Milk and Dairy

auspicious

No you fail to accept the point.
There is no as you put it hyperbole. The phases of dairy production I highlighted are prerequisite. There's no escaping it. I'm not on about cruelty through neglect. Only cruelty through the dairy 'process '.

gozunda

auspicious wrote: »

No you fail to accept the point. There is no as you put it hyperbole. The phases of dairy production I highlighted are prerequisite. There's no escaping it. I'm not on about cruelty through neglect. Only cruelty through the dairy 'process '.

Incorrect Read the comments by the many posters in this thread if you are still unsure about how dairy farming operates in this country.

What you've described is nothing more than a gross distortion of truth regarding dairying here. And yes cruelty can be either deliberate or neglect or both. Cruelty - both human and animal is against the law here with cruelty being very clearly defined. And yes I agree cruelty is truly abhorrent but thankfully - it is the exception rather than the rule imo. Just because someone has been led to believe that something equals 'cruelty' - does not make it so.

auspicious

Separation of mother and calf is what? Wholesome? In all best interests of both? As in any mammal? Evolutionary understanding disagrees with you.

gozunda

auspicious wrote: »

Separation of mother and calf is what? Wholesome? In all best interests of both? As in any mammal? Evolutionary understanding disagrees with you.

What exactly is "evolutionary understanding"? Is it some deified force in the universe that it somehow "disagrees" with people? Again I'm afraid that's hyperpole. No-one has said dairy calves are not separated. What has been explained is how and why this is done by those who know what they are doing. And looking after those animals correctly because stressed animals will not thrive. Are there sometime exceptions? Yes there are. But they need to be dealt with and not used to beat others over the head with.

What is also true is that animals (including mammals and birds) and other organisms are routinely harmed and killed during cultivation and harvesting. Is that 'wholesome'? Yes its a fact that for humans to have food- all our actions are going to impact other animals and thats whether someone is vegan or otherwise.

auspicious

A separated mother and child 'calf', can never thrive. It's a debasement of natural order. A human mother separated from their baby will undergo psychological trauma. Humans are animals too and evolution accounts for this.

gozunda

auspicious wrote: »

A separated mother and child 'calf', can never thrive. It's a debasement of natural order. A human mother separated from their baby will undergo psychological trauma. Humans are animals too and evolution accounts for this.

Well you're never seen happy calves then in real life. The likes of Earthling Ed has made his Millions out misery porn pedalling that type of misinformation about farming. But no cows are not humans and humans are not cows. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be cared for so they do thrive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

auspicious

What?

You’ve some patience Auspicious.

You’re trying to discuss, online, what is cruel with the people that are financially gaining from the cruelty.

What do you expect but deceit ?

You’re discussing with someone who is guided by the law as to what is right or wrong. The law. They don’t involve empathy or independent thought. Just what is deemed to be lawful.


Example of people that are guided by the law -

Someone that thinks it’s ok for a 50 year old man to have sex with a 13 year old girl if you live in the right (wrong) country.

Someone that thinks it’s ok for gay people to be criminalised and receive the death penalty.

Someone that thinks it is ok to rape a woman if you’re married to her.

All examples of accepting something because it’s legal in a country you may live in. No room for empathy.

Room only for profit and following the law.

White Clover

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You’ve some patience Auspicious.

You’re trying to discuss, online, what is cruel with the people that are financially gaining from the cruelty.

What do you expect but deceit ?

You’re discussing with someone who is guided by the law as to what is right or wrong. The law. They don’t involve empathy or independent thought. Just what is deemed to be lawful.


Example of people that are guided by the law -

Someone that thinks it’s ok for a 50 year old man to have sex with a 13 year old girl if you live in the right (wrong) country.

Someone that thinks it’s ok for gay people to be criminalised and receive the death penalty.

Someone that thinks it is ok to rape a woman if you’re married to her.

All examples of accepting something because it’s legal in a country you may live in. No room for empathy.

