undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdep_b5y ago0 comments

I'm simply stating that raising them to eat is better than just gassing them immediately. If you're against eating meat as a principle then it's probably pretty useless. But eating the less wanted meat or produce really helps preventing pollution through overproduction of food that is never eaten.

There are many people that think it's more ethical to kill a cow just for it's meat than to eat the meat of a horse, which is never bred just for it's meat.

Both capon and horse meat are tastier than chicken and veal.

0 comments

La1n5y ago

>I'm simply stating that raising them to eat is better than just gassing them immediately.

I think that is more of an ethical debate than a fact. One could argue that most farmed chickens live a life of suffering, and keeping them suffering long is not better than gassing them immediately.

dep_bOP5y ago

But the same goes for the chickens that remain to lay eggs.

rsynnott5y ago

> I'm simply stating that raising them to eat is better than just gassing them immediately.

On what basis, though? From a humane perspective, the quicker you kill a chicken the less suffering it does, and it's not like the culled chicks are ultimately wasted.

carlmr5y ago

I see your point, it was just the wording of "not killing" which I found a bit odd. The environmental argument makes sense, the ethical argument depends on many factors.

kgwgk5y ago

> than to eat the meat of a horse, which is never bred just for its meat.

Maybe you meant to write

> the meat of a horse which was not bred just for its meat

Millions of horses are raised every year for their meat.

dep_bOP5y ago

> Millions of horses are raised every year for their meat.

I don't know enough about the numbers worldwide to give you real hard data but the majority of all of the horse meat consumed worldwide is not from horses bred with the sole purpose to breed it for it's meat. I have the idea that it's not more than 30%.

Also the horses that are primarily bred for food are for a large part free roaming in places where other cattle simply wouldn't survive. This in contrast to other meats (chicken, veal, pork) that are often raised in factory like environments.

kgwgk5y ago

"Not the majority" is quite different from "never" :-)

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsdep_b5y ago0 comments

There are many people that think it's more ethical to kill a cow just for it's meat than to eat the meat of a horse, which is never bred just for it's meat.

Both capon and horse meat are tastier than chicken and veal.

0 comments

La1n5y ago

>I'm simply stating that raising them to eat is better than just gassing them immediately.

I think that is more of an ethical debate than a fact. One could argue that most farmed chickens live a life of suffering, and keeping them suffering long is not better than gassing them immediately.

dep_bOP5y ago

But the same goes for the chickens that remain to lay eggs.

rsynnott5y ago

> I'm simply stating that raising them to eat is better than just gassing them immediately.

On what basis, though? From a humane perspective, the quicker you kill a chicken the less suffering it does, and it's not like the culled chicks are ultimately wasted.

carlmr5y ago

I see your point, it was just the wording of "not killing" which I found a bit odd. The environmental argument makes sense, the ethical argument depends on many factors.

kgwgk5y ago

> than to eat the meat of a horse, which is never bred just for its meat.

Maybe you meant to write

> the meat of a horse which was not bred just for its meat

Millions of horses are raised every year for their meat.

dep_bOP5y ago

> Millions of horses are raised every year for their meat.

kgwgk5y ago

"Not the majority" is quite different from "never" :-)

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse