katz said:

Quoted message said:

I feel safer buying at the co-op. I think conventional food producers do many things in the name
of economics that turn out to be really questionable for human or ecological health in the
longer term.

*snickers* tell it to the applegrowers. Seriously, organically grown apples, at least, are far
more of a risk to your health than pesticide-covered ones. Apple rust is proven to be far, far
more carcinogenic than any pesticide applegrowers use. So, buying organic apples is a [censored] shoot.
Wish I knew as much about other organic products, but I only know people who grow apples on a
professional basis.

I'd be interested in seeing a citation of that.

Quoted message said:

the temptation to make fun of people who think because it is natural it is automatically better
for you is mounting...

When someone promotes something to me as "all natural," I reply that uranium is all natural, too --
that doesn't make it good for you. "Evaporated organic cane sugar" is sugar by any other name. "All
natural" does not mean that common sense should fly out the window.

Make fun if you want. At least I'm not dodging one of the millions of pounds of ground beef that
_might_ contain a ground up mad cow. Or complaining about the lousy texture of "injected" pork.

Quoted message said:

fwiw, most genetically engineered products are better for you than their counterparts (think
corn)... of course, they do about nothing for biodiversity...

As I mentioned in my post, I don't have a problem with genetic manipulation in the form of hybrids
or grafted stock or such. I _do_ have a problem introducing characteristics of one species to
another, especially on the massive, accelerated schedule that GMOs require. I'd be very interested
to see positive statements about GMOs from people who will not profit financially from their
introduction.

sd

Quoted message said:

I live in the United States, in NJ just outside Philadelphia. I am not obsessive about my food
purchases. I tend to avoid frozen foods. I do not eat fish much so getting the best seafood is not
an issue for me, but if I wanted, I could get a wide variety of seafood because I live in a
coastal state.

Sometimes frozen is fresher than 'fresh', as in factory ships that freeze their catch on-board vs.
fish that sit on ice (one hopes) for a day or more before being delivered 'fresh' to the fish
market. There are also veg-processing operations close to growing areas, so that many things that
*can* be appetizingly frozen are processed much more quickly than the 'fresh' products shipped
thousands of miles out of season

Quoted message said:

Sadly, the quality of our food is likely to decline. Specialty items such as free range meats and
organic produce will increase in price and become more difficult to find in stores. In another
three or four decades, I suspect we'll eat a lot less meat and chicken, simply because produce is a
lot more efficient to grow and distribute than animal products are. Being a carnivor, that prospect
does not sit well with me.

?? 'Free range' and 'organic' already command premium prices. Normal economics suggest that if
demand rises, so will supply, and eventually prices will *fall*. The availability and affordability
of 'regular' meat in the diet has been increasing for the past century.

Quoted message said:

We keep losing farm acrage. Every day, more and more farms are converted to housing developments
and/or strip malls. We continue to lose farm acreage at a time when the world's population is
growing at a considerable rate. At some point, we will get to a point where the two situations
(declining farm acreage and increasing population) will reach a nexus and than the consequences of
those problems will make themselves known, even in prosperous countries such as the United States
and Canada.

Farm (and forest) acreage close to urban areas is certainly being lost to expansion of those areas,
but haven't you seen the stories of "town for sale" or "free land" in rural parts of the US? There's
*plenty* of land for farming, and likely to be for centuries in much of the US. Farms surrounded by
suburbia regularly sell out, but if the owners want to continue to farm, they only have to seek out
another area.

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking, Frogleg of EarthLink Inc.

-- url='http://www.earthlink.net/'http://www.EarthLink.net/url said:

I don't eat veal. The methods of production seem cruel, but then so do the conditions of many
*human* workers in food industries. I'd rather see the *people* treated fairly and 'humanely'
first, and worry about the chickens and cows later.

It's perfectly possible to care about both.

There's no logic in "Since some people work under bad conditions, it's okay to treat animals badly";
those two things do not connect with each other, or do you think it will help people get better
conditions to treat animals badly? One doesn't happen at the cost of the other, and it's a false
dichotomy to set it up as if you can only help or care about either humans or animals, when you
*can* care about both.
--
Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18 ICQ# 251532856 Unreferenced footnotes: nut.house.cxcgiOpen ↗
bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN "There is scarcely a business or industry left that could understand the concept
of shame even if they looked it up in a dictionary." Eric Walker (AUE)

sd said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Lena B Katz

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I feel safer buying at the co-op. I think conventional food producers do many things in the
name of economics that turn out to be really questionable for human or ecological health in
the longer term.

