Come on Al, Steak or the Earth?
Like the Greek god Typhon, who threatened heaven with his scorched breath, Glenn Beck creates a firestorm whenever he opens his mouth. The heavens shook and the gods fled when Typhon appeared on that giant TV screen of old -- the sky -- and, now as then, guilt by association is the order of the day. That was clear when I appeared on Glenn Beck's show this week to argue that Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore -- who most of us know as the man who wants us to change our light bulbs and save up to buy a Prius -- is obliged to go vegetarian. (And judging by the results of a Los Angeles Times poll this week, it would seem that if he fails to kick his meat habit in the noble cause of saving the Earth, the scorn he felt when driving a Lincoln Town Car will look like small potatoes indeed.)
Soon after appearing on Beck's show, I found out that it wasn't only George W. Bush and that Darth Vader-like hunter Dick Cheney who were hell-bent on destroying our right to say what we want to say, where and when we want to say it. Liberal blogs screamed over my "stupidity," "gall," and "balls" in appearing on FOX and, sin of sins, on that show. Didn't I realize I was "used"? (One might ask who was using whom when some 30,000 people came to PETA.org after the show, and more than 9,000 of them stayed to watch Alec Baldwin's video "Meat Your Meat."
Didn't I know that Al Gore is a saint, off-limits and that PETA is obliged to support anything the left does, right or wrong? This very gripe is usually offered up by the right to lambaste its opponents. At least both sides agree on something.
PETA's history contradicts the theory that either side is always correct. The fact is, for the last 30 years, we have been an equal opportunity critic, scrutinizing the actions of everyone from President Reagan to President Obama. Wear a fur hat or buy a purebred dog and we will say what we need to say -- on behalf of the foxes in steel traps with fear in their hearts or the dogs sitting at the pound with hope in their eyes. Some days, that means we lose more members than we gain, but we are not hobbyists or begging to be cuddled, so we do not back away from criticizing cruelty no matter who wields the cudgel or, in this case, the steak knife.
For those who think PETA started out with a battering ram, please know that we have long tried privately to cajole, convince and even cook for Mr. Gore. We've offered to send him a famous chef with impeccable credentials and a mouthwatering culinary repertoire, provide him with nutrition experts and praise him mightily for dipping his toe into it all by taking PETA's 30-day "veg pledge." We have pointed out that the United Nations, the Worldwatch Institute and even his own Live Earth agree that going vegetarian is the most effective step that anyone can take to combat climate change.
That's why he has only himself to blame for the blows dealt him this week from the BBC's Mr. Paxman, ABC's Ms. Sawyer and other commentators. Yes, he's the son of a Black Angus rancher. My father climbed mountains and went out in to the ocean in small boats during storms, but I'm not following suit. He protests that eating meat is a "personal choice" and tries to excuse his penchant for a daily steak (sometimes two, we hear from a reliable source) because he finds it "too hard" to "give up" meat? Driving a Hummer for the hell of it is a personal choice, and how hard can it be to go vegetarian when this week's New York Times list of best-selling hardback advice books shows chef Tal Ronnen's The Conscious Cook sitting pretty at number three and Alicia Silverstone's The Kind Diet at number five? Both are vegan -- not just vegetarian -- cookbooks that I dare anyone to open without drooling. Last week, Chipotle at Dupont Circle in Washington test-marketed a Gardein vegan "chicken" burrito. It sold out almost instantly, and an emergency supply of these delicious little medallions of soy protein had to be dispatched to meet demand.
Take a look at these few facts among the many: A 2006 United Nations report concluded that the meat industry produces about 40 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than all the world's transportation systems -- that's all the cars, trucks, SUVs, planes and ships in the world combined; Worldwatch estimates that filthy factory farms, transport and all the related parts of putting the nugget into the bucket and the burger into the bun account for 51 per cent of all greenhouse-gas emissions; and that animal-based agriculture is responsible for deforestation, river contamination and 130 times more manure than the whole human population produces.
