California sides with the animal rights nuts

[EastUS1]

......the government has not regulated your local farm out of business.

Yet. Give 'em time

In my earlier life; senators and those in congress were unfailingly referred to as "representatives" as in; of the people....but for years now, they've tagged themselves publicly, as does the media, as "lawmakers". That alone should speak volumes to any rational person about what's gone incredibly wrong with the glorious government of late.

Somewhere along the way...the Rights of the individual and any/all notions of America properly defining it's self, first and foremost as a Free country, have been systematicaly attacked by those mistakenly trusted to actually uphold their oaths of office...a disgusting process that continues as we speak.

"--We find ourselves in the peaceful possession, of the fairest portion of the earth, as regards extent of territory, fertility of soil, and salubrity of climate. We find ourselves under the government of a system of political institutions, conducing more essentially to the ends of civil and religious liberty, than any of which the history of former times tells us. We, when mounting the stage of existence, found ourselves the legal inheritors of these fundamental blessings. We toiled not in the acquirement or establishment of them--they are a legacy bequeathed us, by a once hardy, brave, and patriotic, but now lamented and departed race of ancestors......

This task of gratitude to our fathers, justice to ourselves, duty to posterity, and love for our species in general, all imperatively require us faithfully to perform.

“From whence shall we expect the approach of danger? Shall some trans-Atlantic military giant step the earth and crush us at a blow? Never. All the armies of Europe and Asia...could not by force take a drink from the Ohio River or make a track on the Blue Ridge in the trial of a thousand years. No, if destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we will live forever or die by suicide.”

Abraham Lincoln

 

[Knotbuyinit]

Off topic but WTF!

Today's lesson boys and girls!

View attachment 9512

 

[xUT]

An interview with Guillermo Gonzalez of Sonoma Artisan Foie Gras

Amongst all of the current discussion surrounding California’s apparent imminent ban on Foie Gras, what seems to have gotten lost is the fact that there is a family and its business involved. Owned and operated by Guillermo Gonzalez and his family, our state’s only foie gras farm, Sonoma Artisan Foie Gras, has been operating quietly and producing some of the world’s finest fattened duck livers for almost 27 years.
Though they have always operated within the confines of the law, over the years they have been targeted with threats and vandalism so egregious the FBI has deemed them acts of terrorism. Frivolous lawsuits meant to harass and drain finances from Mr. Gonzalez, coupled with numerous trespasses, theft, and property damage on their farm have continuously distressed the operations and its employees.

Q: Do you feel that there has been an effort to silence you, to eliminate your voice from rational, educated discussion, and why?

GG: Not perhaps literally, but the lack of leadership on the part of the government and the pressure of animal rights activists upon UC Davis led to a paralysis around the issue. After having been publicly vilified by the activists, with some (not all) media clearly biased against me in 2003-2004, I became a lone interested party whose voice was not heard.
I have insisted since that time that science and reason should prevail over propaganda and intimidation. The tactics used against us, which have been described as “domestic terrorism” by some government agencies and law enforcement officials, have without doubt impacted the general public’s willingness to engage on this issue. It has not been until recently that hundreds of courageous chefs and restaurant owners have coordinated to stand up to the bullying tactics of the anti-meat movement.
Intimidation, in any form, is a despicable practice often utilized by those who are incapable of addressing an issue fairly and reasonably. My family witnessed this type of activity first hand in El Salvador, as we left during a period of Civil War in 1985 and came to America partly to avoid dealing with the ruthlessness and lawlessness associated with the politics of fear and intimidation. It is unfortunate and ironic that our family business, after achieving a brief period of success in this country, had to be subjected to this, but if I have anything to share going forward with other businesses and individuals, it is that what happened with Senate Bill 1520 was a wake-up call demonstrating that special interest groups allied with powerful politicians can, and will, take away the legitimate rights of the rest of society.
In the end, in 2004 I compromised on the bill when I reached an agreement with Senator Gilbert Cedillo. On the initial committee vote, Senator Cedillo voted Nay when the vote was called at the end of the session when SB 1520 was introduced. It was clear from watching the hearing that, after Senator Burton’s not-so-subtle whispering in his ear, he had to change his vote — a critical one for passing the bill. However, as part of his willingness to change his vote in committee, Senator Cedillo and I agreed to an amendment that would 1) provide a sunset period of 7 ½ years, and 2) importantly, that the State would provide funds to an agricultural university to conduct research and perform studies, that would validate or negate the prevailing position that the practice of “gavage” is a non-injurious method and that the anatomy of the duck allows this process.
In other words, the accusation that the “gavage” process is an act of cruelty and even torture, as Senator Burton clearly adopted from the animalists’ rhetoric, is based on opinions and not sound science. The report used to justify SB 1520 was inconclusive, outdated and self-serving. As in statistics, one can always manipulate the numbers to better tell a story, but ultimately, the public loses because backroom deals and machinations prevail in politics.
In conclusion, SB 1520 was forced through the legislature in a very heavy-handed way, ignoring or dismissing truth and justice by not giving our family business an opportunity to validate the standards and practices of our business and our treatment of animals through scientific studies that were promised by the legislature. This was an abuse of privilege and the result of undue process.

