The Guardian Does Not Want You Driving, or Parking
Scene from Today's Pro-Life Protest On Van Ness
Fisher Pulls Museum Out of the Presidio
Why Are You at Work Today?
Sarah Palin Quits
Yes On 2: Sponsored by the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, Prop 2 says it's c"ruel and inhumane to confine animals in cages so small they can’t turn around or stretch their limbs." Why? Because all animals (tasty or otherwise) deserve humane treatment, even animals raised specifically for nourishment. Vote YES on Prop. 2 to save animals from unacceptable abuse.
No On 2: Run for your lives, it's the MEXICAN EGGS!!!!!!!!!!!!
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
Do you think Mexico is going to get pissed, that besides "teh gays," they are the Republican's go-to boogeyman?
seems that way. and the mexican eggs scare tactic kills me. like, really? ugh.
"I am a decent human being with a smidge of compassion, so I will vote YES"
Lots of laughs over here.
you can have humanely raised animal-food items right now, just change your spending habits.
I don't vote on props or ballots initiatives. They completely gum up the system and run counter to the whole notion of having a representational democracy.
davitydave: yep.
these props (other than 8 and 4) force me to ponder too deeply the meaning of life and thus, my position on things that i never would have thought about in a million years otherwise. blankity blank blank blank except where i'm already firmly rooted in my thinking.
If I were Satan, I would be sending typing this comment from a sweet iPhone 3G at The Bellagio.
A yes vote is just another way for omnivores to distance themselves from the truth that the thing in their sandwich that tastes like chicken was in fact a chicken. Don't get me wrong, I believe in humane treatment for the animals I devour, and that's where my dollars go. But, like DavityDave and his sympathisers, I don't think this is something we should be voting on. My choice = leaning no, probably blank. Vote with your dollars. Buy free range organic.
By the way, I bought eggs in Mexico. I really remember how watery they were. I survived.
Nuff said.
I'm voting No on all propositions, as usual. As for Prop 2, if you want to change farming standards get involved with the USDA.
It's all well and good to say "buy free range organic." And I'm more than happy to do so, willingly shelling out $7.50 for pastured eggs at rainbow WHEN THEY ARE AVAILABLE. However, often, particularly in the winter, you practically have to get there at the crack of dawn and fight the hippies with a steak knife to get them.
Forcing everyone to raise the standards under which chickens (and other animals) are kept prior to being turned into our food will hopefully result in the availability of more humanely raised food.
I'm so confused -- I thought we were *against* legislating morality.
that's not what prop 2 is about.
If you treated a dog they way factory farmed animals are treated day in and day out you'd be jailed. Pets are not superior animals.
Vote yes for humane treatment of factory farmed animals.
Yeah... I'm too poor to afford free-range eggs.
Prices have gone up as it is. They'll be even more ridiculous once they've mandated that all chickens be treated with more care.
Call me Satan, but I already voted No on my absentee ballot.
the problem w/ this resolution is that it allows people to skirt personal responsibility by simply checking box. If you really cared you'd change your behavior first.
I don't vote on props or ballots initiatives. They completely gum up the system and run counter to the whole notion of having a representational democracy.
Plus, they're almost always poorly written. No on Bad Writing.
:P
I for one, have changed my behavior. Prop 2 doesn't affect ME and my behavior, it affects animals. This prop benefits animals, who can't go knocking on doors requesting that people "change their behavior first."
I love Chicken, Veal, Steak and Foie Gras (in moderation) and don't feel like paying more for any of them just because some 'we wanna save the world' vegans in meat-eater clothes got some stupid ass measure on the ballot.
What's next, we can't kill them because they might feel pain?
This is nothing more than a well-coordinated, end around run on the veal and foie gras industry.
If you want to feel good about yourself, hop on a plane and spend a year feeding starving kids in Africa who would happily chew the neck off your adorable pug or kitty just to stay alive.
I don't tell you who you can or cannot marry so you certainly cannot claim the right to tell me what I can and cannot eat or how it should be raised. The level of hypocrisy in the Bay Area is astounding.
NO on 2.
I call bullshit.
hypocrisy is the most overrated character flaw.
Is the argument about Mexican eggs really a straw man? Won't this prop. just push egg production out of the state to anywhere without the proposed restrictions? If not mexican eggs, then Nevada or Oregon eggs produced more cheaply in less humane conditions? I'm not knowledgable on the economics enough to say whether the effect would be significant or not, but I doubt any of you are either.
There's a very real possibility the overall effect of this could be no difference in the overall well-being of chickens and an increase in the carbon footprint of bringing eggs in from outside the state. Not to mention extra money flowing out of the state.
I'm not saying one should vote against this prop, just that it seems like many of you are discounting the argument against without a serious look at it.
