Oregon Latest State to Consider Banning Foie Gras

[rodeodance]

i wonder if it is function of this food being a French food or it cause of the animal rights activists. Or maybe it just happens that they are of one mind on this.



......."At a time when we don't have a K-12 (education) budget and a health and human services budget, to go and pass a bill to prevent the force-feeding of ducks that's not even a problem in Oregon, demonstrates to me that we have our priorities out of line," said state senator Jason Atkinson, who predicted that the bill would fail in the House."......

Oregon Latest State to Consider Banning Foie Gras

http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050428/od_nm/food_foiegras_oregon_dc;_ylt=AqMefjV2oNUmXCgwMCbY2IwZ.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5Mm0ycTEwBHNlYwNsbjc1Nw--

By Polly Forster Thu Apr 28, 9:06 AM ET

PORTLAND, Ore. (Reuters) - Oregon came a step closer to bidding au revoir to foie gras after the state's Senate passed a bill to outlaw the production and sale of fattened duck and goose livers.

The bill, passed on Tuesday by 18-8 votes, would make it a crime to force-feed fowl or serve the fattened livers in restaurants, although the law has yet to go into effect since it will next face a vote in Oregon's House of Representatives.

The French delicacy has become a national issue in the United States. Animal rights activists argue that enlarging the birds' livers to produce the delicacy is cruel.

[Pacifist Patriot]

1. As a vegetarian perhaps I should refrain from commenting...

on that last sentence.

I guess I have had my head in the sand for awhile though. I had no idea this was a big issue in the U.S.

[rodeodance]

5. article said CA banned it already.

[progressivebydesign]

2. Foie Gras is nasty shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My pretentious ex-husband loved that stuff. Disgusting.

[Roland99]

4. Agreed! I tried it once.

BLECH!

[underpants]

3. What is that one of them French gays?

(pokes with a stick)

[expatriot]

6. foie gras is evil!

http://www.goveg.com/feat/foie/

[barb162]

22. it is truly barbaric and should be considered animal cruelty

It's inexcusable

[Caoimhe]

7. Its disgusting

And yes, there are obviously more important issues that should be discussed, but I think that foie gras should be banned and any food that comes about through torture to an animal. Its one thing to kill them humanely, but to force feed them until they can hardly walk is cruel. Obviously it isn't natural if you have to stick a tube down their necks and pump high caloric paste in to get their liver super fat. Basically you are eating liver disease. I see no problem with banning it. Many other states have talked of doing the same thing.

[flvegan]

13. Sadly, most animal-based food arrives from torture.

It's too expensive to be humane in the slaughter industry.

[AllyCat]

16. Another vegetarian weighing in here

So I am, from the outset, biased, but outside of the torture of animals to produce food, there is just something inherently nasty about eating an organ that filters the crap out of the body! Ugh! Even if I ate meat, I wouldn't want to eat this organ.

[Triana]

86. and another vegetarian here...

...this is yet another great reason to avoid eating meat.

Iiiick!

[Tsiyu]

110. I'm not a vegetable-terian, but I will not eat liver

for the same reason you mentioned. It's gross to think of eating the body part responsible for filtering out toxins.

Many years ago, maybe that was a safe thing to do, and poor folk used all of the animal so as not to be wasteful.

But with all the gunk in our environment now ( and fed to livestock) who would want to eat something so potentially full of filth?

( No offense to the liver-eaters out there. It just grosses me out...)

[HuckleB]

113. That's your choice.

But liver remains as safe a part of the animal as any, and its quite nutrient rich.

[Theres-a]

8. What about veal?

I mean,it's a lot more common than foie gras.Why bother with something so unusual,when veal is cruel and common?Is it because fat liver is bad for people?Well then maybe they could worry about something a little more prevalent,say,cigarettes?Since when is foie gras common?Common to whom?:wtf:

[flvegan]

9. Veal? Now you're talking about taking on both Big Beef AND Big Dairy

Banning veal (or it's cruel confinement practices) would be much like trying to ban hamburgers. We fought like hell to ban gestation crates for pregnant pigs here in Florida, and that was close to impossible.

[0007]

10. If most folks were exposed to the process of how veal

is put on the plate, they'd be less incline to eat it.

It is also a very cruel process.

[DS1]

11. Veal is wrong, too. I don't think I've ever had it, although I've been

around many that do eat it. It's just wrong, sometimes I give them a rash of shit about it, sometimes I don't. Eating meat is one thing, treating animals especially inhumanely *and I'm not condoning the acts of big meat industries* for a purpose is another.

I also refuse to eat anything that's been boiled alive. F that.

[Caoimhe]

18. what about veal...

IMHO The reason this (foie gras) is even an issue you are hearing about is because there isn't a huge foie gras lobby to shut people up about it.

Like someone else said here, try taking on veal and you have a lot of cattle/dairy money that's gonna be used to blow you out of the water.

Try taking on cigarettes (many have) and money comes gushing in from tobacco lobbies and cigarette manufacturers.

Because something is uncommon doesn't make it any less wrong.

[jdj]

45. ouch.

so true.

In fact, that would have been a sparkling response to the Abu Ghraib scandal, in that they played down the numbers of occurences and made it seem isolated, as if that somehow makes it okay.

[bobthedrummer]

54. It's terrible-don't eat veal for God's sake--it's a terrible thing, veal

production.:puke:

[RebelOne]

94. I am a vegetarian, but even in my meat-eating days

I wouldn't eat veal because of the horrible treatment given those calves.

[BiggJawn]

12. Did we even KNOW what foi Gras was before "Emeril LIVE!"?

I'll take chicken livers, breaded and fried, thank you..
But then again, that's "Cruel Food", too, because it involves something dieing...

[SuffragetteSal]

14. Good, I wouldn't eat that...

humans are the strange birds...

[dsnail]

15. Good Riddance

The process of producing this disgusting dish is mind-blowingly cruel. Good for Oregon, hope others follow...

[flvegan]

17. Hi, dsnail! Welcome to DU!

[HuckleB]

19. In Oregon, it's animal activists.

Of Fur and Foie
http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=5779

"...

