A Preposterous Proposition

November 5, 2008 at 5:41 PM 5 comments

Last night was the California General Elections night. Obama now needs to plan for his inauguration and has proven that people other than old white men can become President. However, I am not here to discuss the pros or cons of his impending presidency. Instead, I am going to perform a dissertation on the 63 percent (6.25 million) of Californian voters who committed a terrible mistake in saying yes to Proposition 2.

Proposition 2 “requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.” – Official Voter Information Guide

First, let’s talk about the “humane” side of the problem, which seems to be the entire reason behind this whole mess. People think that animals suffer from being keeped in confinement. They think that if they were allowed to “turn around”, among other things, that they would be somehow happier.

If an animal is not allowed to move, than it will not move. However, with the extra space, which isn’t all that much really, will provide the creature with the illusion that it can move. Therefore, it may try to escape and hurt itself. It’s like if you’re stupid but you know you’re stupid – how would that make you feel?

Then there are the health issues:

“According to the United States Animal Health Assocation, hens housed in cage-free and free-range housing systems have substantially higher risk of exposure to Avian Influenza, Salmonella, and other diseases … because they have access to the outdoors.” – Wikipedia

With all this concern for Bird Flu, you wouldn’t want your eggs to somehow have a human-transmissible version of H5N1. I hear salmonella isn’t that much more pleasant.

While confined, the animals are kept in a controlled environment, where unwanted substances like feces and urine are removed. Contact with wild animals that could possibly be carrying diseases and parasites would also be prevented.

There’s also economic ramficiations. You’ll now be paying more for potentially more lethal meat and eggs. Someone has to pay for all those upgrades to the farms. Since the owners are predictably seeking a profit, and they’re probably going to be government subsidized, it’s you who will be paying in the end, whether in the form of higher prices and/or higher taxes. In this day and age, with the economy as it is, you’ll probably need that extra money.

Additionally, the proposition will ban “almost all modern egg product production in California … wipes out Californian’s access to locally grown, fresh eggs … [drives] up prices at grocery stores and restaurants and creates a dependency from eggs shipped from [out of state]” – Wikipedia

This destruction of the California egg industry will be another blow to an already severely damanged economy.

Most importantly, your beef will now be less tender. It is said that bear meat is tough and stringy, partially because it’s all muscle. By allowing cows to move around, they will develop their muscle, and therefore be less tender. Also, the fat accumulated by lack of movement contributes to the tenderness as well as the flavor and juiciness of the steak.

By voting yes on Proposition 2, you have endangered your soy-free source of protein, made it more expensive, hurt our economy even more, and made beef less enjoyable. Because of your affinity for animals, the very creatures you are trying to save will now be even more unhappy. You have failed me, the 37 percent of voters who logically said NO, and meat-eaters across California.

Sources: Wikipedia: California Proposition 2 (2008)

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Uncategorized.

If I could vote… Sex is a lot of work.

5 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Stacey Derbinshire  |  November 5, 2008 at 5:45 PM

    I found your site on Google and read a few of your other entires. Nice Stuff. I’m looking forward to reading more from you.

    Reply
  • 2. Mr. Jackson  |  November 6, 2008 at 12:13 AM

    Your comments on Proposition 2 is rather interesting. I disagree with you.

    You wrote:

    If an animal is not allowed to move, than it will not move. However, with the extra space, which isn’t all that much really, will provide the creature with the illusion that it can move. Therefore, it may try to escape and hurt itself. It’s like if you’re stupid but you know you’re stupid – how would that make you feel?

    There is no logic behind the statement above. First of all, if there is no room to move, the animal will try to move. Why? They need to. Secondly, no animal is stupid enough to hurt itself escaping. Thirdly, if “it isn’t all that much”, then it will not cost too much either, right?

    Animals feces are removed? How? Do they have toilets? Actually, a “controlled” environment is not that clean.

    You are a very evil man. You are taking advantage of the poor animals by stuffing words into their mouths. You said, “the very creatures you are trying to save will now be even more unhappy”. You taking advantage of the fact that animals do not have voices is just immoral and inhumane. Many notorious people, such as Kim Jong il and Joesph Stalin, commit these acts.

    By voting yes of Proposition 2, you have endangered your soy-free source of protein, made it more expensive, hurt our economy even more, and made beef less enjoyable.

    This statement is my favorite, only because it is the most inaccurate statement of the 21st century.
    1. There is plenty of protein in the water.
    2. Eating beef is hurting our economy. If there were no beef, the world hunger crises would not exist. If you have studied ecology, you should know that energy is lost going up the trophic pyramid. In fact, only 10% of usable energy is preserved. The rest is waste.
    3. Vast regions of land are needed for raising cattle. This region could easily be converted into farm, where soy products could be made. Soy products are not only great sources of protein, but also great contributors to rich soil. SInce they have bacteria that fix nitrogen, they are rich in nitrogen, a macronutrient of plants. Converting land for raising cattle into farm land would mitigate the world hunger crises and stymie global warming. Cows produce large amounts of methane every year, and methane is one of the biggest contributors to global warming.
    4. Meat is not necessary. In fact, humans could perfectly nourished with a diet of only corn and rice.

    Meat does have one purpose: Enjoyment. However, this enjoyment is expensive and inhumane.

    You have been awarded the accolade for the Most Inaccurate Statement of the 21st Century. Enjoy you prize.

    Reply
  • 3. You are sick  |  November 8, 2008 at 5:34 PM

    See video…

    Reply
  • 4. Beef will not be more chewy  |  November 8, 2008 at 5:40 PM

    Proposition 2 only applies to pigs that are pregnant, egg-laying hens, and calf raised for veal.

    Reply
  • 5. Wow...  |  November 13, 2008 at 7:25 PM

    wow….. you worship meat like someone else worships Harrison Ford.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Calendar

November 2008
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Blog Forecast

  • Cloudy with a chance of moufflets.

Feeds

Open to interpretation. All poorly constructed humor and errors are merely figments of your own imagination.

By viewing this content, whether reproduced here or elsewhere in any form, you realize that said content is product of a persona, and you agree to hold the persona separate from the identity of the author.

Copyright © 2008 - 2010 Moufflets.
All rights reserved.

Certain images are used without permission. Please notify if this presents an issue.

Creative Commons License
This work by Moufflets is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.


%d bloggers like this: