STOP KILLING ANIMALS PLEASE! - Page 4

If people want to deny that humans are part of the food chain and meant to consume meat, then so be it. I'll agree that current meat consumption is wanton and there is no justification of factory farming and overconsumption. The balance of nature has tilted in favor of humans. However, if all humans were to turn vegetarian, the animal populations would become unsustainable nor would we have enough resources to feed and care for all animals.

I don't think there is anything morally wrong in playing out your role in the food chain. When you take something from earth, there are many ways to give back to earth as well. As long as you don't take more than you deserve and give back whatever you can, it is not harmful. If this sort of good stewardship is unpalatable to people simply because someone eats meat, so be it. If I am to be a heartless, soulless beast because I eat meat, so be it. I can live with my conscience, because I know exactly what I take from earth and exactly what I do to take care of earth as well.

animal population is automatically kept in balance in wild..
most of the big meat producing corporations use different techniques to breed animals like test tube babies.. and also injecting them with so many crappy antibiotics and who knows what else fattening chemicals! population rise of animals is only in captivity because they have to produce more and more animals just to slaughter them for meat eaters.

in natural conditions in wild there is an automatic balance of animals..
you are not caring for those animals now also .. big meat producing factories are breeding them and killing them! you call that taking care? and taking care just to kill isnt justified anyways even if they are in farms.. and for not enough resources to feed them is a joke..

[quote]More than two-thirds of all agricultural land is devoted to growing feed for livestock, while only 8 percent is used to grow food for direct human consumption, LEAD reported. If the entire world population were to consume as much meat as the Western world does-176 pounds of meat per capita per year- the global land required would be two-thirds more than what is presently used, according to Vaclav Smil, professor of environment and geography at the University of Manitoba and participant in the EVP study.

LEAD researchers also found that the global livestock industry uses dwindling supplies of freshwater, destroys forests and grasslands, and causes soil erosion, while pollution and the runoff of fertilizer and animal waste create dead zones in coastal areas and smother coral reefs. There also is concern over increased antibiotic resistance, since livestock accounts for 50 percent of antibiotic use globally, according to LEAD.
Breaking down the burden

Calculating the true cost of meat production is a daunting task, Mooney said. Consider the piece of ham on your breakfast plate, and where it came from before landing on your grocery store shelf. First, take into account the amount of land used to rear the pig. Then factor in all of the land, water and fertilizer used to grow the grain to feed the pig and the associated pollution that results. Finally, consider that while a small percentage of the ham may have come from Denmark, where there are twice as many pigs as people, the grain to feed the animal was likely grown in Brazil, where rainforests are constantly being cleared to grow more soybeans, a major source of pig feed.

"These interconnections are even more important for countries, such as Japan and the Netherlands, that rely heavily on trade to meet local meat and feed demand," said Marshall Burke, a collaborator on the EVP project and program manager at Stanford's Food Security and the Environment program.

To help quantify the industry's hidden environmental costs, Mooney brought together a team of international experts, including Naylor and Falcon, to create a model that traces the impacts of livestock production on a global scale. The results were published in the journal Environmental Modeling & Assessment, with Burke as lead author.

The researchers then applied the model to the United States and Brazil, two of the largest livestock producers and exporters in the world; Japan, which relies almost completely on imports; and the Netherlands, which imports feeds but exports animal products. The results, published in the December 2007 issue of the journal Ambio, showed that global meat production has widespread and severe environmental consequences, and that when a country substitutes imported for domestically produced meat, the environmental burdens are shifted abroad, affecting countries half a world away.

For example, Japan greatly benefits from importing grain for raising meat, because Brazil provides the land, water and nutrients to raise the grain without accounting for the true environmental cost that is incurred. Japan would have to devote 50 percent of its total arable land to raise the equivalent of their chicken and pig imports, and the country simply does not have the land available for agriculture and livestock.

"This trade in grain to support meat somewhere else has big impacts on the country it's going to as well as the country it's coming from," Mooney said. [/quote]


there is no food chain for those who have a choice.. food chain is for a lion who have no choice..
these are stupid excuses for justifing killings just like most terrorists think they are killing for invisible god .. those people kill for eternal health/life (as they believe in that)... some people kill for mortal health.. even when they have a choice..

ofcourse it is a morally wrong to kill someone else just because of taste of flesh specially when alternatives are provided, just to fill belly for few hours and a creature has to die.. someones child,mother, father loved one.. so that someone can cook that dead body and crap it out in few hours .. its all about taste.. that is heartless nodoubt specially when you have realized that someone else is actually dying for your need which can be fulfilled by something else.. its not hard to quit anyways i did that .. atleast trying is good thing its never too late to quit...
anways upto the person if he/she feels he/she can live with his/her conscious but giving stupid excuses or trying to justifing killing is wrong.. accept it that you kill others to survive and you don't care .. don't give excuses of population,plant life etc because those are just excuses as you don't care abt them either.. its all about self