dc wrote: Uh, wow... Ok, who cares? I care. The point is that it makes light of killing animals. The point is it makes light of suffering. It has nothing to do with what the animal thinks, the point of the ad is that this cow should somehow feel honored to end out in half-assed fake mexican food. If you're concerned about how animals are treated, then this type of advertising should concern you, b/c it perpetuates the image of animals as something to be made fun of and whose suffering is not to be taken seriously. It is hardly their honor to become our food, no matter how they are raised. And even if Chipotle uses a certain type of meat, this type of advertising, as I said, does little to enhance compassion for animals (quite the opposite) and as a result perpetuates the very practices to which you object.
Moreover, I'd argue that it's not "natural" for humans to consume meat. Perhaps the tendency to eat meat has evolved out of need when there were not other options, but from the ground up, our bodies weren't built like a carnivore's. Our closest relatives in the animal kingdom do not consume meat. And the fact is there is absolutely no phyiscal reason why we should.
I guess it just takes a lot to upset me. I see my vegetarianism as a very personal choice and I really couldnt care less about other people's attitudes about it. I'm going to choose not to support the industry, but if others want to, or want to make light of it, that's their choice. And by saying that it's "natural" for humans to eat meat, I don't mean that it's unnatural for them not to. I think both are perfectly fine and you can get the nutrition you need both ways. Basically, if it offends you, boycott Chipotle or write a letter. Good for you. I'm just throwing in my two cents saying it doesnt bother me.
Well, Maddie, that's fine but I think you missed my point. I was not talking about you or your choice personally, merely your logic: specifically, if you really don't eat meat because of the cruelty to animals, it's counterintuitive to not be bothered by where the societal mores that shape that cruelty come from. Anyway, I am not here to change your mind and I have a feelnig that'd be useless.
-- Edited by dc at 19:08, 2005-09-12
__________________
~ dc
"Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination" - Oscar Wilde
dc wrote: Well, Maddie, that's fine but I think you missed my point. I was not talking about you or your choice personally, merely your logic: specifically, if you really don't eat meat because of the cruelty to animals, it's counterintuitive to not be bothered by where the societal mores that shape that cruelty come from. Anyway, I am not here to change your mind and I have a feelnig that'd be useless.-- Edited by dc at 19:08, 2005-09-12
I actually didn't miss your point, I was stating why it's not mine. This issue isn't 100% about logic, it's about how something affects you. Personally, it doesn't affect me. It does affect you, and you laid out very well why it does. It makes sense and I respect your point of view. I explained why I didn't have reaction. Because in terms of meat eating, I don't care about what choices other people make. And I'm sorry if I came across as unwilling to listen to your point of view, but starting a response with "Uh, wow...ok..." and telling me what I "should" do doesn't really get me excited about reading openly.
Hee hee! They are Van's, which you can buy at Whole Foods in the breakfast section. There is another brand, too, but the Van's has more Omega 3's. Also they are a good source of fiber and protein. The taste is ok, though lately I've been adding blueberry preserves. I just pop one in the toaster to munch while getting ready in the a.m. You can also buy flaxseed oil to add to recipe or I think ground flax. All that is at whole foods. HTH!
Based on your rec, dc, I bought some flax waffles today at the grocery store. At Randalls, no less. One thing I love about Austin is that all the stores (even the ones in the super Targets and such) have fairly decent organic/natural foods sections. Supply and deman I suppose.
Maddie, I never told you what you personally "should" do. The word "should" was used in the context of a sentence where I was saying that one would think that any person who thinks X should/would believe Y. Apparently your reaction contradicts that, and that's your choice, which is fine. My reaction (thus the “wow”) was that the tone of your post was unexpected, nothing more than that: sometimes the phrase “I don’t care” can just come off as really flippant and dismissive, whether you intend it or not, and to people who do care deeply about something, that can rub the wrong way. I am sure you can understand that, as I can understand how you felt by the words I chose.
Anyway, sorry for getting frustrated. I suppose we just agree to disagree.
-- Edited by dc at 22:09, 2005-09-12
__________________
~ dc
"Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination" - Oscar Wilde