Re:

Not Responding said:

Quoted message said:

and people rearing pheasants for 'sport'

Now that is a "sport" that is cruel and wasteful. If I were into
banning things, this would be on the list.

Are the pheasants not cooked and eaten?

I have found the odd bit of shot in game at a restaurant not far from
here. I assumed that it had come from a gun, but I suppose it could
have been added manually for 'authenticity'.

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

Quoted message said:

MartinM said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:35:10 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>
wrote:

> And the reason for killing foxes in the first place is?

Because they interfere with other equally immoral activities such as
"farming" chickens.

and pheasants!

I presume you are completely vegetarian then?

yes,

but the thing with pheasants is that they are bred for sport, you don't see
free range pheasant that is killed without being shot.

MartinM said:

but the thing with pheasants is that they are bred for sport, you don't see
free range pheasant that is killed without being shot.

Point of order, m'lud, roadkill, and lots of it!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

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

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

I presume you are completely vegetarian then?

Not a perfect one. I avoid dead animal products in my diet. I also
attempt to minimise the use of dairy products at home, although when
eating out I lapse. Eggs I will eat if free range.

I still own a couple of pairs of leather shoes purchased many many
years ago and see no reason to dispose of them. I'm no longer a vegan
as such but I am what I call a "VGV" - Very Good Vegetarian.

I'm a really bad vegetarian, Quorn, Morningstar and Linda Mc C do well out
of me; after several yeras of trying to get creative with a turnip it's back
to toad in the hole and Quorn chilli; but I avoid non free range eggs.
Leather, well I eat and drink dairy products so.....
and I eat fish
anyone who exercises more control over their diet feel free to call me a
charleton ;-)

MartinM said:

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

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

I presume you are completely vegetarian then?

Not a perfect one. I avoid dead animal products in my diet. I also
attempt to minimise the use of dairy products at home, although when
eating out I lapse. Eggs I will eat if free range.

I still own a couple of pairs of leather shoes purchased many many
years ago and see no reason to dispose of them. I'm no longer a vegan
as such but I am what I call a "VGV" - Very Good Vegetarian.

I'm a really bad vegetarian, Quorn, Morningstar and Linda Mc C do well out
of me; after several yeras of trying to get creative with a turnip it's back
to toad in the hole and Quorn chilli; but I avoid non free range eggs.

So do I. And Linda Mc C sausages are the only vegetarian ones that taste any
good.

Quoted message said:

Leather, well I eat and drink dairy products so.....
and I eat fish
anyone who exercises more control over their diet feel free to call me a
charleton ;-)

I am quite happy with the concept of killing something for food. After all,
what is the rational difference to distinguish between a mammal and a
vegetable wrt life?

I am quite happy with the concept of catching my own food. I also want food
that is well looked after and not mistreated (ie treated with respect and
allowed a decent life.) so I try to avoid factory/industrially farmed foods.

One gets to suggest that it is better to give an animal a life in security
with plenty of food etc. and a quick death than to have it suffer a long
death from starvation or disease.

This is starting to stray very much towards the 'is pain just a chemical
reaction and if so does it matter' and the metaphysics of life itself.

...d

MartinM said:

anyone who exercises more control over their diet feel free to call
me a charleton ;-)

I fort vey wuz a saarf Lunnon footie team...

(dies)

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

David Martin said:

I am quite happy with the concept of killing something for food. After all,
what is the rational difference to distinguish between a mammal and a
vegetable wrt life?

The presence of a central nervous system.

Quoted message said:

I am quite happy with the concept of catching my own food. I also want food
that is well looked after and not mistreated (ie treated with respect and
allowed a decent life.) so I try to avoid factory/industrially farmed foods.

Whilst I still don't agree with the need for humans to kill other
animas for food, I tolerate killing of food by oneself far more than I
tolerate factory farming

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

Quoted message said:

MartinM said:

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

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:10:31 +0000, David Martin
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> I presume you are completely vegetarian then?

Not a perfect one. I avoid dead animal products in my diet. I also
attempt to minimise the use of dairy products at home, although when
eating out I lapse. Eggs I will eat if free range.

I still own a couple of pairs of leather shoes purchased many many
years ago and see no reason to dispose of them. I'm no longer a vegan
as such but I am what I call a "VGV" - Very Good Vegetarian.

I'm a really bad vegetarian, Quorn, Morningstar and Linda Mc C do well

out

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of me; after several yeras of trying to get creative with a turnip it's

back

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to toad in the hole and Quorn chilli; but I avoid non free range eggs.

