The Spirituality of Killing Your Food

Regarding the comments that: This is true in a way, but also misleading. It can't be denied that, in order to farm vegetables in a large scale, habitat must be taken up, and that while harvesting those vegetables, some wild animals will be killed by the machinery, etc. So yes, in general, animals also die in order for vegetarians to eat. However, it is also well-known that it takes many times more acres to feed a person on meat than on vegetables. (See, e.g. http://www.vegforlife.org/earth.htm ; http://www.alternet.org/story/12162). Therefore, a meat centered diet robs many more wild animals of their habitats than a vegetable centered diet.

Also, the unintentional killing of wild animals during the cultivation and harvesting of crops is terrible, but I would argue that it is not equivalent to the intentional killing of animals for food. I think an analogy can be made to driving. Every year, many people are killed while driving. It is a virtual certainty that by (almost) all of us making the choice to drive cars, thousands of us will die or kill others on the road accidentally each year. This is a tragedy, and we should do our best to reduce this number. However, if some guy went around intentionally running people down in his car, nobody would buy it if he argued that accidental deaths are guaranteed on the highway each year, so killing people with his car on purpose didn't make him any worse than anyone else. I bring this up because this thread is about the spirituality of killing animals for food, and I believe that there is a big moral/spiritual difference between intentional and accidental killings.

Personally, I try to live a life of minimum negative impact on the earth and its creatures. This is a struggle, and I know that I don't do as well at it as I could, but I am trying to do more each year. For me, being a vegetarian is a big part of this effort.

__________________
And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.. And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.. They shall not hurt nor destroy In all my holy mountain For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.

Texican, I know where you are coming from, but the reality is that the amount of feed that livestock consume far exceeds the landspace and water needed to support a non meat diet.
So in effect- if everyone were vegetarians either 1. there would be more than enough food to feed all the planets peoples or 2. all that corn, soy, hayfields, etc used exclusively to feed livestock could be turned back into forest area.
It isn't an influx of vegetarians depleting the forest lands.

This idea has had a lot of press but is only true if you are using animals that are fed grain in the equation.
Our current agricultural practices for raising animals are based on animals that have been bred for size and production that can only be sustained with a grain diet.
But these were initially grass eating animals.

The grass-fed movement rejects those practices and breeds to bring back normal foraging traits.
Those animals graze on land that is marginal or not useable for farming purposes.

Gene Logsdon's "All Flesh is Grass" is a good resource that gives the statistical data backing those statements. Sorry, I don't know of a web source. I'm sure it's out there if you google "grass fed".

__________________
Hut on the Hill Farm
http://www.hutonthehill.org

Minnikin- I have the Logsdon book- a great read. But you are forgetting something. This isn't back in the day. This is today. Most store bought food is big huge fat cows. Big fat pigs. Chickens that won't lay without special ration.
Heritage breeds are far from the norm. What percent of people eat gras fed heritage breeds? Less than 1% I imagine.

So, for those of you of the arguement 'it takes more acreage to feed livestock than to feed a vegitarian' are you against research and farming for bio-fuels?

What's worse? Drilling for oil in the ocean, or growing corn to make into ethanol?

__________________
My best,

Melissa

And if we did not eat meat, animals would take over the world. They don't use birth control! I know in our area even with extensive hunting the deer & wild turkeys are taking over. I could not imagine how many diseased & starving animals there would be if we did not harvest some of them. Be a vegetarian is fine, but you should also thank us meat eaters for keeping the animal population under control. If we didn't, you wouldn't have any vegies to eat because Bambi & Thumper would be eating them instead.

As for giving thanks, I give all my thanks to God for providing us with the food we have. Whether it be vegetable or meat. All good & perfect gifts come from above!

__________________
I can't believe I deleted it!

Well I've waited to post here because I'm certain I'll be flamed for my views.. Oh well here goes anyway

My spirituality is earth based. So anytime I eat meat (havent butchered yet as we're still stuck in the city), cut down a plant, etc.. I give thanks to that plant/animal/ and mother earth.. Because everything is tied together in this circle of life.

I don't believe the crap about "the animals being here for us to use" bit.. As far as I'm concerned they have as much right to be here as we do; maybe more so as most critters were here far before humans.

