Originally Posted by TheMidwest

Once you've taken the step of viewing animals as morally equivalent to human beings, you've got to swallow the whole pill in order to be consistent. I mean, if you thought that what we do to ducks is bad, you should hear about what we're doing to chickens.

I think the question is this: at what point do the "Hugs for Puppies" folks draw the line in their protests? It is clear from their website that the ideal solution would be for Philadelphia to "Go Veg." Is the next phase to protest any restaurants that sell chicken, fish, or beef?

Their problem is the same one that I think plagues a lot of protesters; namely, they're long on emotion and short on fact. I think they're usually willing to go a lot further - irrespective of the consequences to society - than most people would agree to. For instance, I doubt you would find much opposition to increasing funding for the Humane society, or a local animal shelter. I think we could all agree that it's better for an animal to have a safe home than to be roaming the streets in squalor.

But what of a vegan utopia in Philadelphia - do protestors really want this? Do they realize the linkages to local farms that would be destroyed? Do they realize the number of local businesses that wouldn't be able to sustain themselves? As I see it, the damage for Lancaster county alone would be enormous.

Originally Posted by guzzijason

I wish they'd do the whole world a favor and drink the red kool-aid and get it over with.

Originally Posted by brooklyncat

I saw them Friday night too...all I thought was, wow, London serves foie gras? I'll have to get there more often!

I don't love the fois gras process, but seriously, check out how chickens are raised sometime. There are way more postive ways to help educate people about the dining choicees they are making than standing there with body odor and a bullhorn.

Originally Posted by TheAdlerian

Veal is about a thousand times more heinous than fois gras in my opinion. I won't eat it unless for some reason that I might need to. Why isn't that being protested?

Reason:

It's not a current fad.

Originally Posted by Malloy

Agreed. Look out, you may have started something...

Originally Posted by Sexyredkid

Veal rocks! Foie gras is ok, but the process for obtaining chicken or beef is only slightly less barbaric.

Look I understand peoples reasons for not eating these types of meat, but I've got a grand idea: Instead of expending your energy getting all riled up over having a tube stuffed down a gooses throat, why not put that energy towards some more useful cause? There are far more important issues that modern society faces other than fois gras.

What if fois gras and veal were the only options for starving people to eat? Would it be such a horrible thing then? Feed the hungry veal, manatee and fois gras and move on to more important social issues like child education and pollution and stop cluttering my thinking space with insignificant dribble like what kind of meat someone is going to eat.

----- "Son, when you participate in sporting events, it's not whether you win or lose... it's how drunk you get." - Homer

Originally Posted by TheAdlerian

Veal is about a thousand times more heinous than fois gras in my opinion. I won't eat it unless for some reason that I might need to. Why isn't that being protested?

Reason:

It's not a current fad.

Originally Posted by KENfmt

But they'll happily sell you a side of ribs or some ground beef.