The Meat We Eat

You look around your table: it’s that time of the year again. You know the one where the family gets together, perhaps a few of them get drunk and say things they shouldn’t, or if you’re one of the select few families that actually get to have a good time together, during this day, then you can already smell the roasting of the fowl in the oven, or perhaps being carved already. As a general population we never consider where that Turkey or Ham came from that ended up on our tables and into our figures, or rather a part of. Where do these animals come from? How are they treated before they are chosen for slaughter? All are questions that are asked by many people who argue that we shouldn’t be eating these animals.

“Most of these creatures have been raised under conditions that are, as Americans know—or, at least, by this point have no excuse not to know—barbaric.” (Kolbert)

Let’s consider for a minute that we, a society as a whole, made an attempt to raise animals in a more natural setting. Rather than large farms specifically meant for breeding and slaughter, we raise them on small farms and let them graze and reproduce naturally. Let’s also consider the United States Population according to one article was 305,529,237: U.S. population estimate for Jan 1, 2009 (www.usnews.com). Can we actually expect to raise animals not only for production of milk and other various things they provide, but also for the slaughter yards to feed our over 300 million population? I would tend to side of improbability in that assumption. Although the health benefits would certainly be a positive outcome from such actions, it’s very unlikely that anything like this could occur. So, let’s take this further shall we? We’ve talked about the methods on which animals are reproduced and the efficiency of such methods. Let’s delve into the treatment. This is however, a large controversy in the article by Elizabeth Kolbert, “How is it that Americans, so solicitous of the animals they keep as pets, are so indifferent toward the ones they cook for dinner? The answer cannot lie in the beasts themselves. Pigs, after all, are quite companionable, and dogs are said to be delicious.” (Kolbert) This is a logical question, and the answer is simple. We can’t raise these animals in natural environment because of what was previously stated, and at the same time they are needed in this large amount of production to be beneficial for society as a whole. It can’t be dependent on the individual cattle farmer to raise enough beef to feed the entirety of the United States. So the solution isn’t too hard to contemplate, we have a dirty little secret that means we are harsh to those we are about to consume. Let’s consider the facts though; these animals are raise to be food. I won’t waste your time with pleasantries, we are raising these beasts and fowl to eat them, that’s the bottom line, considering this little bit of information, in order for this to occur, and we have to kill them: these animals must be put to death prior to their consumption. Is their honestly a pleasant way to do this?

“Bred to produce the maximum amount of meat in the minimum amount of time, fryers often become so top-heavy that they can’t support their own weight. At slaughtering time, they are shackled by their feet, hung from a conveyor belt, and dipped into an electrified bath known as “the stunner.” (Kolbert)
Although the article in question cited no sources, it is important to consider the possibilities of these accusations. Even if everything that was stated is true, is it really important? The animals are delivered in a certain condition that must be adhered to, otherwise for our own well being, yes yours and mine, and anyone else that eats meat would have health and risks issues. These conditions are very much monitored by the U.S. Department of Health and Agriculture. Anytime anything that has life is killed it’s a sad situation. But are vegans any better? Plants and vegetation are forms of life. Yet they have no moral qualms about eating them. This topic seems like one that people just create to cause rift in our society. It seems the common reaction to the question I just proposed that Vegetations are forms of life brought similar reactions from the vegan population as a whole, which is self-righteous at beast. They believe that since plants do not have a central nervous system, they aren’t harming the plant, it can’t feel pain. As well as the fact that they eat the fruits from a plant not the entire plant itself. This just simply isn’t true. (Forum) Celery is a whole pant. A lot of root based foods are plants, Turnips, potatoes and Asparagus are all plants that are eaten by the destruction of the plant. Life isn’t defined as having feeling. If this were the case the decision to take people off machines when they were brain dead wouldn’t be a legal matter at all. Life is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have self-sustaining biological processes from those that do not. (Wikipedia) This only further supports the argument that humans can’t survive without death. It’s essential in our society that we have a balance of creation and destruction, a chaos theory if you will. This balance includes the need for one or some to die so many can live. It’s the natural order of things, and how this world operates. Believing that you are “better” , or smarter, or even “have your eyes open” because you choose this lifestyle is just self delusional. Everyone has a choice, and at the end of the day we all have the same goal, Survive, and for the most part we do whatever it takes.







Works Cited
Forum. Yahoo Answers. June 2009. December 2009 <http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090614075638AALHIf9>.
Kolbert, Elizabeth. "Flesh of Your Flesh - Should you eat meat?" The New Yorker (2009).
Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 22 Nov 2009. Dec 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life>.
www.usnews.com. "U.S. Population." U.S. News (2008).