Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aberkok
I don't see what's so difficult to understand, Menoman. It is better to use your money to support a system of production that is ethical. If I'm interpreting sweetpea's post correctly, all she's really saying is that being more compassionate about what we eat is... more compassionate.
I think she brought it up because there's definitely a contingent in here who doesn't seem to want to look past their taste buds.
I'm more concerned with the quality of life than the quality of the death.
|
thank you aberkok, you summed up my post succinctly.
In WA state where I live, consumers are given the choice. On most products, we are offered the average raised product and then next to it, the tiny bit more expensive free-range-organic choice, which is in my opinion paying a little bit extra so your food had better quality of life. Btw, at least in this state, it is certified, so it's not just a label slapped on to make an extra few cents.
All I'm saying is... given that choice, if you are given it as a consumer, why WOULDN'T you choose the free-range-organic product?? Unless you literally don't have the extra 10 bucks or so a month that it takes to go free-range-organic, I don't see why everyone isn't making that choice for their food to have better quality of life. But if you have that extra 10 bucks a month, why not make that choice?
and aberkok, you make an excellent point, I care more about their quality of life while they are living than the manner of their death. nicely put.
Do I feel it's ethical to care about the quality of life of my food? Yes, I think it's my duty as a intelligent and compassionate consumer when given the choice and when possible to enable my food to have had a better life.
*shrug* It's just something I happen to care about, if it's not something another indivdual cares about, I cannot change that person's mind, I can only lead my life the way I see fit for myself.