Sure you can, for some, that is how we lead our lives. We raise & breed the animals, look after the animals & the day comes when we send them away to be returned as neat little packages ready for the freezer.
Raising something as food does not stop us caring a lot for those animals, we do not think less of them, give less care to the welfare of such animals, or less attention to the dietry needs of such animals, if anything, they get more attention than we give ourselves.
But honestly, the first thing you do when you call up animal health & get your holding and or stock number to allow you do keep such animals, is also use the knowledge thats at the end of the phone to update yourself on legislation covering slaughter & where your nearest option to have the animal slaughtered is.
If you search the dictionary for the meanings of: 'Compassionate' it can mean: having or showing compassion;to show pity; being humane.. A variety of ways to define it. Alternatively, a carnivor is simply anything that eats meat..
I think that if you are going to choose to eat meat, you should only be doing so compassionately. That is, to try and be humane and to show compassion towards how the animal lives & dies.
There are several reasons for avoiding even ethically produced meat and other animal products on health grounds (saturated fat and cholesterol), animal welfare grounds (they are capable of suffering and do not want to die) and environmental grounds (meat production is a terribly inefficient method of feeding people).
If you are going to eat meat, you should not eat much - certainly not everyday. You should buy local, free-range and organic from someone you know who raises and slaughters their animals to the highest ethical standards.And, given that the animal gave its life to feed you, you should not waste any of it.
But when it comes down to it, we do not need to eat meat to live. It is a menu choice. Is it not ultimately immoral to kill something so that you have some brief pleasure from the taste of its flesh? Is its life not worth more than a transitory pleasure? We can nourish ourselves and enjoy good tasty food without taking a life. Is this "conscientious carnivore" lark not really just an attempt to salve a guilty conscience by those who know deep down that killing animals for food is wrong?
It's great that people want to take care of their animals and give them a good life and tend to their every need. However, the end result is the same. Death. Surely it's more compassionet to look after an animal well and not kill it. We look after dogs & cats like they're our own flesh & blood but they don't end up killed 2 months later do they.
But when it comes down to it, we do not need to eat meat to live. It is a menu choice. Is it not ultimately immoral to kill something so that you have some brief pleasure from the taste of its flesh? Is its life not worth more than a transitory pleasure? We can nourish ourselves and enjoy good tasty food without taking a life. Is this "conscientious carnivore" lark not really just an attempt to salve a guilty conscience by those who know deep down that killing animals for food is wrong?
Do animals apologise or feel guilty for killing for food? NO. Vegetarianism for this reason simply ignores the fact that WE ARE MEAT EATERS! It doesn't make sense. What, do you suggest, should we do with the vast numbers of cattle and livestock that now exist. Cull them? Set them free (effectively the same)? If you are vegetarian for this reason alone, trying to make meat-eaters feel guilty is futile and counter-productive. Surely you would be better fighting for the welfare of the animals. Holier than thee? I think not.
I read Tom Hogkinsons article with interest however he contradicts himself. He states he killed his animals in a painless manner and yet at the beginning of the article he states that one squealed for seconds after being shot in the head.
That doesn't sound painless to me. There is no such thing as humane killing. Meat is murder.