Room only for profit and following the law.

The conglomerates that flog all this super processed vegan food to you. Are they doing it for charity?

Donald Trump

Deleted User wrote: »

You’ve some patience Auspicious.

You’re trying to discuss, online, what is cruel with the people that are financially gaining from the cruelty.

You could also point out that on one side if the "discussion" you have a party who knows nothing and has no practical experience of taking care of calves, apart from reading some crap on twitter, and on the other side you have a professional who has probably been taking care of them all his life.


Years ago I visited one of these animal sanctuaries that were "saving animals". The state of the animals and the conditions that they were being kept under were very bad. Obviously by some idiot who thought they were "saving" them but in reality they hadn't a clue

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You’ve some patience Auspicious. You’re trying to discuss, online, what is cruel with the people that are financially gaining from the cruelty. What do you expect but deceit ?You’re discussing with someone who is guided by the law as to what is right or wrong. The law. They don’t involve empathy or independent thought. Just what is deemed to be lawful. Example of people that are guided by the law - Someone that thinks it’s ok for a 50 year old man to have sex with a 13 year old girl if you live in the right (wrong) country. Someone that thinks it’s ok for gay people to be criminalised and receive the death penalty. Someone that thinks it is ok to rape a woman if you’re married to her. All examples of accepting something because it’s legal in a country you may live in. No room for empathy.Room only for profit and following the law.

That's some load of whataboutery klopp. So you're now on to 'raping married women', paedophilia. Jesus wept - thats a new low even for this thread

You know who is financially gaining from flogging all this crap? The guy whose sick videos you seem to enjoy sharing and watching.

Do you know that our friend Eathling Ed who flogs those videos - has a financial value of about $68 million.?

Then there's the $6000 - $7000 a month that Ed gets from his Patreon money collecting. And in September alone he earned another $ 1.3K from idiots viewing his videos on YouTube.

I think the overwhelmingly obvious lesson is that It's difficult to get a person to understand something when his bank account depends upon his not understanding it. In this case its pays Ed and others to deliberately paint farming in the worst way possible because a small number of gullible people lap it up.

NcdJd

Donald Trump wrote: »

You could also point out that on one side if the "discussion" you have a party who knows nothing and has no practical experience of taking care of calves, apart from reading some crap on twitter, and on the other side you have a professional who has probably been taking care of them all his life.


Years ago I visited one of these animal sanctuaries that were "saving animals". The state of the animals and the conditions that they were being kept under were very bad. Obviously by some idiot who thought they were "saving" them but in reality they hadn't a clue

This is very relevant DT and have major issues with the concept of "Saving" farm animals. Farm animals are not cats and dogs. A large level of skill and knowledge is required to look after the welfare of these animals.

A local farmer has asked me to raise calves for him. I've not made up my mind yet on the matter but I would never do this without the support and mentoring from someone that has experience in this and also proper veterinary support and facilities in place.

Does the Department of Agriculture do checks on these sanctuaries or is it up to members of the public to report instances of neglect ?

Jjameson

auspicious wrote: »

A separated mother and child 'calf', can never thrive. It's a debasement of natural order. A human mother separated from their baby will undergo psychological trauma. Humans are animals too and evolution accounts for this.

That’s fairly easy to disprove, cows have been milked on these islands for about 4500 years. And it wasn’t done by allowing the calf to suck and hoping they’d be a sup left at milking time.
So somehow cattle have survived all that domestication with cruelty and no thrive!

If you took a calf from a average cow after calving and gave her a few nuts in a bucket she chomp away contentedly and never even look for it,if you attempted to introduce it to her in 3 days time she wouldn’t want to know it and possibly would even hurt it (in a lot of cases 3 hours). Bonding is a combination of hormones and experience. The calf definitely doesn’t look back. Calves only thrive with the best welfare as a stressed calf is very quickly a sick calf.