Everything must absorb energy to sustain life. big fish eat little fish, the big fish are eaten by the bear. The bear also eats berries/honey/etc. then we eat the bear..

__________________
"Let the beauty we love, be what we do. There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." Rumi

Boy, that's one thing I like about this board: So many different outlooks on life, and a topic such as this is a fine illistrator of that point. I agree with you mystic, there should be a spiritual connection to your food. If we go back to what I consider the "sweet spot" in human evolution, we were really a bunch of nomadic grazers, taking both plant and animal as needed, however unreliable that was for the long term survival of a particular person. To recognise that connectection, and turn it into a spiritual aspect of your life, can be nothing but beneficial. As a homesteader, I see this as an being even more significant, since we are involved with every aspect of our foods life. I try to always have extra, and this makes the best gifts to my extended family that money can buy. In the summer, when all the nephews and neices are around, I never pass an opportunity to "turn them on" to this type of connection with the earth. They may or may not follow the homesteading path, but at the very least, they have a much better understanding of the life cycle of our food. When asked the question " how can you raise and kill your own food?" I reply with this: A tyson chicken lives it's entire life in a 1-foot cube, injected with god knows what, and is a number. All of my food is raised in the highest quality of life they could possibly have, and are butchered in the most humane ways possible.

I don't consider being connected to your food, being aware of the sacrifice involved in killing it, and being grateful for the sustenance and a bit saddened by its neccesity, spiritual. I thank the things I kill, and I also apologize to them. I do this out of respect, and because it makes me feel better.

I think that part of the problem with agribusinessand factory farming of livestock is that its counter movement is so extreme and doesn't consider the feasibility of their platform. Give your average omnivorous human a choice between eating meat that is raised in confinement, that was likely not slaughtered in a humane way vs. meat that led an enjoyable life up until its swift and as painless as possible demise and they will likely choose the kinder route. Offer them a 1/4 pound angus burger or a Tofu sandwich and they're going to pick the meat. If all of the energy that is poured into trying to convince people to become vegan/vegetarian was instead directed towards changing livestock husbandry practices to a more sustainable, less cruel model there might actually be a chance to shift things around a bit.

There was once a PBS program where a Native American explained why he thanked the buffalo before he killed it. Actual showed him doing so, back and forth close up of him then the buffalo. Personally, I thought that was interesting.

The most interesting thing I've noticed animals since I've been living and dealing with them on a daily bases is how they handle death. Well, to be more exact how they handle the death of another member of their flock. Check it out, get on with life as if not much has really changed. I envy them that.

So, if you wish to thank your food before you kill or eat it and that makes life better for you I see no harm in your doing so. If you can't but help humanize your animals, and therefore can no longer eat meat, and not doing so makes your life more enjoyable I think that's what you should do.

I'm going to keep working on the idea of someday being able to slaughter my own food, so far it's only snails, fish, and other seafood. And working on being more like animals towards death.

Hugs
Marlene

__________________
It is the one with persistence and determination that brings great ideas into being.

If all of the energy that is poured into trying to convince people to become vegan/vegetarian was instead directed towards changing livestock husbandry practices to a more sustainable, less cruel model there might actually be a chance to shift things around a bit.[/QUOTE]

You are absolutely right.

