The animal cruelty involved in eating a Big mac from Mc Donalds

My comment to a friend who wrote about eating a 'Big mac':
You can all easily Google ‘cruelty in Mc Donalds’ to find out what cruelty the animals go through to become a ‘Big Mac’. And there is no “humane way” to produce animal products, the animals involve always go through suffering – there are just different degrees to the unnecessary suffering involved.

I think the core of the issue is that people don’t see an animal and what suffering they are causing when they are eating a Big mac or any other animal foods. But it is our moral obligation to the animals to not inflict unnecessary suffering, we all agree with this, so thus we all should study what the animals are going through, so that we stop seeing dead animals and their secretions as ‘food’, but see suffering and death each time we look upon an animal product.
I don’t see anything good when I see an animal product, I don’t miss the taste that I enjoyed for almost 28 years as a non-vegan, I only see dead animals that were inflicted unnecessary suffering and death to satisfy someone’s palate pleasure /convenience of animal foods.

I think it is time that we all act upon our moral intuition, and start to eat as we care of the animals. They are defenseless against us, and we must live up to our moral obligation of stopping exploiting them and inflicting them unnecessary suffering for food. We must start acting like we care, and like they matter more than a frivolous taste experience'/convenience!!

As we sow, so shall we reap. The connection between violence against animals and humans

Humans today don’t eat for survival. Humans today do eat for habit, “taste” or convenience.

As I quoted before:
I mean that our thinking about animals is very confused. On one hand, we claim to regard animals as members of the moral community. We claim to embrace a moral and legal obligation not to inflict “unnecessary” suffering or death on animals. We can, of course, debate the meaning of “necessity,” but whatever it means, it must rule out suffering and death imposed for reasons of human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. If it does not do so, then the exception would completely swallow the moral rule.

The problem is that 99.99% of our animal use cannot be justified by anything but human pleasure, amusement, or convenience. For example, we kill more than 12 billion land animals every year in the United States alone for food. No one maintains that it is necessary to eat animals to lead an optimally healthy lifestyle and an increasing number of mainstream health care professionals tell us that animal foods are detrimental to our health. Animal agriculture is a disaster for the environment because it involves a most inefficient use of natural resources and creates water pollution, soil erosion, and greenhouse gasses. The only justification that we have for the pain, suffering, and death that we impose on these billions of animals is that we enjoy eating animal foods, or that it is convenient to do so, or that it is just plain habit.
http://cup.columbia.edu/static/interview-gary-francione

There is NO justification for killing another human for “taste”, habit or convenience.. There is no justification for killing a cow, cat, dog, elk or any other animal for “taste”, habit or convenience. We are all consciousness. We all have the same right to live. We sow suffering and violence to the innocent sentient non-human violence; and our culture reaps violence, suffering, wars, injustices and starvation. If we want a peaceful revolution, we must stop sowing suffering and violence at our plates, at our families plates and at our society’s plates.