Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: PeterPrinciple
but higher pork prices to end this kind of “production” is one I would pay.
I don’t want to put words in you mouth

I'm glad you preambled your comments with that disqualifier, else I would have nominated you for an Olympic gold medal in Conclusion Jumping.

"You currently have the choice to buy the product you want and pay more . . ."
No. At present, at least in my area, I don't have the luxury of choosing the "organic" equivalent of pork - or beef/chicken for that matter. I'd rather be in a farm area where I could buy my meat from a rancher or farmer, who doesn't use those corralling approaches. (That being said, I don't fall for that "organic" bullcrap for vegetables.)

". . . but would use the force of law to reduce my choice."
No. Where on earth did you get that from?

"You believe the hype that putting chickens or pigs in cages is cruel."
Not hype. PETA and crew go overboard in these situations, but it sure as Hell isn't natural. (My wife's folks lived on a farm and I am familiar with the natural order of life.)

"The argument is I wouldn’t want to be in a cage so the chicken would not want to be there either. You believe the man-bear-pig theory. You can project your feelings on the pigs and chickens."
No. You must have picked up a copy of "Pyschoanalysis for Dummies" and extrapolated your newfound knowledge.

"You think we can feed all the people in the world with another production system, because this one isn’t perfect. But you haven’t a clue what that production system is."
You also picked up "Economics for Dummies" and did another extrapolation.

144 posted on 01/03/2015 4:03:59 PM PST by Oatka (This is America. Assimilate or evaporate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]


To: Oatka

but higher pork prices to end this kind of “production” is one I would pay.


I am sorry, but after reading the article and your comment above, anyone logically would assume you support those 3 points, especially a politician or activist. My point to you, me and the rest of FR, is be as clear as you can on issues. Don’t get manipulated. Notice the article directs one to an emotional response and note the comments.

I also will point out to you the paying more will not solve the perceived animal welfare problem. Chickens will be chickens and hogs will be hogs.

We are very close to the govt controlling our food system even more. And to be honest with you there are too many conservatives here who think the govt is the solution to the problem because it is perceived as easy. If we pass a law, that will solve the problem. Pay attention to what is written here. How may times to you see comments about freedom, choices and responsibility?

Your statement is the same as the following statements that have had unintended consequences as we have seen.

I would gladly pay a little more utilities to save the environment.

I would gladly pay a little more to help those that need medical help.


145 posted on 01/04/2015 8:02:11 AM PST by PeterPrinciple (Thinking Caps are no longer being issued but there must be a warehouse full of them somewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson