måndag 25 februari 2013

Humans are herbivores, And if you took a baby and put a bunny in front of him, and if you had a cat and a bunny, the cat at any age would want to attack and kill the bunny and the child would say, 'Oh, look at the bunny'

We are natural plant-eaters.
http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/natural.html

"And if you took a baby and put a bunny in front of him, and if you had a cat and a bunny, the cat at any age would want to attack and kill the bunny and the child would say, “Oh, look at the bunny!” So the idea that we have some innate aggression towards animals…we don’t.

If you open the mouth of a cat, a carnivore, you see that they have long canines, way beyond the other teeth. If you open the mouth of a dog, you see the same. If you open your mouth, you don’t. You have canines that are the same length as your incisors. If you have long canine teeth, it allows you to do two things: one, it allows you to snatch your prey. The other thing it allows you to do is to pull away the hide. If a dog happens to catch a rabbit or another animal, it can very easily remove the hide. If a cat catches a squirrel, they have no trouble with that. But if a person does that, they will work all day and all night to get the skin off of an animal, because they don’t have long canine teeth anymore.

We also don’t have claws. Plus we’re not fast. Plus we don’t have very good vision, or good sense of smell. An owl is a predator and can detect a mouse at a tremendous distance. Dogs have a sense of smell much greater than ours and they’re much faster than we are. We have fairly dull senses, fairly slow locomotion. In our Olympic trials, we celebrate speeds that would be an embarrassment to a bird or a dog or another animal.

We have nothing to kill prey with and nothing to remove the hide with. So the question is when did that change come? It’s something like 3.5 million years ago that we lost our long canine teeth. And most of the great apes did, too—and they’re almost entirely vegetarian. Chimpanzees will eat a little bit of meat. But, they never eat dairy products, and no other animal would do that."
http://therumpus.net/2012/09/the-rumpus-interview-with-dr-neal-barnard/

Animal proteins are causing cancer and other diseases: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CN7PF10RKo&feature=player_embedded
http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/
showing that our body is not suited for animal products
Not our soul either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZpF1R6GUo

6 kommentarer:

  1. Well we do have brains that are much better to retain and if we choose to kill and eat an animal. We can make snares or we can capture and domesticate animals whether for pleasure or food. And we do still have canine teeth which is generally attributed to tearing...meat or bread.

    What the author doesn't focus on is our ability to inflict almost no pain at all pain when shecting an animal.

    Almost all animals will eat dairy products but none of them have the capability to make cheese or milk another animal.

    Perhaps the author sees nothing symbiotic in domesticating milk animals in exchange for their protection. He must have never seen a predator violently and painfully kill another animal. He forgets all those that treat their animals kindly in exchange for their milk and even for their meat.

    SvaraRadera
    Svar
    1. Den här kommentaren har tagits bort av skribenten.

      Radera
    2. Eliyahu,
      Why would you ever want to eat a product that causes disease, see the research behind: http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/
      Why would you ever want to eat a products that causes animal such cruelty: http://www.earthlings.com/
      Why would you ever want to eat a product which cause cows and their babies to be separated:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg3Yfdbs24I&feature=player_embedded

      Or eggs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wu5RrqMTUtM
      The domestication of animals started 10000 – 15000 years ago, was propagated by Torah and later on Christianity – and now you see terrible animal abuse and slavery by humans of more than 57 billion land animals per year and more than 1000 billion marine animals each year.
      All of this is a result by claiming that animals are “property”.
      “Almost all animals will eat dairy products but none of them hav the capability to make cheese or milk another animal.”
      A capability doesn’t make it moral.

      “What the author doesn't focus on is our ability to inflict almost no pain at all pain when shecting an animal. “
      You can kill human animals also without almost any pain. It doesn’t make it ethical. Cows are enslaved all their life. We can live symbiotic with animals wild in the nature. We can’t live symbiotic with animals if we force upon them a confined lifestyle on our conditions.

      “Perhaps the author sees nothing symbiotic in domesticating milk animals in exchange for their protection.”
      I don’t see any symbiotic in draining a cow on her calcium and to take the milk that the calf needs.
      Cows love their children as much as you love yours: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vcQ6yBEE5N0
      It is not ethical to deprive the cows on the most precious that they have – their relationship with their family and their life.

      Think of this:
      1. The imposition of suffering on any sentient being requires an adequate moral justification and pleasure, amusement, or convenience cannot suffice as adequate to justify imposing suffering on any sentient being
      2. The most “humane” animal agriculture involves considerable suffering imposed on sentient beings
      3. As a general matter, our best (and only) justification for eating animal products is pleasure, amusement, or convenience
      4. Therefore: We cannot morally justify eating animal products
      http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/moral-concern-moral-impulse-and-logical-argument-in-animal-rights-advocacy/#.US-3TVeFnQJ

      Radera
    3. Eliyahu,
      Persons witnessing the murder of animals are aware of this:
      "Animals do not 'give' their life to us, as the sugar-coated lie would have it . . . They struggle and fight to the last breath, just as we would do if we were in their place." [John Robbins]

      “He must have never seen a predator violently and painfully kill another animal.”
      They do it for survival.
      Humans do it for “taste”.
      Humans are not predators and would NEVER have thought of that idea have they not been ingrained in the culture we live in, and substituted their intuition that it is wrong to harm and kill another sentient being with our cultural belief.
      As I pointed out in my previous post there is no such thing as “kindly” take anyone else’s milk – in your example the milk that belongs to a calf.

      Radera
  2. “Well we do have brains that are much better to retain and if we choose to kill and eat an animal. “

    I don’t believe that.
    Science has shown that meat is detrimental to physical health, including the brain.
    See: http://www.thechinastudy.com/the-china-study/about/
    http://www.adelicatebalance.com.au/
    http://www.forksoverknives.com/
    http://www.heartattackproof.com/
    ‘Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn argues that heart attacks, the leading cause of death for men and women worldwide, are a "foodborne illness" and explains why diet is the most powerful medicine.’
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqKNfyUPzoU


    SvaraRadera
  3. So the Torah that you promote, promotes a diet that is detrimental to human health. Why is that?
    And also to other animals health, the environment.....

    SvaraRadera