Horse Slaughter facilities continued

[knabe]

when emotions and reason disagree, the reward for delayed gratification is not realized.

 

[mocharolais]

The value aspect shouldn't even be a consideration in the debate.  All opening these plants does is provide a fascilitator for these horse mills to keep pumping foals out in hopes of breeding that great one with no recourse or repercussion for the disposable mindset that afflicts these people.

And the problem with this is what? Do we not do that in the cattle industry? Horses are, in the end, just meat. Grow them out and sell them for slaughter just like we do cattle, I see nothing wrong with that! I own 4 myself, and bred them for years when I was younger. I am all for slaughtering horses for meat.

You won't get the court of public opinion behind you but I feel the same way.

 

[hevmando]

Another area where others know what is best for us because we don't.  Horse slaughter is necessary because without it, there is no way to humanely get rid of an animal that is no longer wanted and no one else wants to buy.  Why is that so hard to accept?  Many people are pro choice, many are pro life, but if a mother wants to abort her baby in this country she can.  But if a horse owner wants to send their horse to slaughter, it can't be done.  Another instance where animals have more rites than humans (the baby that had no vote in the matter).  The very loud, wealthy minority is again ruling the US.

 

[RyanChandler]

I think it's just so many people -especially on here- are so far removed they don't know who the real minority are.

 

[SWMO]

XBAR - What do you propose to do with the horses in the country that are not usable or wanted at this time?  Just curious.  Retirement homes?  Just like nursing homes for the elderly in this country, turning a horse out for retirement without someone to look after it is inviting abuse of the worst kind.  An elderly horse requires an enormous amount of resources to keep him comfortable.  Vaccinations, teeth, hooves special feed as they get older.  If I am not willing to foot the bill to do this who should?  Our government?

Horses are still animals no matter how people try to humanize them.  My horse may hold a special place in my heart, but to someone else that is having to foot the bill for him because I could not face getting rid of him he is a financial burden.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with slaughtering horses in this country.  It is many times the most humane treatment that an unwanted animal will get.

 

[RyanChandler]

If an owner turns his horse out, he should be charged with neglect and animal cruelty.  When you purchase a pet- and yes I would contend 99.99% of the horses purchased in this country are pets for pleasure- you have an obligation to care for that animal till the end.  I own two horses - both paints- and they're both in their 20s.  If you're not willing to foot the bill then shame on you for purchasing the animal. 

If there was a fascilitator that paid cash for unwanted dogs and cats do you think the number of mills would increase or decrease?

 

[hevmando]

Ryan,

I agree they should be charged with cruelty and neglect, but my grandmother never bought a dog in her life, but she cared for over a dozen that just showed up at her farm.  Can't catch them so can't stop them.  I see this issue as a notch in peta and hsus bedpost, as well as no tallow in the french fry grease, no gestation crates, etc. that could lead to us being a huge importer of meat because we get too regulated to raise them in the US.  The government pulled USDA inspection of the horse slaughterhouses so they had to shut down.  They never made them illegal, if I understand the history correct.  Sets a nasty precedent.  What will you do with your horses when they are too whatever to keep around?  I imagine a bullet and a loader.  Many owners don't have the guts, land, equipment, or whatever to do that.  So they take the easy way out, out of sight out of mind.  It's wrong, but it happens.  As far as puppy mills are concerned with a slaughterhouse, might eliminate strays and provide a stronger market for the good ones that are worth selling.

 

[BTDT]

Another area where others know what is best for us because we don't.  Horse slaughter is necessary because without it, there is no way to humanely get rid of an animal that is no longer wanted and no one else wants to buy.  Why is that so hard to accept?  Many people are pro choice, many are pro life, but if a mother wants to abort her baby in this country she can.  But if a horse owner wants to send their horse to slaughter, it can't be done.  Another instance where animals have more rites than humans (the baby that had no vote in the matter).  The very loud, wealthy minority is again ruling the US.

Just read this thread.  This statement slammed into me pretty hard. I have watched numerous people fight cancer until the bitter end. Some went through horrible pain and indignation that no human should be put through, and yet, there they are, laying in their bed, contorted, gasping for air, unable to control bodily functions until their heart decides to stop beating.
And yet, if a livestock producer allowed an animal to suffer such as that, they would be instantly put up on charges and put in prison.
Yes, animals do have more rights than those that are in charge of taking care of them.

As for the topic at hand, I can see the argument both ways, but think about this for a moment. Do we, as Americans really want to dictate what others should find "offensive" or "morally correct"?  Americans do not eat horse meat. Hindu's do not eat beef and they worship the cow. Do you want India to dictate to us that we should not eat beef?

Is the issue of horse slaughter the morality of it or the humanity of it? THAT is the question you all need to answer.

 

[knabe]

Do we, as Americans really want to dictate what others should find "offensive" or "morally correct"?

more so every day.

the end result of that will be ugly.

 

[knabe]

I think it's just so many people -especially on here- are so far removed they don't know who the real minority are.

white, heterosexual males, especially one's on farms.

it's pretty easy to spot oppression.  it doesn't matter if one is a minority, of the majority or far removed.

i think it's just so many people, especially on here, are so far removed they don't know what hypocrisy is.

that a horse has more rights than an aborted fetus is about as hypocritical as it gets.

Let's be clear. The vast majority of abortions are for birth control.

One couldn't possibly kill enough horses to keep up with the slaughter of human life.

St this point, America has killed more humans through abortion than any of the worst dictators in history and somehow the people who support that have a problem killing horses. 

Sick.

 

[BTDT]

Even in my opinion, the worst thing you can be in this country is able bodied, white, average, and heterosexual. Every one else can play the "race", or "chauvinist" or "disabled" or "minority" card.
Removed from what? Cities? Minorities? Abortion rights? Antiabortion rights?  Darn near every thread you respond to is related to antiabortion regulations. While I respect your stance on such a controversial subject, I think you minimize it when you relate it to everything.
Hypocrisy is not the same as being hypocritical. I can be hypocritical of an issue without being a hypocrit.

Just because Americans, or their government, tries to change the world, doesn't mean it is right, nor does it make it wrong. It does however, make those who try and regulate others without imposing a like regulation on themselves, hypocrites.


Again I ask the question, is it the humanity of horse slaughter or the morality of it that is the issue?

 

[knabe]

Morality is simply a set of circular logic that groups of people agree on to ignore the circularity.

To your question.  Its neither.

If people want to kill humans but not horses, its inconsistent, thats the question.

We have somehow desensitized society that killing a himan is ok because we have to have sex and dont want to accept the consequences, but somehow its different that when we buy a horse or dog or cat, that somehow its outrageous that we want to send them to the pound or slaughter is inconsistent. 

As long as people keep advocating they are somehow outraged sending a horse to slaughter and these same people are for sending a human to slaughter, i will point it out.

There is literally no concern about gosnell or karpen or others yet somehow there is more outrage of horse slaughter. 

Again i ask, is it the humanity of abortion or the morality of it that allows us to kill one million humans each year and 18,000 of them after they are aborted alive.

 

[RyanChandler]

Your usage of the word -human- is inconsistent with its usage in the English language.

 

[knabe]

Oh the humanity.

 

[knabe]

http://thehill.com/regulation/other/345441-lawmakers-target-horse-meat-trade


meanwhile, we still have "choice". oh the humanity.