Comment by uxcolumbo | Hacker News Reader

Comment by uxcolumbo | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

My premise is that if we showed kids the realities of slaughterhouses and the impact that animal farming has on our biosphere and all the other externalities - I believe most would not want to support this.

Imagine we had a children's book that would convey these facts in a manner kids understand more easily.

And yet we hide these facts from children and we tell them to eat meat and drink milk because they need it for protein etc, even if they don't want to - happened to me and countless others (online reports).

Don't you think a child would get traumatized by the sight of a cow being shot in the head and being cut open and the guts falling out - sometimes the animal is still alive and its eyes are rolling. It's a horror show.

If a grown man (Mike Bisping - ex MMA fighter) couldn't last longer than 2 weeks working in a slaughterhouse because it's a madhouse - do you think children could stomach watching videos of that environment?

Slaughterhouse workers suffer from PTSD - some say they had to suppress their compassion to carry out the killing.

This is called moving the goalposts. You could just as easily advocate for more humane slaughter house conditions but you are instead using bad actors (claiming this is how ALL animals are slaughtered) to call for a vegan lifestyle.

Let's define vegan for a moment.

Vegan = reduce suffering and cruelty to other sentient beings as practically as possible. So this means the only justification for killing an animal to consume its flesh is when our survival depends on it. That is not the case anymore for the majority of people.

My premise is around the large scale factory farm industry, which not only causes immense suffering and cruelty, but also causes great pollution and environmental destruction.

Feeding the whole world with meat is not sustainable.

That's not moving the goalpost, but a fact (See UN, IPPC and various other reports).

More poultry and meat means more co2 capture.

So following that logic we should eat more meat to reduce global heating and keep it below or at 1.5C increase as urged by the IPCC?

Following that logic, we should raise more animals, either through public parks/recreations, zoos, farms, or public feeding.

Like how India does it. There used to be a documentary on netflix on this. The greatest density of animals and humans, where both help each other survive.

I don't understand.

I was asking you whether you meant that breeding more animals for slaughter would solve our high carbon footprint in the animal agriculture industry?

If yes - then it doesn't make sense, since the science community agrees we need to reduce meat and dairy consumption not increase it.

And a lot of people in India are vegetarian.

Raising more animals does not increase global warming. And eating those animals does not increase global warming.

> lot of people in india are vegetarian.

Not really. Majority are not vegetarian. only Gujurat is Majority vegetarian. Every where else they are a minority. They have made it a purpose of life to feed wild animals, and live with wild animals. It's quite fascinating.

> Raising more animals does not increase global warming. And eating those animals does not increase global warming.

Raising more animals will mean more resources are required, such as land, water etc. It's more efficient to use that land and use that water to grow food for us.

So are you saying the scientific community is wrong by saying that the world needs to reduce meat & dairy consumption?

This is an agenda.

I don't follow.

Can you elaborate?

You are trying to insert your own views into the upbringing of other people's kids in order for them to be have taken the same view point as yourself.

Agenda.

Factory farming causes the following:

- environmental destruction, biodiversity loss, Amazon destruction, overfishing etc

- causes PTSD in some slaughterhouse workers

- animals lead a miserable life and die horribly.

That's not a view but a fact.

There is a reason why kids are not being shown the reality of this.

Would you show your kid slaughterhouse scenes from this documentary - https://www.nationearth.com/ ?

> That's not a view but a fact.

Ok. The rest of it is a view!

Ok - so thank you for acknowledging the facts about factory farming.

So what I'm saying is that if we would talk to our kids about this or show them the realities of factory farms and slaughterhouses and show them that there are alternatives that don't involve all that destruction - then my view is most kids would instinctively choose the option that doesn't involve killing and making animals suffer.

I'm not saying we have to force kids - but instead give them the facts and let them decide.

But we are not doing it, since we know the reality of factory farming and slaughterhouses is grim.

Even a lot of adults can't look at that footage.

As Paul McCartney said - if slaughterhouses were made of glass and people could look into it - many would be horrified.

Which makes this an agenda, back to where we were from the start.

Which definition of agenda are you referring to?

1) discuss a list of item 2) "hidden purpose" - which is a negative connotation.

If you mean point 2 then how is discussing with kids the facts and showing the reality of factory farming a hidden purpose?

Are you saying kids should not know what they are eating and how it's being produced?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32743808

So you mean point 2. Then let me repeat my question:

Are you saying kids should not know what they are eating and how it's being produced?

Do you not understand you are in pursuit of an agenda? Do you not know what you are doing is pandering a personal agenda? NO matter what I am saying, this will still be an agenda. NO matter what you feel truth is, this will still be agenda.

So telling the facts of where meat comes from is following an agenda?

Basically ou're saying we should hide facts from children.

How else can I interpret your answer?

If I go a step further, I could say you're following an agenda, i.e. don't tell kids that they are eating those cute animals they read about in their childrens books - because otherwise they might change their mind.

The fact that you can't answer the simple question I raised in my post above is quite telling.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com