However, considering that "water wars" are widely believed to be the ones we'll wage in the future, we have asked Mr. Gore to consider one other fact: It takes 2,400 gallons of water to bring 1 pound of flesh to the table. The threat from draining the water from our own aquifers to feed "livestock" should be chillingly familiar to those who have witnessed the crises and bloodshed that spring from depletions of gas and oil. That tidbit alone should be enough to compel Mr. Gore to give a vegetarian diet a whirl. As leading climate change expert Lord Stern told The London Times last week, "Meat is a wasteful use of water. ... It puts enormous pressure on the world's resources."
Of course, Mr. Gore isn't the only public figure who should wave the steak plate away. Appendicitis is related to high meat consumption, and this week, Mr. Beck was rushed to the hospital to have his appendix removed. I'm sure there are many people who wish the hospital had taken his vocal cords along with it, but although Mr. Beck disagrees with almost everything PETA stands for, our position is that "we may not agree with what you say, but ..." we'll gladly come on your show to defend our right to hold our own views.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The USA is still feeding cows to cows, have systematically covered up mad cow disease, and CJD deaths there from as sporadic CJD. THE USA even had a school lunch program, that fed our children all across the Nation the most high risk cattle for mad cow disease and other dangerous pathogens i.e. dead stock downer cows, all under the guise of a recall based on animal abuse. what about child abuse, from force feeding them dead stock downer cows? who will watch our children for the next 5 DECADES for CJD.
School Food Authorities Affected by Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. Beef Recall February 2006 – February 2008
http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/safety/Hallmark-Westland_byState.pdf
http://downercattle.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
BSE RISK USA UPDATE NOVEMBER 2009
http://bseusa.blogspot.com/2009/11/bse-risk-usa-update-november-2009.html
TSS
GO INGRID!!!
I SO AGREE! My bf was upset with me for not tolerating Gore's HUGE faux pas...I guess because he shouldn't be criticized at all?
BS!!! Mr. Gore knows better. He has so far, FAILED miserably with the truth. He has engaged in willful ignorance...no, it's not acceptable. Sorry! You are weak Mr. Gore and not fit to be in the role you are in now. You are a wealthy man, nothing is stopping you from going veg but your own weakness. Sorry.
Changing lightbulbs will not save our butts. It is so irresponsible to leave out the most important part of this and that is MEAT.
THANK YOU INGRID for telling the truth!
The is one MAJOR difference in the carbon gases released by stock animals and those emitted from hydrocarbons.
Animal emissions are derived from plant materials that if they were allowed to decay would emit something close to the same amount gases. This is illustrated by the methane gas extracted from Landfills.
Hydrocarbons used to fuel combustion has been locked in either a solid form or in a liquid form trapped within the Earth.and could not be released by decay and require some external ignition.
Therefore=
Carbon emitted by Plant Decay = Carbon emitted by Animals that would have eaten Plants
net difference is negligible
Carbon emitted by Oil and Coal in natural state = 0
Carbon emitted by combustion of O and C >> 0..
with the hydrocarbons we are actually adding more carbon sources to the biosphere by bringing them to the surface and releasing COs by burning.
Walk the talk, Al.
Funny you mention soy medallions. If there is one crop that can give factory farming a run for it's money in being bad for the environment, it's soy.
Only because most soy grown is being fed to animals...sherlock.
If we didn't feed the animals to make meat, it wouldn't be a problem.
Lifelong vegetarian here.
I have a question for people who are more knowledgeable about PETA than I am. I am NOT asking as a criticism because I don't know if this is even true. Do you know if PETA operates an animal rescue place in Virginia at which they carry out euthanasia on animals? If it is true, it sounds a little hypocritical, although I do NOT know the circumstances behind it. I wold like to know more about it. If true, what is the reason?
Most likely it is because euthanasia is considered an ethical treatment. All of their complaints surround the mistreatment of animals as they are raised and processed.