*snickers* tell it to the applegrowers. Seriously, organically grown apples, at least, are far
more of a risk to your health than pesticide-covered ones. Apple rust is proven to be far, far
more carcinogenic than any pesticide applegrowers use. So, buying organic apples is a [censored]
shoot. Wish I knew as much about other organic products, but I only know people who grow apples
on a professional basis.

I'd be interested in seeing a citation of that.

*responded to privately*

does anyone else want a citation?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the temptation to make fun of people who think because it is natural it is automatically better
for you is mounting...

When someone promotes something to me as "all natural," I reply that uranium is all natural, too
-- that doesn't make it good for you. "Evaporated organic cane sugar" is sugar by any other name.
"All natural" does not mean that common sense should fly out the window.

Make fun if you want. At least I'm not dodging one of the millions of pounds of ground beef that
_might_ contain a ground up mad cow. Or complaining about the lousy texture of "injected" pork.

then, you realize, i'm probably not making fun of you... ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

fwiw, most genetically engineered products are better for you than their counterparts (think
corn)... of course, they do about nothing for biodiversity...

As I mentioned in my post, I don't have a problem with genetic manipulation in the form of hybrids
or grafted stock or such. I _do_ have a problem introducing characteristics of one species to
another, especially on the massive, accelerated schedule that GMOs require. I'd be very interested
to see positive statements about GMOs from people who will not profit financially from their
introduction.

Talk to any political scientist worth their salt about the problems of the South... they'll see a
good deal of promise in such genetically modified plants. I do as well... save a lot of kids from
blindness, without having to persuade morons that you can save a hell of a lot more lives by giving
"carrot pills" to kids than by trying to "cure cancer." Rich people diseases will _never_ kill as
many as poor people diseases.

Lena

yes, hiv counts as a disease of the poor...

Frogleg said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

avoid processed food because it contains additives?

I avoid processed food because most of it contains vast quantities of sodium. "Additives" aren't a
single, monolithic, cancer-causing class of ingredients, in spite of long chemical names on
labels. Some are flavor-enhancers, or coloring agents (beta carotene) or benign substances to
[censored] spoilage. If a 'fat-free' product is made from vegetable gum and modified food starch, I
stay away from it because it sounds icky to me. Iodine was an early "additive" to salt to prevent
a thyroid condition. Calcium is added to orange juice. Vitamins lost in milling grain are re-
introduced as "additives". You cringe at pyridoxine hydrochloride? That's vitamin B6. I don't mind
if someone adds vitamins to my food. I worry more when I see products that list water and sugar in
various guises as predominant ingredients.

that's one of the best tricks i ever learned! helped me find a source for aronia-berry flavored
juice in the 'states (where no one has ever, lord help me, heard of the stuff).... Read the labels,
and remember that apple and grape juices are added for sugar value...

Lena

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:56:53 +0100, MEow <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking, Frogleg of EarthLink Inc. --

url='http://www.earthlink.net/'http://www.EarthLink.net/url said:

I don't eat veal. The methods of production seem cruel, but then so do the conditions of many
*human* workers in food industries. I'd rather see the *people* treated fairly and 'humanely'
first, and worry about the chickens and cows later.

It's perfectly possible to care about both.

There's no logic in "Since some people work under bad conditions, it's okay to treat animals
badly"; those two things do not connect with each other, or do you think it will help people get
better conditions to treat animals badly? One doesn't happen at the cost of the other, and it's a
false dichotomy to set it up as if you can only help or care about either humans or animals, when
you *can* care about both.

Not at all what I said. However, I see/hear a *lot* more in the media from PETA and similar about
animals than from organizations and individuals who consider the wages and conditions of humans
working in food production. How many vegetarians lecture others on the ethics of eating animals vs.
those who are concerned with the way farm workers live? We applaud when KFC says they'll no longer
buy chicken from sources that raise and slaughter them in cruel ways, but not a word about the
underpaid people who work in horrible conditions to bring these chickens to market.

Of *course* I don't want animals mistreated. Even more, I don't want humans treated like not-very-
valuable animals. I certainly don't believe it's a zero-sum game, but I'm a little oversupplied with
animal rights and don't hear enough about human ones.

MEow said:

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking, Frogleg of EarthLink Inc. --

url='http://www.earthlink.net/'http://www.EarthLink.net/url said:

I don't eat veal. The methods of production seem cruel, but then so do the conditions of many
*human* workers in food industries. I'd rather see the *people* treated fairly and 'humanely'
first, and worry about the chickens and cows later.

It's perfectly possible to care about both.

There's no logic in "Since some people work under bad conditions, it's okay to treat animals
badly"; those two things do not connect with each other, or do you think it will help people get
better conditions to treat animals badly? One doesn't happen at the cost of the other, and it's a
false dichotomy to set it up as if you can only help or care about either humans or animals, when
you *can* care about both.

but one is an issue of moral _obligation_ whereas the other has much less morality attached...

Lena

MEow said:

Quoted message said:

We applaud when KFC says they'll no longer buy chicken from sources that raise and slaughter them
in cruel ways, but not a word about the underpaid people who work in horrible conditions to bring
these chickens to market.

or the people working for KFC. I don't buy things from shops which I know use sweatshops to make
their products, and I generally try to shop ethically concerning the treatment of humans and
animals, but I don't think I'm managing to make much of a difference.

Liar. Or did you really build your computer from scratch? (and I mean with homemade boards...). I
seriously get [censored] when people think they're so cool for buying "fair trade"... but they don't
do it for everything, or even attempt doing it for anything that's "hard".

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Of *course* I don't want animals mistreated. Even more, I don't want humans treated like not-very-
valuable animals. I certainly don't believe it's a zero-sum game, but I'm a little oversupplied
with animal rights and don't hear enough about human ones.

So you mean that we hear too much about animal rights, not that there are too many animal rights,
then? Okay, I understand you, in that case.

animals have no rights.

Lena

MEow said:

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking said:

Quoted message said:

One doesn't happen at the cost of the other, and it's a false dichotomy to set it up as if you
can only help or care about either humans or animals, when you *can* care about both.

but one is an issue of moral _obligation_ whereas the other has much less morality attached...

Which one do you classify as which category here, and why?

For something to be classified as morally good or bad, someone must have an obligation, a duty to do
it. In order for a person to have rights, he/she must also take on duties. Flip sides of the same
coin. Without duties (like the duty to not harm someone) there can be no rights (like the right to
not be harmed). In an ethical society, people share the same duties and rights as each other.
Because animals cannot behave ethically, they can have no rights, because they are incapable of
bearing responsibility for their actions.

Most ethical arguments about animals revolve around them being "close to humans", not about them
actually having rights.

See any book on medical ethics.

and, to be consistent, no, infants do not have rights either. but i'm much more in favor of abortion
than infanticide.

Lena

While frolicking around in rec.food.cooking, Frogleg of EarthLink Inc.

-- url='http://www.earthlink.net/'http://www.EarthLink.net/url said:

Not at all what I said. However, I see/hear a *lot* more in the media from PETA and similar about
animals than from organizations and individuals who consider the wages and conditions of humans
working in food production. How many vegetarians lecture others on the ethics of eating animals vs.
those who are concerned with the way farm workers live?

I don't give a lot for PETA, because of what I've hear about them. As far as vegetarians
lecturing/preaching goes, I hate that too, and I didn't like them even better when I was a vegan.
However, I have heard people in alt.food.vegan talk about avoiding for instance bananas because of
how badly the banana-pickers are treated, and many people there buy Fair Trade, or similar labels,
for better treatment of the people where the products come from.

I see the issue of treating people properly, and treating animals properly as being connected, and
not just because that humans are animals too.

Quoted message said:

We applaud when KFC says they'll no longer buy chicken from sources that raise and slaughter them
in cruel ways, but not a word about the underpaid people who work in horrible conditions to bring
these chickens to market.

or the people working for KFC. I don't buy things from shops which I know use sweatshops to make
their products, and I generally try to shop ethically concerning the treatment of humans and
animals, but I don't think I'm managing to make much of a difference.

Quoted message said:

Of *course* I don't want animals mistreated. Even more, I don't want humans treated like not-very-
valuable animals. I certainly don't believe it's a zero-sum game, but I'm a little oversupplied
with animal rights and don't hear enough about human ones.

So you mean that we hear too much about animal rights, not that there are too many animal rights,
then? Okay, I understand you, in that case.

You're right that there should be more about the conditions which some people work under, in the
media. At least I agree with that.
--
Nikitta a.a. #1759 Apatriot(No, not apricot)#18 ICQ# 251532856 Unreferenced footnotes: nut.house.cxcgiOpen ↗
bin/nemwiki.pl?ISFN "You can tell if someone is a doctor. Their handwriting is very messy and
illegible and they know stuff. Medical stuff." John Coxon (afdaiain)