So much for the 'I trust science' crowd.
B) xUT

 

[Ms Tree]

Should we leave dog fights and cock fights as well as any other animal abuse actions up to popular demand as well?

What possible benefit is there to abuse animals for our personal gratification. What is wrong with treating an animal decently until they are killed? We eat animals. Fine. But why abuse them in the process? Just because we can does not mean we should. I recall veal tasting really good but i found out how they make it and will not touch it any more. No need for that kind.of animal abuse in my opinion.

 

[EastUS1]

I recall veal tasting really good but i found out how they make it and will not touch it any more. No need for that kind.of animal abuse in my opinion.

"... in my opinion."

Good enough. Why should your viewpoint require any laws be made? If enough feel as you do; veal wouldn't be profitable, and production would cease. IF, on the other hand, you've the notion of making your preferences illegal, simply because you find them acceptable beliefs...well...what happened to the rights of others? Must we, one day, all become vegetarians, should you ever truly garner any actual understanding of how even your "free range" animals live and are slaughtered? Seriously; have you ever seen the process?...Or does it enhance your happiness to just imagine it all being magically joyful, or at least, not so "bad" for the animals killed?

Where I find the greatest disconnect is with thoughts like these: "We eat animals. Fine. But why abuse them in the process?" Do you not consider brutally ending life as at least some, slight degree of "abuse"? Have you ever been even momentarilly scared, almost out of your wits, that you were about to be killed? I'm guessing not. Had you ever...I'll guarantee your views would change.......Mother Nature and this "Best of All Possible Worlds" go by some pretty harsh "rules" indeed. To pretend otherwise is to do just that = Pretend.

"We eat animals. Fine." = We kill them, and it's not any magically clean and painless process....ever.....Period.

I'm certainly not interested in any legal mandate for constant change in diet due to whatever is, for the moment, purely social fashion. What would be next?....No consumption of pork so as not to "offend" anyone by such? Don't get between me and a nice slab of breakfast bacon, or holiday ham....

 

[Ms Tree]

I guess I am not of the belief that animal abuse should be up to popular vote than equal rights for humans should be.

Yes I have seen free range animals live and die. Far better in my opinion than the corporate raised animals.

I was held up at gun point by two thugs in 1989. So yes I have been there and done that. I also had a friend murdered and I still do not support the death penalty. Yes, the act of killing an animal can be brutal. There are methods that are less so than others. Would you rather be tortured to death or killed quickly? The way you make it sound you are dead either way so there is no difference. I believe there is a huge difference.

I do not support the abuse of animals where abuse is not warranted or needed. If you are going to place the killing of the animal in the same category as keeping a young cow penned up so it cannot walk that is a conclusion I do not agree with. Most animals do not have self awareness. They do not understand the concept of death like humans do. My cat does not experience self pity or fear of the future. They experience fear of the immediate situation. If I walk up to a cow with a knife or a gun or what ever, they will not be afraid of it. They will be dead before they know what happened. They can experience fear, so far as they can experience it. Using your metric, I see no reason to abuse an animal beyond when they are killed.

 

[EastCheats]

Off topic but WTF!

Today's lesson boys and girls!

View attachment 9512

I read the article.

I like it. Handouts lead to dependency. Having grown up in a family where both parents were executives and had high paying positions, when friends were driving brand new Trans Ams and Camaros I was bagging groceries to scratch enough together for a '75 Monte Carlo. When I decided to take flying lessons at age 16, I swept hangars to pay for the lesssons.

I was not happy at the time to see friends getting that new car at 16. I understand the message. Stand on your own two feet and don't expect a handout. Besides, my parents expected me to be own my own after college and not move back home and stay until I turned 30.