I don't know specifically, but I do know that PETA has refused to support the No Kill philosophy. They do kill healthy animals (note I said "kill" and not "euthanize" because terminating the life of a healthy creature is a far cry from euthanasia). Some research suggests that PETA's core philosophy is that humans should not co-habitate with animals at all (in other words, they don't believe in pets or animal companions -- at all). Do a little research and you'll find that beneath the glossy, celebrity-studded veneer, PETA is a fraudulent organization that cares very little for the welfare of animals.
I avoid eating confined animal products or any annual monocrops such as corn, wheat, soy, or oats. I don't consider these foods to be ecologically sustainable, or ethical in the treatment of sentient beings.
I need help understand the logic of this article, which seems to promote vegetarianism as a way of eliminating the detrimental effects of the confined animal industry, and promoting the ethical treatment of animals.
A vegetarian is someone who eats plant and animal foods. The animal foods are dairy and/or eggs.
Dairy comes from cows, and eggs come from hens. There is nothing ethical about the treatment of cows on dairy farms, or the treatment of hens in the egg industry. Both industries require the confinement of animals, either to rob them of the milk nature designed for calves, or to rob hens of eggs nature designed to be fertilized. Both require the systematic killing of these animals after their productive years are over.
While switching from meat to dairy/eggs may reduce the confined animal population somewhat, it certainly does not eliminate the ecological or ethical ills created by animal farming.
Most vegetarians and vegans eat plant foods produced by agricultural machinery that kills and maims millions of ground-living animals in a very cruel fashion, and requires tons of toxic chemicals that poison all of us.
An eating plan designed by nature (not humans) for our species can be found in "The Original Diet."
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
Well, here is one reason. I will not associate with your organization if you continue to bash the food choices of individual people. I don't care how famous those people are.
Your job as an organization is to inform and education and, I guess, cause a public commotion every now and then.
It is not to stage personal vendettas against individuals.
PETA is not the only anti-meat game in town. I can throw my support elsewhere.
Isn't part of informing and educating saying "The man that says he is giving you the whole story on climate change is not doing so."
If Al Gore drives around a fleet of SUVs, would you get angry with anyone who criticized his "personal choice" to drive whatever he wants while promoting what he does?
Isn't part of informing and educating also letting people know that while PETA rants against people who eat meat and wear leather or fur, they turn around and needlessly slaughter hundreds of healthy animals each year? The media needs to expose PETA but unfortunately, the organization has far too many close connections to the media. As a result, people are misinformed and animals continue to suffer and die. But it will come out. PETA will eventually be exposed.
I wonder what Ingrid thinks about the government takeover of human healthcare. Is it only important that I not eat meat, or is it also important that I be free to make my own health and economic decisions? Under Pelosi's plan, anyone who doesn't fork over $15,000/yr. minimum for insurance, can go to jail. How can so many people care so much about what other people eat, and yet so little about protecting their own personal liberty?
Source please.
I care about both. They are related issues, too.
Animal products is the leading cause of expensive disease in this country. If we don't change our diets, it will bankrupt us if we get governmental healthcare.
And, I agree. The Pelosi plan will probably spell worse healthcare. Waiting times, less choice, less quality, the whole thing. It's the nature of the beast.
By that logic, all other issues and problems in the world are irrelevent and the healthcare issue is the only appropriate discussion. That is a bit restrictive don't you think?
What is your source for Pelosi's plan?
Vegetarian society is coming soon, trade in your flesh meat for faux meat. Try out a vegan restaurant, my favorite is Loving Hut.
Raising animals for food causes global warming, wastes resources and
pollutes our environment. By going vegan, people would help - not only
Earth - but their health ; since eating animals is linked to cancer.
This is the most convoluted argument. Yes, the meat industry is a horrible polluter. We definitely eat far more meat than we need to eat; our dietary practices are dangerous to our health and to the environment.