Ordinarily the Nose would just ignore the fur fanatics. But it happened that the Sinuses were already inflamed this week by another set of animalistas. Lately, a bunch of vegan thugs has strong-armed restaurant owners into dropping foie gras, that sinful pâté of fattened goose liver, from their menus. In fact, the foie gras-tapo makes last Friday's fur protesters look like Gandhi's spiritual heirs.

With a combination of pickets, harassment and sabotage (filling up reservation books, then not showing up--classy!), a group called In Defense of Animals browbeat Hurley's, Higgins and the Heathman into 86-ing foie. The group then handed The Oregonian its hitlist of potential future victims, a tactic Tony Soprano hasn't even thought of yet.

Sure, foie makes an inviting target. It involves a nasty-sounding force-feeding regime (unlike, say, soybean cultivation, which only involves plowing under whole ecosystems). It's expensive and French, so Joe and Jane Twelvepack don't care if it disappears (though if Joe and Jane ever tasted foie, you can bet they'd start smearing it everywhere, even on each other).

But look at the joints the foie fedayeen are singling out. These are fancy restaurants--but they're also small, locally owned restaurants. Many places on In Defense of Animals' blacklist work overtime to buy sustainable, locally grown produce. In other words, the foie-stika front is persecuting some of the Portland food world's good guys--not coincidentally, people who can't afford to lose too many customers.

..."

--------------------

Foie Gras protest (against eating livers of force fed ducks)
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/303616.shtml

"This Wednesday, November 17, 2004 we're educating consumers nationwide about a controversial dish made from the diseased and engorged liver of a force-fed duck or goose. The Heathman Hotel Restaurant, among the five area businesses still selling foie gras, are next in this campaign's spotlight, where a costumed duck will be "force fed" outside during tomorrow's lunch hour.

We have had our 2nd victory in the anti Foie Gras campaign! Although we are still confirming his statement, Mr. Hurley, owner of Hurley's Restaurant agreed Saturday night to remove Foie Gras from his menu. Portland animal advocates have made a presence at Hurley's restaurant every Friday and Saturday night for the last 3 weekends in a row asking Hurley's to remove Foie Gras from their menu.

..."

--------------------

It's not a humane practice. Still, The Nose makes some very good points, IMHO.

[HuckleB]

23. Another piece on this legislation, from the Oregonian.

http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/111390506192250.xml?oregonian?lcpl&coll=7

[benny05]

66. Maybe more than Animal Rights' Activists

It is also a punch in the nose to a bunch of wealthy folks who can afford it. After seeing 10B in medicaid cuts, which could have been worse, had it not been for Senator Smith of Oregon, I don't blame the legislature for this piece of assinine legislation. Our national legislative branch has gotten way out of control with spending on the right-wing issues.

[HuckleB]

75. I don't think that has much to do with it, IMHO.

Those who can afford it, will afford it somewhere, somehow.

[doodadem]

20. I knew this was up for a vote in Sacramento

but didn't know if it had happened yet. If so, HOORAY! Also waiting to see what they were going to do with proposed legislation to control the waste lagoons on dairy farms, that are leaking into local water supplies.

I nearly cannot drive past the big dairy farms here anymore. Not only do the lagoons stink to high heaven, but they put the veal cages right out front--little black and white calves, who can't stand up or turnaround in those confines. Makes me want to hurl.
My question has always been, why hasn't the ASPCA taken this on? It is most certainly animal cruelty, and on a massive scale. I'm sure it's because the dairy industry is huge here, but DAMN. Suprisingly, there are some "Happy Cows" like you see on the commercials, but they most definitely are NOT dairy cattle--they are beef cattle. All around us, beef cattle graze in knee deep grass and wildflowers on the sides of the mountains. They may ultimately not come to a good end, but their time here looks like a pretty good cow's life. The dairy farms are huge stinking muddy/dusty overpopulated hell holes, without a blade of grass in sight.

[EC]

21. Anytime they use it on the Iron Cheif or any of the other

shows on the food channel, I switch stations because just the thought of force feeding makes me gag....

[HuckleB]

24. A Flap Over Foie Gras

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7613524/site/newsweek/

[ladeuxiemevoiture]

25. This won't make me popular, but I love foie gras!

and tripe. and veal.

My father was born and raised on a farm, though. That's how my grandfather made his living. It seems obvious to say this, but I wonder if people realize that animals are not people, and people are somewhat carnivorous. some of us NEED meat and meat products. I know I certainly do. I get weak and pasty when I cut meat out of my diet. If it weren't for agriculture and livestock farming, many/most of these animals wouldn't even be alive.

I don't agree with some modern methods of raising livestock, like these big chick holding pens or the practice of raising veal without light, in confined spaces - free range is best, I think - but foie gras has been cultivated since at least Roman times, and - while they are not exactly disinterested - foie gras farmers say that the geese compete for the feeding tubes when feeding time comes around. If it was torturous for the geese, they would run, wouldn't they? Are there abusive farms? Undoubtedly. Are they all abusive? No.

And also, how is deliberately fattening a goose's liver any worse than fattening a pig or feeding a cow corn in place of grain (as corn makes the beef taste better)? It's all a kind of engineering on some level.

[HuckleB]

26. You've got guts!

Good for you!

I've never had Foie Gras, but, dang, I do love tripe. And I suspect it's good. I mean, I like liverwurst, and it's got to be better than liverwurst.

Salud.

[ladeuxiemevoiture]

28. Thanks!

And actually, last week on PBS there was a show about climate change and they were filming with these Inuit in Alaska who traditionally fed on caribou as their main food source, and ate things like raw caribou liver and bone marrow, and this is what sustained them and made them strong through the winter, and the herds are declining, so now they're worried that their food source is being compromised. But the point is that they eat meat products because meat is healthy. I recognize that abusive farming practices are reprehensible. It's just not clear to me that the cultivation of foie gras and good farming practices are mutually exclusive.

[livinginphotographs]

29. Regarding your last paragraph:

"And also, how is deliberately fattening a goose's liver any worse than fattening a pig or feeding a cow corn in place of grain (as corn makes the beef taste better)? It's all a kind of engineering on some level."

Simple: there's PLENTY different. Overfeeding and the administering of antibiotics to make abnormally large cows and pigs is cruel, yes, but shoving a tube down a bird's esophagus and dumping several pounds of cornmeal down it a day, making it so the goose can hardly move because of how large it becomes.

