Farmers who rear animals on an industrial scale often justify their welfare standards by claiming that animals are not like us.
In so saying they seem to imply that animals do not mind being kept in conditions totally alien to their needs and closely confined in vast sheds. Sows in gestation stalls. Piglets reared on slatted floors. Ducks without water except to drink. Poultry on stinking bedding rank with ammonia fumes. Cows and calves separated at birth. Is it a stretch too far to suppose that these animals - motherless, sick, filthy; trapped, afraid and defenceless - do not suffer fear, anxiety and distress as they live out their utterly wretched lives, their spirits broken, in conditions that are akin to torture?
Some people equate intelligence with sentience. Yet we do not believe that our own babies are incapable of feeling pain or fear or all the other reactions associated with sentient beings.
If we look at the similarities between us and the animals we farm, it seems there are a raft of ways in which we are not so very different at all. We share the same instincts and behave in similar ways although we give them other names. We make nests - but call it home. We suckle our young - but term it breast feeding. Our bonds with our offspring are no more - or less - strong. We too defend our territory. We too like to have friends and be in groups of people we trust. And, like sheep in a flock, we follow where others go - as sports fans or followers of fashion or members of clubs. Neither is our instinct to escape from danger or to protect our young different from any other mammal. When our backs are against the wall, our fear and anxiety, our terrified, panic-stricken reaction, are just the same. How must animals feel when they are rounded up for slaughter and rushed up ramps onto lorries?
Also, like us, animals have their own characters and personalities. Some might be boisterous or irritating. Some crave affection. Others are playful. Some like cuddling up with others. Others like their own space. Some are aggressive, others cowardly. All have their own personal likes and dislikes. Pet owners know this. Yet we seem not to recognise that animals reared for food have any individuality at all.
If common sense does not tell us that animals suffer in factory farm conditions then the science might. There are a plethora of studies that make clear that all animals share instinctive emotional behaviour like joy and happiness; depression and suffering; affection and irritation; rage and terror. The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness, signed by an international group of prominent scientists, is one of the most recent.
But where farming is on an industrial scale animals have no choice. Every aspect of their lives is controlled. They do not choose their surroundings. Or the animals they mix with. Or what they eat. Or when they eat. Or when or whether (given hormones and artificial insemination) they mate.
Factory farm conditions are, by design, violent, cruel and unfeeling. Do we have a moral obligation to the animals we use for food?
Follow Sue Cross on Twitter: www.twitter.com/notafactoryfarm
Kevin Toolis: Complicit: How Should Movie Makers Deal With Torture?
Veganism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Veganism in a Nutshell -- The Vegetarian Resource Group
Vegan.org | A project of Vegan Action
Veganism News - The New York Times
Recipes by UK Vegan Awards winner
New film poses tough question: Could animal-based foods be doing us more ...
She keeps referring to factory farming, but the truth is that as a vegan she will be against all animal farming. Also if she has become a vegan, then the chances are she has made what she feels is a moral choice, which means that she will then take a "moral" view on everything to do with animal consumption, including us carnivores and omnivores.
So everything that vegan activists claim, will be tainted by their blinkered view of the world.
As to being blinkered, I endeavour to give a balanced view based on many years of research into farm animal welfare. It seems sad that the reaction to my conclusion (that maximising profit to produce cheap food can never be reconciled with the humane treatment of animals) seems to engender irritation rather than compassion.
You usually know when you meet a vegan, as at some point they will normally tell you about their eating habits, and once that's out of the way the moralising will start. A woman I know has a brother who is a vegan activist and used to be, at least, a sab', she couldn't invite him to dinner or parties, as he actually hated people who ate meat, and would always kick off.
Most people who become vegans do so for what they believe to be moral reasons, and by doing, will then have a "moral" view on meat eaters. However vegan organisations dishonestly miss out what they really believe and pick on subjects like factory farming, even worse trying to claim some sort of exclusivity over them.
Also, if we didn't keep manufacturing farmed animals on the mammoth scale we are, no one would need to 'look after them' - still trying to come to grip with that illogically comment.
Farmed animals are not pets, they are reared for profit, all be it a small one, hence some large factory farms owned by the rich, usualy for tax advantages.It is the supermarkets that dictate the terms and take the most profit, and of course the general public demand cheap food.
The majority of farms in the UK are still small scale family farms, run by farmers who do it passionatly and care for their livestock 365 days a year 16/18 hours a day, better than some families care for thier children.
With regard to my, as you say "illogical" comment. If everyone stopped eating meat there would be no need for any farmed animals, (I did not say "manufacturing on a mamoth scale") by the way those are your words. so would you be prepared to foot the bill for looking after them all, I think not. I wholeheartedly agree that ALL life on this fortunate planet of ours should be treated with respect and when farming animals for food, or otherwise, good husbandry should come before profits, but like it or not profit however small, has to be made otherwise bankrupcy ensues, and animals needlessly put to death, .In my opinion.
That we would not have enough protein without meat is debatable.
A third point, that if farm animals did not exist the countryside would certainly be a different place, is surely true. Nowadays most farms are in effect giant processing plants, the animals crammed in them sick and disabled, their needs utterly disregarded. To feed them the environmental effects on the land and sea are on a vastly damaging scale - particularly in the case of soya, palm oil and fish (about one quarter of the global fish catch is used for fishmeal to feed farm animals). Add to this the waste that has to be dealt with: the dung, and, after slaughter, the blood, faeces, urine; the partially digested food and the unusable body parts like heads, feet and udders.
It seems that if factory farming did not exist then the abject cruelty that it involves would not exist either. And the world would be a less ravaged place.
Anything mass produced is going to have lower care and quality put into it.
I have no problems with people eating meat, but it is our duty to make sure animals are raised and slaughtered humanely.
For anyone interested in finding out more or helping farm animals and their plight, google Hillside Animal Sanctuary in Norfolk, i have been to the shelter personally and it is a delightful place for young and old alike.
This created a Jekyll and Hyde; he wanted the taste of meat but he hated the thought of killing. Many today would give up meat if they had to kill their own.
They are cowards who require others to support their tastes. They are the Jekylls who want the Hydes to do their dirty work.
We see Jekyll and Hyde all around us and it may well be that Hyde will win the global battle for mans soul.