If you'll be driving through Chicago, don't pull into a 7-11 for a spot of foie gras.
CHICAGO (AP) -- These are dangerous times for ducks and geese in Chicago.
With the city's ban on foie gras -- a delicacy made of duck and goose liver -- just days away from going into effect, upscale restaurants in the city are serving it up like never before.
They have put together special menus with names like "Foie Gras, Farewell To Our Good Friend" featuring that friend in course after course -- searing it, chilling it, throwing it into salads and turning it into sauce.
At the same time, foie gras (pronounced fwah-GRAH) enthusiasts are cooking up a lawsuit to keep it on the menu in the city or put it back after the ban goes into effect Aug. 22, holding fundraisers to finance their foie gras fight and asking diners to sign petitions in support of that fight.
Now those right-wing, conservative Christian fascists are telling us what we can't eat. Wait a minute. It isn't right-wing, conservative, Christian fascists who are telling people what they can't eat. It's animal rights activists!
While they rage about losing their rights in the War on Terror, liberals have no problem nibbling away at the rights of people who don't choose to live by their rules. Ban guns, ban coconut oil in movie popcorn, ban snack foods in schools, ban Ann Coulter's book, ban Rush Limbaugh's show, ban violent Popeye cartoons, ban smoking in public places, and on and on.
Who's the real threat to our freedoms?
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Nibbled to Death by Liberal Ducks
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Banning animal agriculture would be not only a bad thing, but a stupid thing and an unnatural thing.
Without our main source of protein, billions would starve to death. Everyone from Chinese chicken farmers to Australian sheep ranchers would be thrown out of work and into poverty. And that includes processing plants, butchers, stock traders, etc.
Since when do humans have no place on the food chain?
Making the most eloquent case is fine, but that's not what's happening. Often, the people who can scream the loudest, picket the longest and disrupt society the most get their way. We call that, "the squeaky wheel getting the grease."
You can take my fur [not that I have one] but you are NEVER taking chicken away from me and that is all there is to it!!
If Evolution is true and man is evolved from animals. Why don't animal rights activists fight to protect an innocent rabit from a coyote or a mountain lion. If man is nothing more than an animal and we are built to eat animals why is wrong for man to eat meat and not other preditors?
Whether people need to eat meat to get the nutrition they need is irrelevent. We are ominvores. We are part of the food chain and to remove us would be unnatural. By "people" I'm assuming you mean folks who can just open the refrigerator door whenever they want a snack. That's not how the majority of the human race lives. The majority of humans have to scrabble for every meal, and their meals don't come along three times a day. If you removed animal agriculture, they would simply turn to wild animals to get their nourishment. We are already fighting an uphill battle to prevent extinction of wild species.
What, you want to hold classes in humanity for lions and tigers? Show them that eating a live antelope is wrong? Cats -- all cats -- are true carnivores. Removing meat from their diet would kill them, after first blinding them, weakening them and leaving them open to a host of diseases.
If you feel that killing animals to eat their flesh or enjoy the sport of it doesn't involve a sacrifice of moral sense, then we have a different understanding of nature and morality.
If you want to end suffering, start with the human race and work your way up. THAT is morality.
Post a Comment