If you really want to know what foie gras involves, here: http://www.goveg.com/feat/foie/

There's also a video link. You should watch it.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

34. Hmm.

I have no intention of actually eating Foie Gras. But I have to say that the angry, fundamentalist tone of your post almost made me want to give it a taste sometime.

[jdj]

36. that's your karma, buddy, not mine.

you call it fundamentalism, I call it compassion.

I presume if this was done to an iraqi at Abu Ghraib, then you'd call it torture. Since it's a duck, you call it dinner. I call that hypocrisy.

[HuckleB]

37. LOL!

You presume I have karma of some sort? Why make such a presumption?

I would heartily recommend a good read of Orwell's "Keep the Aspidistra Flying." It couldn't hurt, anyway.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

108. I just have to point out: Duck is delicious.

I don't see what that has to do with prisoners of war in Abu Ghraib.

[Chicago Democrat]

33. I agree 100% .... Froi Gras is a delicacy and Good for Family farmers

gift of this eart to man that is 100% renewable and helps farmers to earn a great deal of money on a single duck.


From one duck:

Not fattened sells for 12 dollars at the grocer, frozen.

Fattened:

Froi Gras liver (1.5 pounds) 68
Duck Prociutto made from breast (1 pound) 36
Two Smoked confit (leg thigh) 8

Total Retail on one duck! $ 112

That's $100 more for the Fattened Duck!

[bhunt70]

111. I agree, I like it too.

[Sabriel]

27. They should stop force-feeding the Ducks, too

Then maybe more teams might have a chance at the Rose Bowl.

[Chicago Democrat]

30. Froi Gras is AWESOME, and natural, and normal and I LOVE IT!

Ducks and Geese naturally engorge themselves prior to annual migration flights and that is how the ancient Egyptians first discovered that fattened fowl's livers taste super yummy.

The Egyptians started capturing ducks and geese and force feeding them FOR A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS PRIOR to slaughter to mimick this fattening and acheive the desired result.


Folks, either you eat meat or do not. Animal cruelty is a completely separate issue. EVERY SINGLE froi gras farm is a SMALL OPERATION where the ducks are FREE RANGE. Compare this to factory chicken farms where 6 chickens are forced to live their entire lives in a 2 square foot cage for their entire lives, fed massive anti-biotics and animal bi-products like bone meal and are genetically engineered FREAKS!!! Where's the outrage about Mc Nuggets?

At Dartagnon, which has the BEST froi gras made in Hudson Valley NY and supplies The White House, the ducks are humanely treated WITH LOVE. You can tell because the livers are perfect and unbruised and unblemished. The last two weeks the birds live like any FAT AMERICAN and are NOT ABUSED. When I retire, I plan on raising ducks and making my own froi gras.
Buy it here:

https://www.dartagnan.com/index.asp


Animal lovers who condemn Froi Gras are ignorant or simply fingering the wrong folks when it comes to farm animal abuse. The true criminals are the FACTORY FARMS.

[HuckleB]

31. Definitely spot on in regard to factory farms.

I suspect you might enjoy this piece:
http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=5779

Salud!

[livinginphotographs]

40. Haha, vegan thugs and sign-waving blowhards.

:eyes:

W would be proud, with the addition of "thugs" (considering the violence done to animals and the violence these so-called thugs do in *GASP* protesting, that's rich) and the mocking of people exercising their right to free-speech.

If a small business was selling racist literature, would it be "picking on the little guy" to protest?

[jdj]

42. I read it too, it was quite embarassing.

big bad burly vegee terraist gonna beat you to death with compassion and understanding.

yes, we are known for our violence and bullying behaviors, that is why we are SO FEARED throughout the land.

edit: LOL I was being sarcastic, yet I just had a post removed. Someone is skeered of me. Geez, maybe us granola crunching tree huggers are more fear-inspiring than I had assumed.

[HuckleB]

53. Compassion and understanding?

Where?
:shrug:

[HuckleB]

46. First, most local bookstores do sell "racist literature."

They wouldn't be able to carry many of the "classics," if they didn't. Second, the point of the article is that these are businesses who otherwise promote organic, local farms, and serve food based on the season's bounty. To ignore that via demonization of them holistically, while failing to protest at Safeway, Fred Meyer, McDonald's, etc... seems a bit out of whack with the purported offense. Further, I was downtown and noted the way the protesters went about their business. It made the fundie preachers in Pioneer Courthouse Square look tame by comparison.

[livinginphotographs]

47. Oh yes, don't forget the word "fundie."

It's called picking your battles. How successful do you think they'd be protesting Safeway to get them to stop selling chicken? Not very, I'd wager.

How successful would they be protesting foie gras and getting it removed from menus and bringing up a national conversation about the reality of how its made? Well, people keep kicking this thread, so it's a start.

on edit: by "racist literature" I didn't mean Tom Sawyer. I meant a white supremacist bookstore (I live in the south, so trsut me, they exist) or something like that. I apologize if I was unclear. I hope you're not just being deliberately obtuse, though, because this discussion is going to take WAY too much work if that's the case.

[HuckleB]

49. Indeed it is called picking your battles.

If you work to demonize and separate yourself from those who actually practice earth friendly practices otherwise, you aren't going to make much headway with any battle. You're working to divide from some of your best allies in most battles, and that doesn't make sense.

[livinginphotographs]

50. Re-read my post.

Small AR groups can't target every evil in the world all at once. Even larger groups have different campaigns they focus on at different times.

As far as the protests, they are working. Period. Regarding whose feelings got hurt, pardon me if I'm not overwhelmed with sympathy.

[HuckleB]

51. Why?

You don't like my answer, and you think it's going to change by rereading your post? Small groups can't take on bigger issues if they toss aside every ally along the way. Winning the battle but losing the war isn't just a cliche.

[livinginphotographs]

67. If you're talking about environmental groups

Not eating meat does wonders for the environment. I would think those groups would want to ally with animal rights groups, and they often do.

I suggested you re-read my post because your answer didn't address my point.