EvanFahy

Monty Burnz wrote: »

A cow would eat you, and everyone you love, if it had the chance.

Cows are herbivores

auspicious

Animal rights posits that animals should not be bred, exploited or used by humans for any purpose. Their right to life and evolutionary needs should be afforded to them as much as it is to humans.
Welfare refers to the treatment and care needed to ensure the best outcome for physical and mental needs.
There is a clear distinction between the two.

Markcheese

auspicious wrote: »

Animal rights posits that animals should not be bred, exploited or used by humans for any purpose. Their right to life and evolutionary needs should be afforded to them as much as it is to humans.
Welfare refers to the treatment and care needed to ensure the best outcome for physical and mental needs.
There is a clear distinction between the two.

Well I wouldn't worry much about their future evolutionary needs if no one's farming them , they'll be gone pretty quick , so the right to life would be gone fairly soon too ...

auspicious

Markcheese wrote: »

Well I wouldn't worry much about their future evolutionary needs if no one's farming them , they'll be gone pretty quick , so the right to life would be gone fairly soon too ...

That's fine by me.
A life under constant oppression and exploitation is not worth living without the hope of escape.
edit: and suffering

Jjameson

auspicious wrote: »

Animal rights posits that animals should not be bred, exploited or used by humans for any purpose. Their right to life and evolutionary needs should be afforded to them as much as it is to humans.
Welfare refers to the treatment and care needed to ensure the best outcome for physical and mental needs.
There is a clear distinction between the two.

Is that nonsense from your cult handbook or what?

Gary kk

auspicious wrote: »

That's fine by me.
A life under constant oppression and exploitation is not worth living without the hope of escape.
edit: and suffering

That's twisted.

Thelonious Monk

Jjameson wrote: »

Is that nonsense from your cult handbook or what?

You'd swear you were in a vegan forum or something. Do you really as a farmer think you're going to agree with people in here? What's the point in posting in here?

Markcheese

auspicious wrote: »

That's fine by me.
A life under constant oppression and exploitation is not worth living without the hope of escape.
edit: and suffering

Nice of you to make that extrodinarily human decision ,for non humans ... Are you going to make that same decision for all the beloved family pets out there ( actually I don't mind if you do , I'm not really a pet person , )
, what about feral populations of cats , deer ,rabbits ect , ? Are they free to eat themselves into starvation without fear of predation ? What of the poor grey squirrel ( I'm not really a fan ) ,being terrified ( literally) by a resurgent pine marten population , is that ok ?
Is there a lot better that can be done for farm animals ,? An awful lot ... Is it as simple as just let them starve or be terrified in freedom because it's suits my views and I like to anthropomorphize .. that is a personal decision ..
And I know I put in a lot of" what aboutary " in there , sorry about that ..

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

That's fine by me.
A life under constant oppression and exploitation is not worth living without the hope of escape.
edit: and suffering

Yet your signature has a message promoting dogs as pets.................




What about cats? I'm interested in your view on cats. Should people keep cats as pets?

Jjameson

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

You'd swear you were in a vegan forum or something. Do you really as a farmer think you're going to agree with people in here? What's the point in posting in here?

The title of thread is of great interest to farmers given that we are the professional with first hand experience on the subject and do not have to trawl google for videos of animal farming on these islands.
Conversations about animal welfare are good. Higher standards should always be striven for and standards should always be held in check however those that should be silenced from any civilised discussion are extremists..
There is no practical or economic benefit to putting any farmed animal under pain or stress. Even at slaughter. Quick and merciful as possible yields the most quality and saleable product.
Have you ever seen a wild animal dying of natural cause? An emaciated diseased deer with its eyes picked out by grey crows? A mangey starving old fox?
I am a animal lover and I have shot both squarely between the eyes with a clear conscience. How does the vegan thesis fit in these situation? It’s a flawed impractical thesis.

Markcheese

Markcheese wrote: »

Nice of you to make that extrodinarily human decision ,for non humans ... Are you going to make that same decision for all the beloved family pets out there ( actually I don't mind if you do , I'm not really a pet person , )
, what about feral populations of cats , deer ,rabbits ect , ? Are they free to eat themselves into starvation without fear of predation ? What of the poor grey squirrel ( I'm not really a fan ) ,being terrified ( literally) by a resurgent pine marten population , is that ok ?
Is there a lot better that can be done for farm animals ,? An awful lot ... Is it as simple as just let them starve or be terrified in freedom because it's suits my views and I like to anthropomorphize .. that is a personal decision ..
And I know I put in a lot of" what aboutary " in there , sorry about that ..

As poor a post as I’ve ever seen.

Take a bow.

Also, I think the word you’re looking to explain the things you’re touching on is - Nature.

Jjameson

Jjameson wrote: »

The title of thread is of great interest to farmers given that we are the professional with first hand experience on the subject and do not have to trawl google for videos of animal farming on these islands.
Conversations about animal welfare are good. Higher standards should always be striven for and standards should always be held in check however those that should be silenced from any civilised discussion are extremists..
There is no practical or economic benefit to putting any farmed animal under pain or stress. Even at slaughter. Quick and merciful as possible yields the most quality and saleable product.
Have you ever seen a wild animal dying of natural cause? An emaciated diseased deer with its eyes picked out by grey crows? A mangey starving old fox?
I am a animal lover and I have shot both squarely between the eyes with a clear conscience. How does the vegan thesis fit in these situation? It’s a flawed impractical thesis.

I don’t have to trawl for videos to know what you do is cruel.

From the moment that animal is born it’s imprisoned. Has zero quality or life or any freedom. All for what ? So people can have something they don’t need ? And people can make money in the process ?

It’s cruelty bordering on savage, and here’s the important part, in my opinion.

To treat an animal as you want and impose your restrictions on that animal is cruel beyond belief.

And it’s all for money. That’s what all of this cruelty comes down to - money.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump wrote: »

Yet your signature has a message promoting dogs as pets.................




What about cats? I'm interested in your view on cats. Should people keep cats as pets?

What is your position on the matter ?

What has it got to do with vegan choices ?

Are people now slaughtering pets for profit ?

Jjameson

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don’t have to trawl for videos to know what you do is cruel.

From the moment that animal is born it’s imprisoned. Has zero quality or life or any freedom. All for what ? So people can have something they don’t need ? And people can make money in the process ?

It’s cruelty bordering on savage, and here’s the important part, in my opinion.

To treat an animal as you want and impose your restrictions on that animal is cruel beyond belief.

And it’s all for money. That’s what all of this cruelty comes down to - money.

No not just money. It doesn’t pay well. It’s the worst paying job I ever had. And if it was cruel it wouldn’t pay at all. Animal welfare and profitability go hand in hand.

You have extremist views and I would like to hear where you got experience enough of Irish farming to validate them.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but not their own facts.

I

Lady Haywire

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t have to trawl for videos to know what you do is cruel.

From the moment that animal is born it’s imprisoned. Has zero quality or life or any freedom. All for what ? So people can have something they don’t need ? And people can make money in the process ?

Ah yes, those horrible, terrible fields they graze in! Cattle are mainly housed in Ireland due to weather conditions but in drier land they can be wintered outside.

Jjameson

Lady Haywire wrote: »

Ah yes, those horrible, terrible fields they graze in! Cattle are mainly housed in Ireland due to weather conditions but in drier land they can be wintered outside.

Oh the imprisonment and cruelty?

Lady Haywire

Lady Haywire wrote: »

Ah yes, those horrible, terrible fields they graze in! Cattle are mainly housed in Ireland due to weather conditions but in drier land they can be wintered outside.

Not sure if you’re missing the point on purpose.

It’s imprisoned in a tortuous cycle to provide milk to humans and money to its ‘owner’. It’s a slave.