So do I. And Linda Mc C sausages are the only vegetarian ones that taste

any

Quoted message said:

good.

they are my least favourite; Wicken Fen and Safeway are nice, Quorn are best
barbied. Being half German potato salad and bockwurst (or is a bratwurst,
anyway frankfurters) are staple on Christmas Eve along with Gluhwein; but
veggie frankfurters always sell out a month before (plus they clear them off
the shelves to put even more meat in their place). Christman dinner for the
last ages has been chestnut and tomato parcels, we were served this up at a
work Christmas party once, the only edible veggie stuff I have ever found at
such a function.

David Martin said:

So do I. And Linda Mc C sausages are the only vegetarian ones that taste any
good.

According to my taste buds, Tesco's "Lincolnshire Style" are munchable
enough to keep in the freezer.

Quoted message said:

This is starting to stray very much towards the 'is pain just a chemical
reaction and if so does it matter' and the metaphysics of life itself.

I came to the conclusion that trying to draw hard, objective lines to
delineate what I should and shouldn't eat as a veggie (back when I was
one) was effectively impossible. It's a bit like fractals, the closer
you come to what seems at first like a solid wall actually has quite a
lot of fuzziness and holes when you start looking up close...
So in the end I just decided I'd eat what I find apetising, and at the
time that didn't mean changing from being a veggie, though in time as I
was offered increasingly good meat and fish I ended up eating it. I
won't eat most chicken: as covered already, most of it's completely
bogging. I won't eat foie gras, because the production method is simply
appalling to me. And so on, but IME it's much easier to decide whether
to eat something on the basis that if you'll put it in your mouth you
will, and otherwise not, than trying to come up with something formal
and consistent that you can write down. There's always some damn fool
exceptional case or a blurring of the sharp line...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

So do I. And Linda Mc C sausages are the only vegetarian ones that taste any
good.

According to my taste buds, Tesco's "Lincolnshire Style" are munchable
enough to keep in the freezer.

very very very yummy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is starting to stray very much towards the 'is pain just a chemical
reaction and if so does it matter' and the metaphysics of life itself.

I came to the conclusion that trying to draw hard, objective lines to
delineate what I should and shouldn't eat as a veggie (back when I was
one) was effectively impossible. It's a bit like fractals, the closer
you come to what seems at first like a solid wall actually has quite a
lot of fuzziness and holes when you start looking up close...
So in the end I just decided I'd eat what I find apetising, and at the
time that didn't mean changing from being a veggie, though in time as I
was offered increasingly good meat and fish I ended up eating it. I
won't eat most chicken: as covered already, most of it's completely
bogging. I won't eat foie gras, because the production method is simply
appalling to me. And so on, but IME it's much easier to decide whether
to eat something on the basis that if you'll put it in your mouth you
will, and otherwise not, than trying to come up with something formal
and consistent that you can write down. There's always some damn fool
exceptional case or a blurring of the sharp line...

I decided to only eat things that I could see being killed without
getting upset. I ended up a vege.

Quoted message said:

--
Sara

On 24/11/04 4:52 pm, in article [email hidden],

Richard Bates said:

David Martin said:

I am quite happy with the concept of killing something for food. After all,
what is the rational difference to distinguish between a mammal and a
vegetable wrt life?

The presence of a central nervous system.

So the presence of an anatomical feature is somehow a determinant of the
value of a life.
Hmm.. interesting concept.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am quite happy with the concept of catching my own food. I also want food
that is well looked after and not mistreated (ie treated with respect and
allowed a decent life.) so I try to avoid factory/industrially farmed foods.

Whilst I still don't agree with the need for humans to kill other
animas for food, I tolerate killing of food by oneself far more than I
tolerate factory farming

fine..

...d

Al C-F [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

The foxes right to life, love and the pursuit of happiness? Dignity?
Self-realisation?

The foxe's right to the rights that we (supposedly) accord to other
animals, including the preclusion of unneccessary suffering.

The problem is not the end result which is often quick, but the drawn
out process that leads to it.

Jon

Al C-F [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

The foxes right to life, love and the pursuit of happiness? Dignity?
Self-realisation?

The foxes' right to the rights that we (supposedly) accord to other
animals, including the preclusion of unneccessary suffering.

The problem is not the end result which is often quick, but the drawn
out process that leads to it.

Jon

Al C-F [email hidden] opined the
following...

Quoted message said:

Time for a second shot? OK, if you insist.

Please note (again), the requirement for a good marksman. With the
correct tools, two rounds can be fired in little more time than one.
This is not a "normal" skill and thus should be left to the
professionals.

Quoted message said:

Any foxes left wounded by hounds?

Occasionally. But ignoring for a second the fact that you have
completely missed the point, what you are comparing is young, fresh and
heavily bred hounds against farmer Giles who was once shown which end of
a gun the bullets come out of.