[HuckleB]

70. What are you talking about?

My answer addresses your point. You just don't like my answer because it shows your "point" to be missing much from the bigger picture. On the other hand, your answer, in this last post, makes no sense, within the context of this conversation and board, at all.

[livinginphotographs]

72. I was wrong.

You were talking about "otherwise promote organic, local farms." I'm not sure where I got environmental groups, but it's been a long day, and I must've picked that up on another thread somewhere.

Regardless, what makes organic, local farms "allies" necessarily? Is it because of their respect for the environment? If not, I'm not sure how these restaurants could be considered "allies" of the AR movement.

[HuckleB]

73. You're forgetting a big piece.

These farms also produce range grown meats, often without additives. In this case, the focus works to divide, and the powers that be don't even have to lift a "divide and conquer" finger. A small victory now and then might feel good, but if it comes at the cost of continuing to allow a great deal more suffering because one didn't develop alliances for the big fights then the truth is that those victories become losses.

[livinginphotographs]

84. Good for them.

And now they can sell them without foie gras.

Like I said, a small AR group has no chance of taking on the beef industry, for instance. I think it's actually a very good strategy of "baby-steps," so to speak. Raise the public awareness of the cruelty involved in making foie gras, and they will soon be more open-minded to the cruelty involved in making a hamburger.

And I still don't see how a high-priced restaurant selling goose livers could be considered an ally.

[HuckleB]

89. It seems to me that you have a personal litmus test.

And that appears to allow a focus on small, "moral" victories that feel good. I know full well that I'm not going to change that. But I am looking down the road toward the bigger picture, IMHO. And that doesn't just include developing and maintaining alliances with locally owned restaurants who support locally owned, sustainable farming. It also includes addressing the way activists attempt to "convince" others in regard to their concerns. In Oregon, as noted by the piece in Willamette Week (and by my own eyes and ears), activists acted in such a way as to ensure divisiveness rather than discussion. They acted in such a way as to ensure that others felt attacked. And no one is going to listen when you've attacked them in the ugly way that some activists have done in Portland. (And I can add, as at least one other poster did on this board.) I don't see how such tactics (attacking those who support sustainable, local farming in such a manner as to ensure nothing but shouting matches) are going to lead to anyone opening their minds about corporate farming practices. Shouting matches might get the "base" activated, but they tend to turn most others off, and the battle to create an environment where more humane corporate farming becomes the expectation can't be won with just the base.

[livinginphotographs]

92. So are you suggesting that people stop protesting?

They are protesting something that the disagree with. Just like many progressives protest the Iraq War, homophobia, Bush in general, etc., these chose to protest locally-owned businesses who sell a despicable product. You may disagree, but that's your perogative and theirs. One question, though: do you disagree with the fact that foie gras is cruel, or do you disagree with their tactics?

I'm not focused on something "feeling good." I've outlined numerous times why I think starting small is a good idea. The protest worked - period - and now there's legislation pending to ban foie gras altogether. Many people who might never have heard of it or how cruelly the geese that it comes from are treated are now aware.

Such a common complaint of AR groups is about their tactics "turning people off." Well, despite how obnoxious you may think they are, veganism and animal rights are now a much more well-known group of ideas than they were many years ago. That to me speaks volumes about the progress that these supposedly pointless movements have made.

[HuckleB]

96. I'll answer your question.

If you can repost this without making insinuations that have nothing to do with what I posted. I shouldn't have to reclarify simply because it's easier for someone else to spin off into another direction rather than answer in seriousness and honesty.

Thank you.

(P.S. - I suspect that you can find the answer to your question in past posts, most of which you've probably already read.)

Finally, expanding the base through outlandishness is easy. You can look at almost any cause and see how that's been done through time. But you can also see the dead ends that such tactics lead to.

----------

"He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself; and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you."
— Nietzche

"I believe that it is possible to be more objective than most of us are, but that it involves a moral effort. One cannot get away from one's own subjective feelings, but at least one can know what they are and make allowance for them."
— Orwell

"If a man meets with injustice, it is not required that he shall not be roused to meet it; but if he is angry after he has had time to think upon it, that is sinful. The flame is not wring, but the coals are."
— Orwell

[livinginphotographs]

100. Well since your major concerns seem to be the tactics

of the protestors (although I already know the answer to the foie gras question), I think it was fair to ask what you would recommend they do? Is there something wrong with protesting?

And how is my insinuating...um....something any worse than the "vegan thug" and "fur fanatic" description. You posted that piece of tripe in the first place...

[HuckleB]

104. I posted a number of pieces, from various points of view.

Do you have a problem with freedom of expression? Did you spend time reading the discussion at Slow Food Forum? Did you read any of the other pieces I posted?

And that piece is no excuse for insinuation and responding to phantom posts. Please don't just get defensive and respond with an attack that makes little sense.

The issue isn't just "protesting," it's protesting in a manner with a clear focus on creating antagonism, creating a fight, screaming and yelling and physically moving toward and then standing in the way of other citizens. It's classic divide politics, and it doesn't serve a long-term, big picture purpose. Neither does the overboard propaganda. PETA has a video using an injured duck that can't move because it's injured, and it then claims that all overfed ducks are in this shape. Sorry, but I'm not going to condone that type of propaganda. It creates doubt in everything else the organization and other AR folks put forth. (And I do have a lot of doubt about much of what is said in regard to foie gras by AR folks. The vehemence (to be kind), for one thing, always leads to questions in my mind, no matter the topic, no matter the speaker.) Further, again, it is about picking the right fight at the right time, AND its about developing allies and a wider base of support over time. This fight, in Portland, at least, isn't the right fight as it shrinks the base of support. It shrinks the base of trust between people who ought to be allies. Of course, I now have the impression that your preference is for all animal farming to be outlawed (correct me if I'm wrong), so what I consider to be ethical, environmentally friendly local farming practices may never fall in line with your view of someone who would be an ally.

[livinginphotographs]

112. You keep saying that I'm attacking you and insinuating things...

Hell, maybe I'm coming off wrong, but I fail to see where I am doing this. If I am, it is not intentional. Anyway...

on edit: Okay, yeah I called that blog post "tripe." I still stand by that. I get defensive because I've put up with enough "People for the Eating of Tasty Animals" posts on DU to have very little tolerance for people making snide comments in these discussions. Still, if you would like to keep this civil, I will do the same. If it works out, you get a full apology. Fair enough?

