Houellebecq: The utubes aren't "grief porn". You say that as if you are somehow superior for ignoring the cruelties that are within our power to stop. What followers you all are.

Re: your question: I would have the animals killed quickly to supply the food.

Nobody said that a creature's life is worth more than a human's, but an animal's life isn't worthless either. I believe it has more value though than whether or not you get scrambled eggs occasionally.

Your answer to my question: As you want to deny it, the cruelty that you SAY you would stop a child from committing, is in the same ballpark as this mass cruelty - callousness; desensitization; barbarity and so on - birds of a feather. In each case, the exploiter/s gets something for themselves out of indifference to the pain and suffering of another being. That is - self-interest over rides any concern for the pain of another living thing.

There is *no* need for them to suffer just to deliver eggs. If there weren't a lot of absurd local council regulations - we could keep our own chickens. If there were no egg boards; it would be a reasonable economic proposition for eggs to be produced in a way that doesn't require mass cruelty.

Btw - Col haven't I seen you refer to yourself somewhere/ sometime as a libertarian ? Houellebecq; don't you think you are something in that general direction yourself? - so what; you're libertarian as long as it serves your wants but you're not when there's an injustice somewhere else. That's pretty inconsistent and hypocritical isn't it.

Also Col. nobody said that chickens are like humans; but the disgusting conditions in which prisoners were kept and the conditions in which chickens are kept were/are very much the same. Your determinedly cruel ignorance is one thing - almost tolerable, and I could let it pass - but your nasty sneering and twisting of the analagy, long after the (perfectly reasonable) comment irks me such that I feel compelled to state it.

Pynchme “so what; you're libertarian as long as it serves your wants but you're not when there's an injustice somewhere else. That's pretty inconsistent and hypocritical isn't it.”

“Yes dear”….

You see, it is like this… people are not critters and critters are not people.

“but the disgusting conditions in which prisoners were kept and the conditions in which chickens are kept were/are very much the same”

“Yes dear”….

You see, it is like this… people are not critters and critters are not people.

“Your determinedly cruel ignorance is one thing - almost tolerable, and I could let it pass - but your nasty sneering and twisting of the analagy, long after the (perfectly reasonable) comment irks me such that I feel compelled to state it”

“Yes dear”….

You see, it is like this… people are not critters and critters are not people.

Now you have said it I assume it is off your chest and we can move on….

Perhaps we could discuss hog farming, trout breeding and turning cattle into sex machines to keep the milk flowing…

Or maybe we could have an afternoon siesta

Yawn

OK Rouge, I'll bite.
"You see, it is like this… people are not critters and critters are not people."
In what way? People are more compassionate than critters?
You fail.
People are able to empathise with others, even 'critters'?
You fail.
Humans are able to imagine what it must feel like, to be a victim?
You fail.
Rouge, you hit the bottom of the barrel when you suggested we should treat chooks, the way chooks treat each other.
Only to a libertarian as shallow as you, would that make sense.