Minnikin, this is an interesting claim. I understand the idea that having animals graze on land that is unsuitable for farming does not take away from other farming activities, but do you know whether that "unsuitable" land was previously a habitat for wild animals, and for some reason could not continue to be a habitat once it was used for grazing? And I'd also be interested to know how many acres it takes to feed a person on grass fed meat, versus corn/soy/other veg products. I'd be willing to bet that the meat is still more, but it's just a guess--I don't have any sources to cite on that, either. I did a quick google search for some stats, because I'd really like to know, but I didn't come up with anything. There's also the point that Farmer Joe raised--even if grass fed meat is no more intensive in its land usage than raising veggies, it's unfortunately not an option for most people today in this country, yet, anyway.
I'm pretty sure you're kidding, but I just have to ask--you're kidding, right? Hunting might prevent mass starvation and other ugly deaths for certain species of wild animals, but I don't think that broiler chickens and angus cattle are in any danger of taking over the world. According to the USDA, the average American in 2001 ate 187.8 pounds of meat in a year ( http://www.reapinc.org/MEAT%20CONSUM...20THE%20US.htm ). The CIA estimates the US population in 2006 to be over 298 million ( https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...elds/2119.html ). If you multiply those numbers, it looks like America consumes about 55.6 billion pounds of meat each year. I wonder what percentage of those pounds come from hunted animals each year, or humanely raised grass-fed, for that matter. The best estimate I can come up with is based on how many animals are killed each year. According to the HSUS, 10.2 billion land animals (excluding aquatic animals) are raised and killed for meat, milk, or eggs each year in America. Also according to the HSUS, 100 million land animals are reported killed by hunters each year (they recognize that many more may be killed but not reported). Even assuming that all of the hunted animals were eventually eaten, which is clearly not true, less than 1% of animals killed for meat would be hunted animals.
I basically agree with this. I think that the torturous and unsustainable practices of agribusiness are more deplorable than the deaths of all those billions of animals each year. Death is one thing--torture is another thing altogether. That's why I appreciate homesteaders so much, and hunters who actually hunt for food, and people like Temple Grandin, who has done so much already to revolutionize the treatment of corporate farmed animals.

__________________
And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.. And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.. They shall not hurt nor destroy In all my holy mountain For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.

I slaughter my own animals to eat and to take that life so that I can eat is an ever present, very sobering reality that makes me treat my animals that are still around better. I do however have a very hard time putting the life of a human on the same level as that of an animal. We are not the same.

I believe that everyone who eats meat should have to kill their own. Not with a rifle either but up close and personal. I am not jewish but the kosher method of slitting the throat would be a good way to illustrate the terrible shape that mankind is in. Having to take a life in this manner allows a person to see the life pour out the animal for no other reason than to be food for them.

I also have a very hard time attaching a political message to such a thing. It's a time for reflection, not political activism.

__________________
Dahc.

Marlene, that is an interesting observation. Of course, animals don't always react that way to death--I've seen dogs and cats become depressed and even die of "unknown causes" shortly after the death of another member of their household, either animal or human. I've seen nature programs that show animals abandoning the safety of their herd to stay with the body of their deceased offspring, or sister, or mother. And of course we all know of the mother animals that will sacrifice themselves to protect their young. But I don't think any of this is really the most telling behavior to look at to understand how animals regard death. I think it is more relevant to look at how an animal reacts to its own mortal danger. Does it stand there passively and accept its fate (if it is clear to the animal what fate is coming), or does it run, fight, scream, squeal, struggle, and generally appear terrified? Does the antelope see the lion approaching and lie down to wait as if death is no big deal? I don't believe that it is "humanizing" animals to see that they clearly would prefer to live rather than die. Humans and other animals are both deeply imbued with an incredibly strong drive to stay alive and healthy--and it might even be argued that humans have a much weaker emotional attachment to living than other animals, because I haven't heard many stories of other animals committing suicide, or doing things that they know are detrimental to their health, like smoking cigarettes or taking drugs.

As for the "animals being here for us to use" bit--I guess that they're here for us to use as much as we're here for them to use. If a lion is hungry, I suppose it has every right to kill and eat a human, and if a human is hungry, I suppose we have every right to kill and eat a chicken. I think the difference between us and the lion is that we have a choice. If I am hungry, I can eat a nice bowl of pasta with fresh pesto and a tomato salad, or some suffed roasted squash, or a nice big slice of blueberry pie. Mmmm.... I have no honest need to kill animals for food, and I believe that killing without dire need is wrong, so I don't. If I were starving and that were my only option, then I would, because I believe I have a right to fight for my survival. I believe that animals are God's creatures as much as we are, and that we are to be shepherds of creation, not wanton consumers/destroyers of it. Biblically speaking, before the fall, all animals had a vegetarian diet, and the prophesies include visions that that state of peace will return to the world (see Isa. citation below). The Bible permits people to eat the flesh of other animals in this imperfect and fallen world, but it is certainly not required, and there is ample evidence that it is not preferred. Of course, that line of thinking is not for everyone, but it seems right to me.

__________________
And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.. And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.. They shall not hurt nor destroy In all my holy mountain For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.

