Chicagoist: Horsemeat Cake, Anyone?

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:24:50 -0600

7: No doubt it will remain taboo. I just think the taboos are more sentimental than logical.

sparky

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:49:31 -0600

I don't eat horse meat, or much meat for that matter. But I see some people's point, Guest 6: horses, unlike cattle, are not bred and raised in this country for meat. They are bred for racing or as companion animals. According to the USDA, Americans today expect a similar standard of care for horses that are offered to family pets, such as dogs and cats--just as the Hindus in India have a standard for cows. That is why animal protection agencies get involved in the welfare of horses. Yes, it is meat, but I do not see why the US has a need for human consumption of horse meat. Historically, the reasons that we do not eat horse meat (kosher law, christianity banning the practice because it was pagan) are cultural and anthropological. And unlike Europe, we have not had a problem with BSE, so at this time there is no need for an alternative to beef. Perhaps if we do have a BSE epidemic that wipes out the beef industry, we may need to "rely" on horse meat again (as the Europeans do), but even then, I would imagine we would switch to bison. Yes, the reasons may be cultural and anthropological, but American consumption of horse meat, I imagine, will remain taboo for some time.

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:33:21 -0600

It's meat. Why is this different from other forms of meat? So what they are smarter than some other animals? They are still non-human animals, and as long as health and environmental concerns are addressed, what's the problem, then? No, I don't eat horse meat, or much meat at all, but I don't see the controversy here beyond sentimental attachments to a certain type of animal. What I am missing? Poster 5 uses the term betrayal. I don't mean to be cold-hearted, but I don't seem how using animals for meat constitutes a betrayal. For one, most people have no emotional attachments to horses, not anymore, not in our mostly non-farming society. Second, one could make the betrayal argument when it comes to, for instance, beef (ask a Hindu about that).

skaterina

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:12:56 -0600

Guest 4 - it is expensive to keep horses. But why do we have to address this problem by providing owners with the easy out of selling the horses for slaughter when the owners can no longer pay for their upkeep? Maybe potential horseowners should have to demonstrate their willingness and ability to fork over the cash it takes to care for them before getting whatever license they need to keep the horses. I actually think there is a good argument for banning sale and human consumption of horses. They are very intelligent and sensitive animals and domesticated horses develop social relationships to the people who live with them and work with them. Subjecting them to the horror of slaughter seems like a betrayal. I actually don't eat any meat, but I think it is especially wrong to slaughter animals that we have socialized as much as we have horses.

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 11:47:09 -0600

The 7th Circuit's decision may well be correct, but the law itself is witless. There are horses available for slaughter precisely because horse owners sell them for that purpose. Horses, unlike cats and dogs, are half-ton animals that are very expensive to feed and keep. It should be kept in mind that this law passed primarily because Bo Derek went to Springfield to testify, and apparently impressed the hicks and hacks that make up the General Assembly. I don't particularly want to eat horsemeat, but I can't see one good reason why doing so should be unlawful.

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:34:27 -0600

Guest 1 -- I disagree. The state can and should ban the sale of meat from illegal sources, such as endangered animals. What you've said is that "their is absolutely no reason to ban the sale of contraband". For example, prohibiting the SALE of STOLEN property is one way to fight STEALING. Libertarian absolutism is so cliche.

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:33:20 -0600

as long as we are still able to slaughter our unborn children!! Do NOT take that choice away from us!

guest

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:06:52 -0600

there is absolutely no reason to ban the sale of any meat, much less meat as plentiful as horses.