The issue isn't just "protesting," it's protesting in a manner with a clear focus on creating antagonism, creating a fight, screaming and yelling and physically moving toward and then standing in the way of other citizens.

That's the entire point of the protest. That's the entire point of ALL protests. Except, I don't see it as simply screaming and yelling or creating a fight. I wasn't there, so I can't speak for each individual protestor's behavior, but the point of a protest is to loudly speak up against something you consider to be wrong.

I definitely prefer the more reserved type of protest than the ones similar to family planning clinic protests (I've seen those, and those are completely out of line), but standing outside a business holding a sign and chanting doesn't strike me as some sort of attack on the general public.

Of course, I now have the impression that your preference is for all animal farming to be outlawed (correct me if I'm wrong), so what I consider to be ethical, environmentally friendly local farming practices may never fall in line with your view of someone who would be an ally.

That is definitely my preference. It is also my preference for peace on earth, no child ever goes hungry, etc. but I doubt that it's going to happen overnight. As I told the other poster, I would prefer that if people are going to eat meat, they patronize farms which raise animals in a more "humane" manner, but overall, I can't consider it humane to raise an animal simply to kill it for food. I'm not sure if that would make those farms an ally of mine or not. From an environmental standpoint, probably, but from an AR standpoint, definitely not. Does that answer your question?

[HuckleB]

114. I'm confused.

I don't think I said you attacked me, and I don't generally feel attacked by you. Your tone has been civil, and I very much appreciate that. My concern is that some of your responses don't seem to be focused on what I actually wrote. That can be frustrating.

As for the goal of a protest, for my money, the goal of any protest or other action ought to be focused on both short and long-term goals. To that end, in my mind, it should do more than energize the base. As long as AR folks are tied up with fights against local restaurants and local farmers (both of whom practice what I consider to be - generally - an ethical, environmentally friendly manner), those who are actually the problem have little to worry about. The focus is off them. And what's more, those who might join to put the spotlight on them, are at each other's throats.

OK. I've said enough about all this, I think.

Enjoy your weekend.

[flvegan]

88. These alliances would form, regardless

if the two parties agreed on the issue. Sort of like alliances formed amongst libs, progressives and dems here. I mean, look at this particular thread. I highly disagree with several of these folks condoning this cruel practice. However, when it comes time to lobby for, get active and/or elect a dem and remove a rethug, we are allies. When you draw a line in the sand, you have to be ready to step over that line when the issue over which you drew that line, changes.

That's my opinion, anyway.

[HuckleB]

90. Please read post 89.

Sometimes, in time, alliances may form in certain instances. However, trust is built over time, and it's quite difficult to build trust in the face of such ugly attacks upon businesses that otherwise promote healthy agricultural practices locally.

[jdj]

48. I think you missed the point.

they went after the stores because of the demographic they serve.

they thought the customers might care, and they are probably right.

I think that for insecure nervous carnivores a vegetarian/ vegan/ animal rights activist who dares to take a breath is threatening. I think that most mainstream folks are meat-eaters but would never endorse animal suffering, and these are the folks that you never see acting like 9 year olds on threads like these. They are okay with their choices and don't need to protest to much, so why aren't you?

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[livinginphotographs]

38. Plenty of people have outrage over McNuggets.

Plenty of people have outrage over factory farms as well. It's just when they try to bring up the issue, they get called "kooks" and similar things, sometimes even right here on DU.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[livinginphotographs]

43. .

:toast:

I hear ya.

We should put up an FAQ so that the same anti-animal tripe that gets repeated and shot down over and over again can subside a bit. I'm getting of typing the same thing over and over again.

Q. Is "People for the Eating of Tasty Animals" funny?
A. No. It wasn't funny the first time, and it's not funny the nine billionth time.

Q. Should I show up in an animal thread just to post something like "Mmmm...hamburger?"
A. No. See above. In fact, it makes you look dumber than the PETA joke.

And so on...

[jdj]

44. my mantra in all these cases is:

"thank you for kicking this thread.
thank you for kicking this thread

or

thank you for giving PETA free publicity
thank you for making PETA a household name.

etc.

[ladeuxiemevoiture]

52. I'm confused

Are you for or against the foie gras laws? I can't tell. Thanks.

[livinginphotographs]

68. He or she is obviously for.

Picking away at the animal cruelty industry is always a good step.

[bicentennial_baby]

55. Utter Bullshit

So how is force feeding animals natural or normal?? Short answer, it's not. Just because factory farms are as bad or worse, does not mean that we should overlook the abuse of these birds by "family farms".

"Foie gras, which is French for "fatty liver," is made from the grotesquely enlarged livers of male ducks and geese. Birds have up to 2 pounds of food per day pumped into their stomachs through long metal pipes that are shoved down their throats. The cruel ordeal often causes severe injuries that make it painful or even impossible for birds to drink. Those who survive the feedings suffer from a painful illness that causes their livers to swell to eight to 10 times their normal size. Many birds become too sick to walk and are reduced to pushing themselves across their cages with their wings. When the birds are slaughtered, their livers are sold for foie gras."

[Chicago Democrat]

58. Not true. Animals raised to be eaten are happy to live on small farms

The domestic duck exists only because I want to eat it. Its life was created for me , by a farmer, so that it may eat healthful grains and bugs and things that I don't or can't. Fattening an animal prior to slaughter is a time honored practice.

This animal would not exist at all if it weren't for us meat eaters. It has a relatively happy life, stress free and with food provided. Think of all the terror and stress that happens in nature every single day. The farm duck has it easy for its whole life and then gets fat for the last two weeks A farmer would be a fool to harm the animal during the last two weeks when the duck is force fed because that would harm the liver which is very easily bruised and delicate. A 60 year old 250 pound beer drinking male human has a liver of approximately the same size and the lucky duck only has to deal with such a pot belly for two weeks and is mercifully killed to fufill its life purpose.

A farmer who raises ducks for froi gras has every reason to treat his ducks with great care. I would argue they are completely spoiled and treated far better than other similar farm animals that are slaughtered.

