Faroe Islands

I've not seen it, but it bothers me that they didn't call it Conspirasea instead.

 

It is really not an "insane ethos" it really isn't!
Caveat that the actions of Faroe Islanders and many ritualistic actions of killing for sport is unacceptable we , as a species, are omnivores and evolved as such.
A recent survey suggested of all the species on the planet 63% were carnivores, 32% were herbivores, and 3% were omnivores and in the marine World there are vey few herbivores and most fish and seafood caught are carnivorous and omnivores.

We are for the most part near the top of the food chain only because of science and technology...(medicines and weapons) Otherwise we are quite a way from the top. Anyone who thinks a Great White has a conscience when attacking seals (or surfers) , or Wolves, Polar Bears, Lions, Tigers, Pumas, Panthers and a whole myriad of animals is sadly misguided. Bacteria and viruses trump humans in many cases. Dolphins/sharks tuna and sea birds ' round up' fish, like anchovies and sardines, into huge bait balls which they then slaughter from above and below. No real difference between raising sheep and cattle.

Whilst I have no problem with people who choose to avoid meat and fish I refuse to be lectured and looked down on by those considering themselves morally superior i.e. the 'meat is murder" brigade. I accept that the hypocrisy on the other side is that people have become used to and expect 'cheap food' and don't really care how it arrives on their plate. If people eat less meat/poultry but go for quality not quantity then animal welfare, people's health would improve. Too often we hear the barrier is family budgets but eating meat/poultry , say once or twice a week instead of every day would negate that extra cost. Time to prepare is also used as an excuse and convenience food and takeaways are rife. There are plenty of cheap tasty and importantly quick and easy to prepare recipes out there for busy families so that is just a lame excuse.

Some elements of objections by animal rights organisations I do agree with. Factory farming with intensive rearing where animals are deprived of open air, even natural light is simply wrong. The important thing for me is that as long as animals bred for consumption are treated and killed humanely and have a decent quality of life that is all I expect.

That said, most animals killed by other animals do not necessarily have the same experience. Nature is cruel. Many people experience long and lingering deaths.

It is sheer arrogance to put ourselves above all that. We are animals like all other flora on this planet albeit and are ruled by nature. It is also utter nonsense to say we could all give up meat and fish and the whole planet could support a vegan population. Those, even experts (usually with an agenda) who argue that are like people with EVs who argue the change to 100% EVs in the next decade or two is feasible "because I never have any problem finding somewhere to charge my vehicle on a long journey" disregarding the fact that that is because there are not that many on the road relative to ICE vehicles. Also all the lorries, tractors and Combine Harvesters (especially in very hilly terrains) that would be even more important if we went onto 100% plant based diets will not be able to run on EV The battery capacity is and never will be capable of running complex machinery 24/7 as they have to at harvest times.

 

Thank you for taking the time to respond. We aren't going to agree, but the hypocrisy in this case for me is the reaction by people who are complicit in the murder of animals for food on a daily basis taking umbrage at the slaughter of the dolphins - for me there is no difference, and there is no humane way to kill animals, unless the animal is in sheer pain naturally and needs to be put out of its misery.

As an aside, you live in Italy, a country that I love dearly, and one that I have visited many times. It is also the only place where I saw a man forcibly drag an octopus from the sea with some difficulty, in Levanto in front of a crowded beach, and proceed to batter it against the concrete pier until death and 'proudly' carry it off along the beach, holding it in one hand and his young son's hand in the other. Maybe Italians consider this form of killing some kind of tradition? Personally, i found it sickening. I am arguing against the cruelty of killing animals for food, whether it is chickens lobbed in an abbatoir shredder or an octopus battered in plain sight - there is no moral superiority from me, believe me. But I have an issue with people that eat meat speaking out against other animal killings, if anything that is a form of moral superiority that is misplaced and hypocritical.

 

No, but I have clubbed a wild trout on the head and then cooked it for breakfast. So in theory I guess Redarmy87 is correct.
If I eat meat or fish when I could survive without it, am I any better than those who kill animals for other reasons when they don't have to.

In my own head when I'm doing it, yes. In actual fact, probably not.

 

Shall we just end centruries of the UK farming industry?

 

You don't have to shut down the farming industry to recognise the hypocrisy. If you're against people killing animals unnecessarily, you have to acknowledge it regardless of the reason. Killing a spider is no different to killing a cow or killing a dolphin. A life is a life.

 

My point was about the hypocrisy of people who indulge in the practice of animal killings for meat objecting to dolphins being murdered. The UK abolished corporal punishment after centuries of putting people to death for wrongdoing, a practice that many people in this country found entertaining (today people go to the cinema or the footy instead). I agree with corporal punishment ending, so I'd have nothing against banning farming practices that murder innocent beings, of course not. However, I support people being able to keep their land, and if they could make a living off growing crops etc then that's a good thing. If that's not sustainable and murdering animals is to continue to sustain farmers, then that's not a good enough reason for the industry to continue for me. I'm not going to get misty-eyed at the potential demise of centuries-old barbarism, I prefer animals to have a right to life. As a nation of dog lovers I'm surprised more people don't think like this, but the double standard is nothing new.

 

I eat pork,beef,lamb and chicken.

Does that make me a bad person?

 

We are all animals on a food chain, I accept your view and wouldn’t try to change it but I have different shaped teeth for a reason, some of them are for eating meat and some are for grinding greenery..... I am an omnivore and my system is designed to eat some meat.

 

Not unless I am also a bad person. But would i be any worse for eating a dolphin or a horse or a chimpanzee?

 

And what about mosquitos responsible for millions of deaths?

Chimpanzees are actually known to be cannibalistic in the wild.

It is a myth to argue that the World population could survive on a Vegan or even a vegetarian diet. 'Pie (vegetarian) in the sky' thinking I am afraid. Many regions of the World currently inhabited (think of Innuits in the frozen Tundra) could not survive without a diet of meat and fish. The steppes and outer Mongolia like many places on Earth cannot provide sufficient arable land to grow sufficient crops to support the population. There is not sufficient space to grow sufficient food to support the population. Much meat is reared in regions e.g. sheep on moorland, cattle in semi-arid deserts, higher altitude grassland etc where crops, even if GM'd cannot grow.

Furthermore, research increasing shows that the human body is not actually adapted/evolved sufficiently to eat cereals without many people suffering adverse side effects ...hence the increasing number of allergic reactions (many life threatening. For millenia we evolved from nomadic hunter/gatherers on a diet of meat, fish, shellfish, berries, roots. Settlers and the growing of crops started only recently in evolutionary terms and has rapidly, too rapidly IMO, replaced the diet on which we, as a species developed and thrived.

The concept of 'meat is murder', whilst extreme, is basically true. However, again I would argue that, as a species, we are, like all other flora and fauna on the planet a product of nature. Many animals kill for food, why should we , as animals, be any different, although there IS a distinction between that and killing for sport or, in many cases, for medical science. The 'middle ground' is surely to ensure animals reared for food are reared, treated and despatched humanely (something most of the animal kingdom e.g. a pack of wolves do not consider) as well as utilising every useable part of the animal. That is what should separate us from the rest of the animal kingdom, not simply advocating disregarding a valuable resource that exists on the planet. Simply stopping eating meat and particularly fish given most of our planet is covered with water, would condemn millions to death from famine.

 

Don't know where that came from, I am not vegan or vegetarian, and have no desire to be. I'm just pointing out that if you are happy to eat meat you don't need to survive or squish an insect that can't hurt you, it's hypocritical to judge other people for killing dolphins.