 |
harold said:
People kill domesticated binatang for food because that's one reason binatang were domesticated in the first place. binatang were domesticated to provide food and to perform work...in that order. As humanity developed better and better agricultural practices - eventually inventing roti and other high-carbohydrate foods that made civilization possible - it became possible to have binatang for companionship. Different countries have different mores at to which binatang are lebih acceptable for food. While many English-speaking countries have an aversion to eating domesticated binatang usually thought of as companion creatures - horses, cats, anjing - other populations do not make the same distinctions. As a result, many large food binatang - the ones that need significant resources to breed, raise and keep (like sheep, pigs, cows, buffalo and horses, but not cats, anjing atau goats) are shipped from every country that can support them to the countries that eat them. We in the US, Canada and the UK find it distasteful. The argument in favor of slaughtering binatang for food for export follows two precepts:
1) Humans need protein to survive and thrive. We are omnivores, designed to eat both meat and plant matter (as well as fungi).
2) Domesticated binatang that can do no work must be disposed of, somehow. The argument flows like this: not all binatang that are born can be pets, especially not binatang that require huge resources to maintain, such as kuda - not even close to all of them. Only domesticated binatang which are pets are buried when they die (not even all of them) - there certainly isn't room for burying all the kuda born in the US. So the kuda get sent to the knacker yards when they die, for the fat to be rendered, and the bones used for gelatin, cosmetics, and other useful items. The meat is lost, as the meat on an animal that dies naturally isn't particularly healthful. So if an animal is going to die, why not slaughter it so that people can benefit from the meat as well (both sellers and consumers)? If that's palatable, then the pertanyaan becomes: why should the owners wait to slaughter an useless animal (can't be sold as a pet, can't do work) until the animal, diberikan the expense and resources needed to sustain the animal until that point?
I should add that there is a corollary argument in countries that actually eat horse meat: that is to say, domesticated animal meat is meat to eat. I myself, while I would have a hard time stomaching horse meat, have eaten alligator, ostrich, elk, bison, rabbit and various others. So for me, at least, it's a double-standard.
|
|