Radical Vegans think they are morally superior and although I can understand that perspective; I don't agree with it. Having been on farms with animals I am convinced that cows and chickens and ducks THAT ARE WELL TREATED (ie not factory farm) are HAPPY to exist. THEY ENJOY THEIR LIVES. Then we kill them and eat them. Its a quid pro quo relationship. Its a symbiotic relationship. Animal gets life and food and protection and no stress. Human gets a very very rare and special gourmet delicacy.

So to the Vegans, I say "Why do you hate animals so much?"

Also "Why do you hate farmers so much?"

Here's from Niman Ranch (where I just bought 10 pounds of prime steak from today) regarding their animal husbandry practice with regard to the Cows that made my fantastic steaks...

Niman Ranchs' Schuyler Ingle writes:

We do everything we can to see that our cattle lead stress-free lives. In the feed lot, they have shade when and where they need it. And they aren’t crowded. They can get off by themselves if they like. They are raised on delicious pasture grasses, and only when they are mature, moved to a feedlot for several months of grass and mixed grains. Stress during the slaughter process is kept to a minimum. Now, if you take the same animal and totally stress it, either with diet or environment, and then make it anxious during the slaughter process, the muscles fill with adrenaline. When you see a piece of meat in a meat case sitting in a pool of reddish colored liquid, you know you are looking at a stressed animal. What’s happening is that the tissues dump water-content when they finally relax. That piece of meat will be tough no matter how you cook it. That said, every once in a while a cow’s just going to be tough. We run into that. Not often, but it does happen. And we hear about it because Niman ranch customers now know what real meat should be like.

http://www.nimanranch.com

[Lindacooks]

60. Your quotes are from beef farmers, NOT those who produce foie gras.

And you keep ignoring the facts of how geese targeted to become foie gras are treated. I haven't seen one of your posts address the metal feeding tube or the pain the animal suffers by being violently, GROSSLY overfed. A metal tube forced down the throat isn't anywhere near the liver, so it wouldn't damage it. Let's talk about the esophogus and stomach - THOSE are damaged.

And those right wing talking points don't help your cause. Saying 'why do you hate farmers' totally ignores the point of the argument and jumps right to a massive and false overgeneralization.

As for your question to vegans 'why do you hate animals?' that's such a stupid thing to say it boggles the mind.

[Chicago Democrat]

62. The last two weeks of life the duck gets multiple daily feedings

and BAD farmers MAY possibly harm the esophogus and only at the very end the liver is enlarged...WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT.


That duck was created by men and by fattening or "force feeding" it turns a 12 dollar duck into a 112 dollar duck! The FROI GRAS is a gift of this earth to man that is 100% renewable and helps farmers to earn a great deal of money on a single duck. Its 'suffers' as much as a fat person 'suffers' and that happens for a VERY BREIF two weeks.


From one duck:

Not fattened sells for 12 dollars at the grocer, frozen.

Fattened:

Froi Gras liver (1.5 pounds) 68
Duck Prociutto made from breast (1 pound) 36
Two Smoked confit (leg thigh) 8

Total Retail on one duck! $ 112

That's $100 more for the Fattened Duck!

So what's your problem with carnivours or the fact that all animals die or that some are just created for a purpose.

[Lindacooks]

64. My problem is the cruelty of creating a liver for foie gras.

which you have not addressed. And I don't give a flying f about the profits on these animals. They're ANIMALS - not pieces of wood; sentinent beings who can feel pain and distress.

And if you think that two weeks of pain and suffering is worth it to produce some overpriced blob of fat, then I feel sorry for you.

[Chicago Democrat]

80. Your entitled to your feelings, banning Froi Gras is Fascist and I

will never, ever, ever give up froi gras or meat despite the fact that vegans hate it or if some stupid state makes it illegal. I'll buy it anyway! Why do vegans care about what other people eat and make value judgements about things that are basic to culture like food? If you closed down every froi gras farm, what have you accomplished? Who have you saved and why? To impose your value judgements on others. What about all the ducks that would never even get to live? Not to mention the small farmer, who in froi gras production is more akin to an artisan.

I think froi gras is like a work of art. A collaboration of farming techniques developed over centuries we take a simple duck and turn it into a Broadway show for the taste buds which you call an 'overpriced blob of fat'. Well whatever, my concience is clear and you should be so lucky to have anything thing that is so delicious.

Not everyone lives on wheat grass and mung beans.

[livinginphotographs]

83. Vegans care because

What tastes good to you means that some other creature had to suffer an incredibly cruel death for you to eat it.

And having to end it with a snide remark (I've never eaten wheat grass, by the way) betrays your "clear conscience."

[Chicago Democrat]

101. Two weeks of being fat and before a kosher death I dont call

"incredible suffering".

How about having your lifelong business that is based on 4000 years of artisan methods passed down being made illegal all of the sudden by vegans who have never even seen a duck.

You actually don't know those ducks endure "incredible suffering". What about the 100 weeks it wasn't fattened? Was that "incredible suffering"? The liver goes from a few ounces to about 1.5 pound and causes the duck to have a big belly. Those ducks are 'suffering' as much as a fat person.

Normal Duck about 5 pounds
Fattened Duck about 7 pounds


Normal Man about 170 pounds
Big liver Man about 220 pounds


So I am trying to tell you that in most well run farms these animals don't suffer. Its only 2 weeks of being fat, its just not that bad.

[livinginphotographs]

69. Hmmm. I know quite a few ducks that aren't living just to be

consumed by humans who can't be bothered to care about the interests of a being besides themselves.

Or maybe I'm wrong and the park rangers really create them in their special duck labs for the benefit of those of us who like to go and feed them bread occasionally. Yeah, that's got to be it.

[Chicago Democrat]

79. Wild ducks are completely different... Over centuries mankind has

bred animals for consumption.


Apparently you have a problem with that, but you won't say what it is. These animals simply -would not be- if it weren't for their utility, so are their lives worthless? I think not.

Cruelty, suffering and malnutrition are normal states in nature. Animals eat other animals. The farmer who raises animals ethically provides a service both to the animal in which he literally creates in incubators and over which he has ultimate control.