Do I think the hounds could do as good a job as a professional marksman?
No. But then, no-one who proclaims hunting to be a good method for pest
control ever bothers to consider the alternatives.

And for the record, the points that you are missing are:

1) The suffering is inflicted in the act of the chase, not the brief
kill that (finally) ends it.
2) Foxes are not a "pest" or "vermin".

What you are left with is a bunch of people who like to play around on
horses and enjoy the thrill of hunting and killing a weaker animal. We
tend to look down on such people these days in all cases other than
hunting which is bizarrely revered as a "good healthy tradition".

Jon

Richard Bates [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

David Martin said:

I am quite happy with the concept of killing something for food. After all,
what is the rational difference to distinguish between a mammal and a
vegetable wrt life?

The presence of a central nervous system.

Dangerous territory here. You should be OK with certain types of seafood
here since they have little or no nervous system at all.

Is the requirement for a nervous system that it be capable of feeling
pain? Or that it be conscious? Or just that it has one?

Quoted message said:

Whilst I still don't agree with the need for humans to kill other
animas for food, I tolerate killing of food by oneself far more than I
tolerate factory farming

Biologically we are adapted to eating an omnivorous diet and restricting
oneself to only non-animal foods will make your dietary requirements
more difficult to meet, and leave you more likely to be deficient than a
balanced approach to meat. Where possible, I try to source meat from
local suppliers such as the Farmer's Market, or from a butcher that
works in a similar manner (Crombies in Edinburgh). One reason for this
is that it tastes better.

Jon

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:25 -0000, Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Please note (again), the requirement for a good marksman. With the
correct tools, two rounds can be fired in little more time than one.
This is not a "normal" skill and thus should be left to the
professionals.

I am an average shot at best and had little difficulty putting a round
into the bullseye at 150 yards with a SMLE. My shooting instructor
specialised in shooting the markers out at that range. Two shots
should not be necessary.

At 50 yards with a .22 I could get a group of ten all well within the
9 ring, but at 25 yards I had a hard time hitting anything at all with
a pistol :-)

Shotguns are a different matter...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

In article <[email hidden]>, Jon Senior

Quoted message said:

Biologically we are adapted to eating an omnivorous diet and restricting
oneself to only non-animal foods will make your dietary requirements
more difficult to meet, and leave you more likely to be deficient than a
balanced approach to meat.

I haven't had a problem, and I don't have to think about it to not have
a problem. Bad sentence, but you know what I mean.

Quoted message said:

Where possible, I try to source meat from
local suppliers such as the Farmer's Market, or from a butcher that
works in a similar manner (Crombies in Edinburgh). One reason for this
is that it tastes better.

Each to his own. I'd not try to stop anyone else from eating meat.

--
Sara

Sara Kirk [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

I haven't had a problem, and I don't have to think about it to not have
a problem. Bad sentence, but you know what I mean.

I've met many who have. Some were down to using vitamin pills (And not
asking too many questions about how the vitamins were sourced).

It's relatively easy for a [censored] cook to produce a good, balanced meal.
It takes a better cook to do so when the range of possible ingredients
is significantly reduced. Not impossible. Just more difficult.

Quoted message said:

Each to his own. I'd not try to stop anyone else from eating meat.

And I don't try to start vegetarians on to meat. I just like to
understand the reasoning (And play with people's ideas. If they can't
stand up to reasoned debate...). :-)

Jon

Dave Larrington said:

MartinM said:

anyone who exercises more control over their diet feel free to call
me a charleton ;-)

I fort vey wuz a saarf Lunnon footie team...

no such thing ;-)

No it's a dance from the 20's

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jon Senior jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk said:

Biologically we are adapted to eating an omnivorous diet

Indeed we are. I use almost exactly those words (written 1998) on
the subject on a personal webpage which details my views.

Though it would be more correct to say biologically we are adapted
to being able to eat a huge range of different diets. That's why
humans can thrive in so many radically different ecosystems, from
the vegan (eg parts of Asia) to the near-all-fatty-meat (eg Greenland).

I gave up meat not because I see killing as inherently wrong, but
because I can't support modern farming methods that keeps animals
for their entire (short) lives in unspeakable conditions prior to
slaughter.

Quoted message said:

and restricting
oneself to only non-animal foods will make your dietary requirements
more difficult to meet,

That's a problem of the packaged society. It's more than a decade since
I gave up meat, and I don't have a problem (unless you count the expanding
waistline as problematic).

Quoted message said:

and leave you more likely to be deficient than a
balanced approach to meat.

The "one size fits all" world view?

--
Nick Kew