Hey, I'm hardly a vegan. I eat meat and I love foie gras. But just because you're going to eat it, does that mean you have to treat an animal inhumanely before it dies? These animals are giving their lives to be our meals. The least we can do in exchange is make their lives (prior to death), a little less torture-filled.
For shame, RobinSF. "Starving children" is hardly analogous. I didn't breed those starving kids. But by eating these animals, we're directly responsible for their suffering.
Brock~
Just for that one, I am marrying a calf and beating it daily. Not to harm it, but just until it is tender enough to make a nice scallopini.
Is that spousal abuse or would I be fined under the Prop 2 law?
lol...
And be sure to check out my new anti-vegan movie "Silence of the Lettuce"
"It places the dressing in the basket..."
oh man, does this mean i have to give up veal? i love the occasional veal dish.
Does it really matter how these animals live until we kill them? Their lives are meaningless anyhow. Sure, it would be nice to make sure they're happy and their existence is filled with sunshine and rainbows, but does it really matter?
Honestly though, I don't care whether they're happy or not. As long as it's delicious and I don't get salmonella or mad cow disease, I'm a happy camper.
Call me cold, call me heartless, I just don't care. What do I care about? I care about how tender that piece of dead animal in the display case is.
They're not animals. They're food. If you don't like it, then buy organic free range animal products. But don't legislate morality.
One last point:
I always feel bad eating a free-range animal. It lives a happy life, wandering around, eating food, cavorting with other members of the species. I feel bad for killing a perfectly happy animal for my dinner.
The non-free-range? Miserable existence, wishing for death. Really, I'm doing that cow a favor.
Just remember. When you eat free-range, you kill happiness.
Im voting no, because not only do i not eat eggs or chicken, i dont want other consumers to get price increases in what is already high prices for eggs.
The eggs aren't going to come from Mexico. They don't produce enough corn, so there is no way they can afford to feed it to chickens.
On top of that we have gas prices that are trending up (okay they're down right now, but who knows what the future holds), this mean if Prop 2 passes it'll still be cheaper to produce the eggs in California rather than trucking them in.
@Brock
No - you do not have to give up veal - you just have to read it bedtime stories and snuggle with it before sauteing it in lemon, butter and capers.
i'm all for treating animals humanely -- which is why i'm voting no on this prop. if it passes, the animals will only be marginally less miserable. we shouldn't waste our money on an inadequate solution to a problem that is exponentially larger than what the proponents of this measure are willing to acknowledge. in the meantime, i'll vote with my dollars.
This is one of the more entertaining comment threads i've read on here in a while.
i definitely agree with the folks saying that if you care you should change your purchasing habits.
And if you can't afford to...then most likely the passing of this prop will make even more products unaffordable.
to bluecanary: for shame back to you. you make it sound like you care more for an egg laying hen than a starving kid. i bet that kid lives in pretty cramped conditions as well. the original point by robin makes sense to me.
Also, have any economists actually tried to predict the cost of this proposition? It very well could drive production out of the state. Which i realize is quite a popular concept in the bay area, until people realize they don't have a job. It does seem like costs would have to increase quite a bit before dairies and slaughterhouses would move, but as soon as they can make more money elsewhere, elsewhere is where they will go.
It seems like people should be more worried about treating "humans" humanely before worrying so much about the living quarters of chickens and cows.
Ask your Mexican and other Central American friends about the results of all the wonderful ETHANOL production going on. It did absolutely nothing to reduce gas prices or increase fuel production in the USA and caused a shortage of corn based products in their countries. A basic staple of their diet.
Seriously think about the long term affects before you attempt to vote on something that may negatively affect others.
Please don't be a sheep and listen to dumb ass slogans created by people you would never listen to or even respect in the first place.
I would vote AGAINST Prop 2 if I lived in California, because I have an immense amount of compassion for the squirrels, rabbits, foxes, and other wild animals whose homes and lives would be lost if an increased amount of space is used to allow more space for chickens. I am vegan because I have an immense amount of compassion for the animals used in animal agribusiness. What an idiotic measure propagated by an organization that claims to have the interests of animals at heart? What about the free-living (wild) animals, HSUS? What about the squirrels, the rabbits, the mice, the foxes, etc.?
And HSUS, why don't you care about the people you are lying to when you promote this garbage? Your double-talk makes me sick. Why do you say one thing to the industry and another to the consumers? Why should we trust you when you manipulatively tell a different story based on who you are trying to convince?
What about the male chicks that are thrown in the garbage in hatcheries used for cage free eggs? The debeaking? What about the killing of cage-free hens when they are no longer productive? What is "humane" about that, HSUS?
Call me Satan if you want, but I Don't Buy The Myth (www.humanemyth.org).