I research in detail and pay a great deal more for meat products that are ethically raised and I'm proud of it. I am good for those animals. My money pays the farmer who feeds and takes care of them. And I pay extra to make sure those animals are well treated.

For ethical meat see these producers:

https://www.dartagnan.com/index.asp
http://www.nimanranch.com

[livinginphotographs]

85. If you don't think their lives are worthless

Why do you kill them to eat them? That's as bad as your "vegans hate farmers" comment.

Cruelty, suffering and malnutrition are normal states in nature.
If you are nothing but a slave to instinct, how does that make you any better than the animals you eat? Animals also shit in the yard, but that doesn't mean I need to.

Do you cook your food, or do you chase it down and tear it apart with your teeth, then eat it raw right there? If not, that's not the "normal state" of nature. That's a ridiculous way to defend eating meat.

The problem is that you think it's okay to eat "ethically raised" meat and others have problems with eating meat at all. To me, raising an animal just so you can kill it and eat its flesh is disgusting, regardless of how it is treated. So we disagree, but it helps to understand where The Vegans are coming from so that we don't end up talking past each other.

True, I'm more comfortable with the producers you listed above simply because, realistically, I can't expect society to just go cold-turkey off of meat tomorrow, so I'd at least like to see more humane meat producers be patronized as opposed to factory farms. Still, the idea of "humanely" raising an animal just to kill it and eat it is about the same as slaveowners treating their slaves "humanely." The entire practice is something I disagree with at its core, and essentially, one is not much better than the other.

[Chicago Democrat]

102. Thanks for discussing this sanely...

First of all we are animals. I'd like you to consider this for a moment. Justr look at all the wars including our own Iraq War. This human race, we intelligent monkies are composed mostly of very cruel animals. In fact we are much worse than animals as they kill mostly for food.

Which gets to your second point me actually chasing down and eating an animal, that actually is very appealling to me. Deer are massively overpopulating the Mid-West and yes I would like that very very much. Its all a matter of perspective. You see Bambi, I see warm tenderloins roasting on my fire on a stick.


Raising animals for slaughter, you concentrate on the slaughter. I look at beauty of a small herd on a small farm, happily grazing. I think about little calves following their mothers. These times are MUCH LONGER and represent this animals' LIFE. Not the slaughter. The slaughter is over in a second. And is purposefullly done with an eye to NOT STRESSING OUT THE ANIMAL.


You say: 'The entire practice is something I disagree with at its core'. Well you are free to try to convince me of exactly why meat eating is bad, but I haven't really been convinced that 1) animals bred for man are miserable and would rather not exist (which is what your'e suggesting) 2) Killing animals to eat is a moral failing

I mean really the moral failing of mankind comes from destruction of species and the planet making it so that the future is in question. I mean what does meat eating matter when some fool with nuke is going to destroy it? I have a hard time feeling bad about something that is really part of human history for thousands of years and my own personal history. I can't wait to get my farm and raise ducks and chickens and goats.

A hundred years ago, animals were everywhere. Everyone had chickens for example. I think the modern world has separated people from where their food comes from and so some people develope a horror reaction after they actually realise where that red stuff that comes in a plastic package comes from. A hundred years ago, the slaughter of animals for food was much more in your face.

To me its as normal as drinking cows milk.

[HuckleB]

105. I don't think...

that livinginphotographs thinks drinking cow's milk is normal.

;)

Me? I'm off for a hike in the Cascades, with my pork/venison summer sausage and extra sharp cheddar packed neatly into my backpack.

Salud.

[livinginphotographs]

109. I think our views are similar when it comes to humans.

That's probably why I have such a fondness for animals, after seeing the brutality of meat-eating humans who think nothing of raping the planet and slaughtering each other in droves, then defending their eating of meat as because they are somehow better than animals (I'm not accusing you of this, I'm just speaking in general).

The problem I have with slaughter is this: no matter how pleasant an animal's life is before the slaughter, the animal still has an interest in living. Plants, animals, humans, amoebae, everything has an interest in continuing its existence. The more sentient a creature is, though, the more it will suffer when it is not allowed to continue to exist. And unfortunately, the farms where a slaughtered animal does not suffer in its final moments seem to be few and far between. That is why I think eating meat is wrong. Does that make sense?

And HuckleB is right, I don't think drinking cows milk is natural. ;)

[Must_B_Free]

56. Foie Gras is delicious!!!

I had it at Susana Fu in Philadelphia.

It is a no brainer to be awesome, that's why they always serve it on the Iron Chef.

Sounds bad, but if you will eat a steak or a hamburger, it is morally no worse...

[HuckleB]

57. An interesting and informed debate on foie gras at Slow Food Forum:

http://www.slowfoodforum.org/showthread.php?t=646&page=1&pp=15

I actually think all sides on this at DU have much to learn by the general tone of that conversation.

Salud!

[HuckleB]

74. Ducking It Out -- The Debate On Foie Gras

http://starchefs.com/features/food_debates/foie_gras/index.shtml

[Lindacooks]

59. Do you know that the liver is considered the garbage can of the body?

That's where toxins are trapped as blood flows through the organ. Eating liver means you're eating a ton of toxins; it's really not very good for you.

[Chicago Democrat]

63. That's why all carnivours devour it first....

its the best part of any animal usually.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

71. One question.

Cubs or White Sox?

[Lindacooks]

77. Um, Minnesota Twins

[Chicago Democrat]

81. Cubbies!

North sider here.

[HuckleB]

91. OK, then.

I'm married to a northsider, but have an uncle who's an adopted southsider. Obviously, I have sided with me wife!

Salud.

[HuckleB]

76. Umm.

The liver does many things, including breaking down harmful substances> The by-products of those substance are excreted from the liver into the bile or blood. Substances in bile move to the intestine and exit the body as feces. Substances in blood end up being filtered out by the kidneys, therefore exiting the body as urine. So the liver isn't keeping all those toxins for some poor animal to eat at a later date.

[Lindacooks]

78. Some materials, especially heavy metals, are stored in the liver.

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_218.html

A more pressing issue is the high concentration of trace metals often found in liver and kidneys. Some trace metals, notably iron, are good for you, but others, such as lead, mercury, and cadmium, are poisonous. Cadmium in particular is worth watching out for. The World Health Organization recommends a maximum daily intake of 70 micrograms; the typical daily intake in the U.S. and Canada is 50 to 100 micrograms. The concentration of cadmium in beef liver is two and a half times that in beef muscle tissue, and in kidneys nearly seven times as high. Accordingly, some researchers have suggested the two foods be avoided.

