On Slaughter/Euthanasia and Goats

Did you see Westland/Hallmark Meat Co. President Steve Mendell on the news yesterday? He defended himself and during his statement he said that the cows in the HSUS video "were not harvested . . . were not slaughtered . . . . They were euthanized and removed."

What the heck kind of doublespeak is that? They killed the cows after they tortured them, end of story. Technically, if euthanasia is the killing of someone who frankly is better off dead, and slaughtering is killing as well, slaughter could be considered euthanasia, no? And if it's not, because euthanasia is humanely ending someone's life, what does that say about slaughter?

And "harvested?" Isn't that what you do to crops?

Finally, Mendell says, "[I]t would be financial suicide for a company to harvest or process a cow that it believes to be sick." Anyone who has seen any large-scale farming operation of cows, chickens or pigs, knows that to be false, and I think that the fact that his company is "ruined" is evidence that. Sick, mutilated chickens enter the food supply; crippled, spent dairy cows enter the food supply; and horses with fractures are drugged so they can race (ditto for Greyhounds). Exploiters claiming it doesn't make economic sense to use injured animals (when they get caught doing so) should not be believed. If your business is set up to get the most out of an animal, your mission is to do that for as long as possible to maximize the return on your investment.

As for goats, I know many of you have given up on the folks at Ideal Bite. Their latest tip is to get a goat to replace your lawnmower. In the comments on the blog post discussing the tip, no one has said the obvious: Get a Neuton battery-powered mower rather than having an animal bred and transported to you, whom you will have to (I hope) care for, including veterinary care, and provide plenty of space for. Not to mention the idea, on the face of it, is profoundly offensive (at least to my sensibilities, but that's me). It's tough to know where to start with this one.

Comments

[kim]

First of all, running a slaughterhouse is indefensible, period. But when I heard this yesterday, I was like "Yeah, they were forcing the cows to stand with bulldozers and shooting water up their noses, to pass USDA inspections, just so they could "euthanize" them." Right, buddy. Does anyone really buy into this crap?

[Billy]

Thanks for discussing this.

Meat eaters tend to grasp at anything to justify what they're doing. If the slaughterhouses can use a term like "euthanasia" rather than "slaughter" they'll do so. This is comparable to "free-range" animal products. It's all advertising gimmicks in order to lull the consumer into a false sense that the animals were "processed" humanely.