But, the PETA/Vegan argument is based on a fallacy. It assumes that we've always produced meat the way we currently do, when the switch to CAFO's is relatively recent. Several decades ago, ranchers in the West were overgrazing land, and even doing so on public land. A cry went up to save the environment. Rather than instituting sustainable grazing practices, it was decided that we should confine livestock and feed it grain from farms. The idea being that it would require less land.
And now we have this situation, terrible as it is. The answer, if we listen to PETA is to give up meat. We could just cut way back on meat intake, and be careful about where we obtain our meat. Good pasture practice is not only sustainable but environmentally beneficial, more beneficial than farming soy beans. And grass, the preferred diet of ruminants grows in places that we can't farm soy, etc.
Cows shouldn't be eating people food in the first damned place. When they eat grass they're converting vegetation that humans can't digest into protein. See how that works?
P.S. How come the compassion of PETA doesn't extend to plants? Who says they aren't sentient?
jackpinesavage: meat production on a scale that feeds current and growing populations will always be much more inefficient in terms of energy, wayer, land and waste. But sure, the climate argument does not show that all animal use is wrong. The animal rights argument does.
If you read up on cognitive science you will see strong evidence for consciousness of pigs, cows and so on. There is no evidence for conscious plants. Read this: http://www.veganoutreach.org/guide/qa.html#plantsfeeltoo
Decades, arguable centuries of biological and psychological research says plants aren't sentient.
Exactly. PETA means well, but they always have a way of oversimplifying the problem, as well as the solution. A great many people would not be healthy as vegans, and a growing number, already high, are developing soy allergies. Soy is a very bad food choice for a whole lot of people, including people I live with. Vegans get a little self-righteous sometimes, and think they are representative of everyone else. They did it, so everyone can. Simply not true. There is a lot of individual variation out there in how we process food, and veganism is not workable for everyone. They should focus their energy on improving the way livestock are treated and maintained. That would be helpful. This is not.
No, not everyone can. But everyone rich and American can. I'm looking at you, Al Gore.
Plants could very well be sentient, but the accumulated plant biomass that goes into producing meat equates to much more plant-killing than if you were to eat it directly.
In his film, Gore bragged about his family "raising cattle". He really misses that part of his life.
He's a selfish excusitarian.
He has a moral compass of (in)convenience.
You may be right about Gore-- but PETA is no better. Right now on their Facebook page they are promoting products that are non-organic (bad for the environment and animals) and non-fair trade (bad for people). They are encouraging people to buy from a restaurant chain that has one of the worst records for farmworker conditions and labor unions. Doesn't that make PETA a "selfish excusitarian," too?
Organic is often not best for the environment or for the animals. I agree on the fair-trade position but then again PETA is in that case not worse than the democratic party or most other liberal organisations in the US - most do not only but or use fair-trade goods. So why single out PETA in that regard? What other organizations are better than PETA in that regards according to you?
Organic and fair trade are both concepts that are still extremely debatable. Climate change caused by animals is not.
PETA isn't arguing for human rights. It's not that they don't believe in them, it just isn't their cause. I support abortion rights, but it isn't really a cause important to me, so I don't attend rallies for it or worry about it too much.
With respect to PETA, I happen to believe that appearing on GB's show simply reinforces the idea that environmentalists are kooks. Nothing to see here folks, this concern for the planet is just a bunch of bull spawned by the radical left and the likes of loons such as Ingrid and Al.
We need to fight the battles we can win (if any exist at all in the US right now). Sadly, I don't see eliminating/limiting meat in diets as one of them...by a long shot.
No, what we need is more people who walk the talk. It is a common problem that people will profess one thing, yet behave in ways that contradict their talk. This discussion is important because it will point out the false assumptions and lack of congruence in what people say and what people do.
As for PETA, I challenge anyone to list the methods they would use to get people to change their attitudes about animals. Consciousness-raising is an art they navigates between challenge and support. Too much of either and people will not go through the process of self-reflection. If you don't like PETA's methods, I would like to learn about your expert ideas.
Some people choose what is important to them based on their sense of right and wrong, not their sense of easy or hard.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