I personally would be worried about the mercury content of any animal liver.

More about foie gras:

Foie gras, the French term for "fatty liver," is the product of extreme animal cruelty. It is the swollen, diseased liver of ducks and geese who are force-fed just up until the point of death before being slaughtered. Birds suffer tremendously, both during and after the force-feeding process, as their physical condition rapidly deterioriates. In just a few weeks, their livers swell up to ten times their normal size, and the birds can scarcely stand, walk, or even breathe. At this point, they are slaughtered, and their livers are peddled as a "gourmet" delicacy.

The idea for this cruel force-feeding practice is thought to have originated in ancient Egypt, after people noticed that wild geese often gorge themselves before embarking on long migrations. Because Egyptians considered the fat-laden flesh and organs of those geese caught after this pre-migration gorging to taste better, they sought to artificially induce and exaggerate this condition in captive geese. Thereafter, the practice of force-feeding took hold, later degenerating and devolving into what is now the modern foie gras industry.

In August 2003, the Israeli Supreme Court determined that the force feeding of birds to produce foie gras is a violation of the nation's anti-cruelty laws. The Israeli Animal Welfare Law states, "No one shall torture an animal, treat it cruelly or abuse it in any manner." (clause 2(a)) Noah, the Israeli Federation of Animal Protection Organizations acted as the plaintiff in the court case, and asked that the court rule that force feeding is forbidden under Israeli law because force feeding constitutes torture, cruel treatment and abuse.


The judges ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, and Israel joined the many other nations that have prohibited foie gras production. As Judge T. Strasberg-Cohen stated summarily, "There is no real controversy with respect to the fact that the practice of force feeding causes suffering to the geese."




http://www.nofoiegras.org/FGabout.htm

[HuckleB]

82. Hmm.

I didn't know that.

:eyes:

Interesting how you go from one thing to another in an attempt to place liver as something bad for folks. The anecdotal evidence you offered doesn't present much of a case for worry about liver, in general, however. Still, I am wondering. Why is it that you can't simply stop your critique at foie gras? I'm sorry, but choosing to bash liver as a food, in general, only diminishes your arguments against foie gras.

[Lindacooks]

93. How on earth is presenting more evidence for toxins in the liver

going from 'one thing to another'??

Liver isn't the smartest choice for a food you eat regularly, or even very often.

And, AGAIN, you're showing your inability to grasp the principles of logical reasoning - bashing liver as a food doesn't diminish arguments against foie gras. The arguments are two separate entities.

Now you're on ignore.

[HuckleB]

95. Uh huh.

That's a great way to show your stripes. Whenever you can't answer legitimate questions, and whenever your evidence is shown to be less than compelling, put the poster to blame on ignore.

Again, you are arguing against liver in general with little to no evidence, while there is plenty of evidence to show that liver as a part of a varied diet offers benefits. Whenever an argument pushes beyond actual evidence into faith, as your argument against liver in general has done, it tends to toss serious questions on other arguments made by the practitioner in question. I'm sorry that this upsets you, but I'm just discussing.

[mondo joe]

106. Do you know the concept MY BODY MY CHOICE?

[Ian David]

61. Foie Gras isn't very tasty. I wouldn't miss it. But VEAL is AWESOME!

I could never understand why people went nuts over foie gras.

There are all kinds of yummy pates that don't involve torturing ducks or geese.

How much of a difference would it make to eat a "Less Cruel" foie gras that didn't involve force-feeding?

Maybe someday we can just grow the stuff from goose liver stemcells?

I'm hoping that someday, through genetic engineering, we can grow veal on cornstalks or inside pumpkins.

[Puglover]

87. This is a tough issue I think.

I could'nt care less if some chooses to not eat meat. I would never presume to tell or lecture someone on why they should or should not. Hell I'd go to the mat for you to keep that right to choose. What irks me is when Vegans or others get on their morale highhorses and judge people who choose to eat meat. Am I for abusive animal practices? Of course not. Am I for fur coats? No. But do I like cheeseburgers? Yeah, I do. Alot.

edit subject line

[Ysolde]

97. Very succint...

and well said. What saddens me after reading through all of these posts (and noticing how many were removed) is that I didn't really see much REAL disagreement, but I did see a lot of hostility.

I try to see both sides of this issue and the post about the differing worths of a "fattened" goose vs a "non-fattened" goose was enlightening to me. I now understand the economic incentives to do this. I also understand the AR activists' position against this practice. I just have mixed feelings on the outcome. Geez. I'm a liberal who believes Government can/should/must protect people. But, I'm not sure that Government should be involved in EVERY facet of EVERY decision we make. Don't eat foie gras if you choose. Don't support those farmers that create it. Don't eat at restaurants that serve it. Educate people about how it's created. But, ban it? Will that stop people from consuming it? No. If there is demand, there will be supply, especially once the practice goes "underground", and the prices increase. Just unsure that banning it really solves any problem.

[SoCalDem]

98. When Oregon bans foie gras, only CRIMINALS will have foie gras

:)

[HuckleB]

99. Nah, they'll just go to Vancouver or Boise.

Where they can still get their foie gras, locked and loaded.

Although I suppose that does bring up the question of crossing the border back into Oregon with foie gras still in one's digestion system. Illegal or not?

Hmm.

Salud.

[northzax]

103. oh, what's next?

caviar? abalone? tiger penis?

[mondo joe]

107. So we're pro choice on abortion but not on duck livers?

For goodness sakes, I'm sometimes embarassed to be a dem.

I have problems with foie gras, although it tastes heavenly, because of the means of production. But it's a fairly rare culinary item in the US anyway.

Is there nothing else dems can promote?

[makhno]

115. It's a safe issue

A cottage industry, no major financial interests involved, no significant campaign contributions and post-political careers threatened. Beats taking on the credit card industry or the military-industrial complex, that's for sure.

[mondo joe]

116. And it sounds Frenchy too!

Ugh. I hate fascism.