 

[EastCheats]

Ms Tree,

I've read the responses.

I don't think anybody here is pro animal torture or abuse. They are pro free market.

 

[Ms Tree]

I see that as a fine line. While they them selves may not be OK with animal abuse (a matter of definition I know) they and you do seem to be OK with it being left up to popular vote, free market or what ever.


I do not believe it is OK to force dogs to fight to the death for our entertainment. I do not believe a person should be allowed to burn an animal to death for prurient entertainment. I do not believe it is OK to gorge a duck so that we can enjoy a tasty liver. I believe that is animal abuse and I will support any laws that prevent this or similar actions from happening.

 

[Kev3188]

 

[EastUS1]

I do not believe it is OK to gorge a duck so that we can enjoy a tasty liver.

Well...Plenty of people don't believe any of us should even eat meat at all. If that idea ever became the majority view; would you be perfectly fine eschewing carnivorous delights for the remainder of your life? How much of your personal liberty and freedom are you willing to sacrifice to suit whimsical and ever changing social trends? I'd suggest further consideration on that last, prior to waving pom poms for the passage of yet more "Big Brother" laws dictating how you/I/all may live...or even eat. It's NEVER the case that, once the guv-mint's sizeable camel nose is inside the tent...that it EVER leaves said tent.....Period.

 

[Ms Tree]

That how I view them but I realize that this belief is not main stream. My animals live better than most people I know. Everyone I know says they want to come back as one of my animals.

Bottom line for me thatI believe animals deserve some protection. Sentient animals deserve more protection in my opinion.

 

[signals]

So Ms Tree how many children do you have?

 

[signals]

Geese brought down a plane....US 1549!

I'll bet most animal rights activists would feel more sorry for a dead animal than a dead person.

Get me going on these poor little rich kids that resort to vandalism and terrorism to promote the rights of animals I find tasty!

 

[EastUS1]

My animals live better than most people I know. Everyone I know says they want to come back as one of my animals.

Bottom line for me thatI believe animals deserve some protection.

1) You seem a caring person, and I've no doubt that the various "critters" in not only our own households, but throughout the country...generally live better than does the majority of the human population on the planet....many millions of which are virtually or actually starving, or dying from untreated illnesses as we speak.

2) No argument there, but it's my belief that sufficently protective laws already exist, and the issuance of further, trendy intrusions is both unwarranted and counterproductive to personal liberty.

I've seen precious little in my lifetime that's ever been at all "improved" by the guv-mint's "gentle" doings...and much that has suffered greatly instead. A disgusting memory comes to mind from years ago. Envision the docks at Monterey. The "genius" politicians had recently passed laws "protecting" the sea lions....at least from human beings. Enroute to lunch after a pleasant shore dive/kelp forest excursion; my brother and I found ourselves utterly appalled at the sight of sea lions all over the decks of private boats docked there. They were, of course "protected" and thus; couldn't be dealt with in ANY reasonable way. Get this; one craft, an otherwise nice looking sailboat, approx 21 feet long or so...had been SUNK by the sheer weight of sea lions that had earlier infested it!...I kid you not! The damm things were all over many boats, and one can only wonder how the owners of these fine toys must have felt about the glorious new laws. In addition to swelling the numbers of sea lions,...well...guess what other population then also increased exponentially?....If you're thinking white sharks...you win the prize. None now need to go to Australia for the study of them, since the glorious guv-mint has provided what is now one of, or even the most dense and available populations of great whites to be found anywhere....in waters I used to love to dive in. Net effect of those "Brilliant" laws? = Literally tons of sea lions crapping on and even sinking boats. An utterly disgusting, stinking environment where once a lovely one existed at those docks. God alone knows how many friggin' deadly predators are nowadays happily swimming and eating in what used to be fine dive spots. That's all just one example of government "improvements" via mindless, touchy-feely, feel-good BS legislation. I won't even start on the obvious insanity of "protecting" such cuddly little creatures as mountain lions...who've already brutally killed several people..since they're nowadays "protected". I've cynically wondered if any of those attacked were supporters of the legislative insanity...and, if so, what truly shocking horror must have existed at being, in an instant, cast back into the stone age, without weaponry of any kind, and at the tender "mercy" of a vicious predator....one must indeed shudder at even the thought.

It's become trendy to place animals above even human beings where concern and "rights" are involved...which is unarguably, clinically insane behavior. Rather than follow (or worse, enhance and encourage that trend)....well...I'll accept some abused ducks any day.