On Mon, 8 May 2000 16:41:36 -0700, Ingrid Bauer/J-C Catry
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:


>>But what does that mean if in the common western meat production about
>>10 times as much agricultural area is used, feeding one person
>>from meat than directly from crops? 10-fold bugs?
>
>An established  grass field ( composed of many species) will support a wide
>variety of animal  life forms( microscopic or macroscopic)  . Very
>different than in  annual vegetables or grains field  that require the
>destruction or
>removal of many  animal life forms every year ( thru tilling) . specially
>true in monoculture and even more so in farming including the use of
>chemicals.

jean-claude, i agree with what you wrote.
*if* you think of nice animals happyily grazing on a grass field,
or wild animals like deer or rabbit living in their natural environment,
then this is well acceptable way how animals should live.
If this is for meat production then the only remaining pain (or karma guilt)
is the last minute of killing the animal.
Rather short and *could* possibly even been done without the animal
knowing it, that it is killed.
No further complaints - and from one animal-ethic based vegetarian I've
heared the statement that she accepted hunting, because the animal
had a happy and natural life, opposed to -- the "normal" way.

I see that this ethics is not so much related to be vegetarian or not.
You can eat meat without killing, even more meat without much suffering
(natural grass fed). Same is not so shure with vegetarians wearing
snake leather or driving a car (latter i do - and like it).

You make your decision when you buy your meat. *most* meat is produced
from a gigantic agricultural space, even in a country with much space
and grasslands, like the USA. Just read how much of U.S. wheat is fed to
animals (i think about 50%). Even more with soy, corn. And this crops
beeing fed to animals are produced with maximum aggressivity in chemicals.
Even grain "finished" animals. They are finished - means fattened from
crops. I bet that this requires  still 2-3 fold the food energy of the meat.
(I think Wally's brother was able to tell how much grain is necessary
for "finishing").

So, if you want to avoid bug killing Tibet style (Ken's version)
you can choose in the supermarket from zero to x-fold desaster.
Most is x-fold and few is so clean as you describe.

And the clean one is the not so fat - right fat - right composition
meat that may be called paleo style. IMO as the only one, if you
learn about how paleo-animal food was.

>i have been vegetarian for many years mostly because of my own fear of
>death
>and suffering. it was one more step in my avoidance strategy to feelings.
>life caught me back and when i was cornered to experience my own death and
>pain on an hospital bed , and surrended to that feeling i started to
>experience how feeling of anything could be an enjoyable journey. The
>avoidance was the source of my suffering not the feeling of what i was
>trying to escape.

It is very nice, how you describe the experiences of your life.
Congratulations that you made it back to your feelings.
I think this is a main challenge for us western people.

Maybe this is the main reason for the "compassion" with our contemporary
animals - our own feelings, how it was if *we* were in such a place
in the slaughterhouse, the hen cage or wounded by an arrow.
Remainders of a time not so long ago, when humans, hominids and primates
were very much a prey to stronger predators.

Amadeus