Actually I wasn't kidding. If we did not slaughter & eat any animals, including beef cows, pigs, & chickens, they would continue to breed & you would have waaaaay too many animals on this earth. If some think people are overpopulating, let us quit killing animals & see how long before the world could not sustain the animals. Let's see, rabbits having babies every 30 days, usually 7-8 at a time. Goats have babies every 5 months with usually twins. Chickens hatching out 20 eggs at a time every 21 days. Sows having a dozen babies at a time. It's not just the wild animals that would get out of hand. Look how the wild mustangs get overpopulated & cause problems. They have the wild mustang adoption thing for a reason. They get out of control if left to breed with no control over it. So eating meat IMO is a good thing!

__________________
I can't believe I deleted it!

Hm. Perhaps if people stopped eating meat, but continued to provide shelter and food and water to broiler chickens and cattle, and all the other animals that are now intentionally bred for food, OR if they just set the currently living billions of farmed animals free on the highways, then the population might get out of control--but that wasn't exactly the scenario I was envisioning. I was assuming that if the demand for meat dropped radically, people (agribusiness) would stop allowing the animals to breed in such massive quantity. Sort of like with horses, especially draft horses, when they became unnecessary for transportation and farming (See, eg., http://www.percheron.ca/history.htm ). Of course, there happens to be a horse overpopulation now, but we generally blame that on irresponsible horse management, not on the fact that people aren't eating enough horses--and it certainly doesn't rise to the level of horses "taking over the world". I would firmly expect that if Americans for some reason all stopped eating meat, the currently living individuals of that species would mostly be killed and eaten, and the remainder would be snatched up by "fanciers" not wanting to let the bloodlines die out. Extinction of the breeds would likely be much more of a risk than them "taking over the world."

By the way, the wild mustangs' "overpopulation" primarily caused problems to the ranchers and their grazing land for cattle, etc.--yet another instance of commercial meat farming taking up wild habitat and leading to the destruction of wild animals. ( http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/history.htm )

__________________
And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.. And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.. They shall not hurt nor destroy In all my holy mountain For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.

Gees!!! You like meat kill something and eat it. You don't like killing meat but want to eat it buy some meat. You don't like meat don't eat it. Life is simple !!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not sure that grass fed meat would fare quite so badly, if you factor in the costs of manufacturing meat substitutes, transporting them all over the country, etcetera. One thing I've been noticing lately is the surge in organic and natural foods available through mainstream channels. Rather than moving towards more sustainability in the way we grow our food, agribusiness and major food manufacturers have learned how to apply their existing models to more vegetarian/ "healthy" habits. I saw organic Post raisin bran the other day. It's also interesting to look at who owns the major natural foods distributors. It's pretty difficult to buy meat substitutes or "organic" food without lining the pockets of the same major corporations that make the livestock industry what it is.

I'll wager that grass fed beef is more sustainable and environmentally sound than a Boca burger from Kraft any day of the week. Especially if the beef is purchased locally and not shipped from the other side of the country. The only real way to know that your food sources are sustainably raised is to do it yourself, or really know the farm and farmer you get it from.

I have seen cows really freak out when their yearling was killed in front of them. (not me) I always make sure they are seperate when I butcher.

__________________
marching to the beat of a different drummer

I'm not a betting person, but I'd definitely take that wager if the beef was not local, and I might still take it even if the beef was local. That's a tough one. I agree that one of the very worst things for the environment going on right now is how far the food travels to get to our plates, and all of the packaging that goes on it. That's why I get my eggs and milk from local homesteaders whom I know (and will eventually get my own hens and goats), and why I try to grow as many of my own fruits/veggies as possible, eat seasonal foods, and buy most of the rest from local sources, and buy very few packaged/prepared foods. I do buy Boca (which was only bought out by Kraft recently) and Tofurkey brand products, but I'd like to switch to making my own meat substitute products soon. And as a side note, vegetarians do not have to eat those meat substitutes. My mom has been a vegetarian for over 40 years now, and she won't touch them because because she's grossed out by how "meat-like" they are. But like you, I'm concerned by how big agribusiness may be able to twist the organic/health food market. Wal-mart going paritally organic is one of the scarier bits of news I've heard lately.

__________________
And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.. And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.. They shall not hurt nor destroy In all my holy mountain For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord.