It seems that animal welfare measures - statutory stops for trucks transporting animals - are to be stopped in the US. It seems that this is part of the 'war on terror'! Apparently, Al Quaeda might hijack the trucks and somehow interfere with hte food chain.
Sounds like another victory for corporate America.
Originally posted by RedmikeWhat exactly are you talking about?...can you give us a source?
It seems that animal welfare measures - statutory stops for trucks transporting animals - are to be stopped in the US. It seems that this is part of the 'war on terror'! Apparently, Al Quaeda might hijack the trucks and somehow interfere with hte food chain.
Sounds like another victory for corporate America.
Originally posted by chancremechanicwww.scottishsocialistvoice.net/pages/page4.html
What exactly are you talking about?...can you give us a source?
At the end of the article about factory farming, by John Patrick.
Basically, in the name of 'homeland security', humane rest stops for animals are being scrapped.
Originally posted by RedmikeIsn´t it heartwarming that Scottish socialists know more about animal transport in the US than local aninal welfare groups?
www.scottishsocialistvoice.net/pages/page4.html
At the end of the article about factory farming, by John Patrick.
Basically, in the name of 'homeland security', humane rest stops for animals are being scrapped.
Originally posted by RedmikeWho cares about the treatment of animals?!... Get them from A to B, cook them, and eat them. Yummy!
It seems that animal welfare measures - statutory stops for trucks transporting animals - are to be stopped in the US. It seems that this is part of the 'war on terror'! Apparently, Al Quaeda might hijack the trucks and somehow interfere with hte food chain.
Sounds like another victory for corporate America.
Originally posted by TexasCowboyPerhaps, but they're are more tasty if they're not tired & stressed when they're slaughtered.
Who cares about the treatment of animals?!... Get them from A to B, cook them, and eat them. Yummy!
If your not interested in animal welfare for its own sake, then at least be concerned at the quality of the final product.
Corporate America gets to cut more costs under the pretence of homeland security.
Originally posted by RedmikeGo "Corporate America"!
Perhaps, but they're are more tasty if they're not tired & stressed when they're slaughtered.
If your not interested in animal welfare for its own sake, then at least be concerned at the quality of the final product.
Corporate America gets to cut more costs under the pretence of homeland security.
Originally posted by TexasCowboyDehydration and malnourishment make animals less resistant to infection and disease. Even meat-eaters ought to be prudentially concerned about the effects of these conditons on the animals, and not merely for reasons of taste, but also for reasons of health and safety.
Who cares about the treatment of animals?!... Get them from A to B, cook them, and eat them. Yummy!
Originally posted by bbarrAgreed - just trying to reduce things to the lowest common denominator for Cowboy.
Dehydration and malnourishment make animals less resistant to infection and disease. Even meat-eaters ought to be prudentially concerned about the effects of these conditons on the animals, and not merely for reasons of taste, but also for reasons of health and safety.
Originally posted by bbarrShow me proof that any other country has more healthy, more safe meat products than the U.S. And if you cannot I will expect you to immediately end your ranting.
Dehydration and malnourishment make animals less resistant to infection and disease. Even meat-eaters ought to be prudentially concerned about the effects of these conditons on the animals, and not merely for reasons of taste, but also for reasons of health and safety.
Originally posted by TexasCowboyFirst, I'm not denying that the U.S. has safe meat products, or that other countries have meat products that are substantially safer. So, your demand for evidence concering a claim I didn't make is irrelevant to the issue.
Show me proof that any other country has more healthy, more safe meat products than the U.S. And if you cannot I will expect you to immediately end your ranting.
Second, one reason why the U.S. has such safe meat products is that there exists a set of enforceable regulations governing the transport and slaughter of animals.
Since the proposed changes to the existing regulations make it more likely that affected animals will taste worse and be less healthy when slaughtered, you have a prudential reason to oppose these changes.
If you weren't able to follow the argument above, I can try and paraphrase it in Texan:
We gots us some good laws for movin meat. These new laws ain't as good, and 'll make our meat more bad. So, these new laws 're bad, too.
Yee-hah!
Originally posted by bbarrYou're a flea on the "sack" of America.
First, I'm not denying that the U.S. has safe meat products, or that other countries have meat products that are substantially safer. So, your demand for evidence concering a claim I didn't make is irrelevant to the issue.
Second, one reason why the U.S. has such safe meat products is that there exists a set of enforceable regulations governing the trans ...[text shortened]... good, and 'll make our meat more bad. So, these new laws 're bad, too.[/i]
Yee-hah!