When it comes to money or just about any whimsical reason, man’s cruelty toward helpless creatures is literally boundless. Fortunate that some decent human beings do hold the line against such gross insensitivity, yet this is a very thin, way overstretched line with relatively few resources. Its precariousness in the face of amply funded barbarism and repugnantly misallocated resources—wars, profiteering, unequal income distributions, etc.— is an eloquent commentary on the way humans manage their affairs.
U P D A T E D
By Patrice Greanville
CALIFORNIA gets a big “Bravo!” in this quarter for being the first state in the union to ban the force-feeding of animals in the production of food. We are certain not everyone will cheer. Addiction to some foods is hard to break, and besides not everyone, even among sincere animal defenders, is or will ever be a vegan. But that’s the direction that humanity should take. Compassion is one of the noblest virtues and we violate it with banal abandon at our own peril.
YET, AS EXPECTED, THE OPPOSITION TO THIS BAN has been mobilizing. Read the update below by Katie Waldeck, and an excellent comment stream from the Care2 site devoted to animal questions.
Foie Gras Ban is… Unconstitutional?!
• By Katie Waldeck, Care2
• July 5, 2012
In 2004, animal rights activists applauded the first-in-the-nation ban on foie gras in the state of California. And nearly 8 years later, the ban on the production and sale of the French delicacy has finally gone into effect. But not without controversy. Foie gras, French for fat liver, is produced by force-feeding geese or ducks far more food than they would eat both in the wild and domesticated. The large, fatty livers that geese and ducks experience as a result of over-eating cause a number of serious health consequences in the birds.The California law, aimed at these inhumane production methods, bans all products made from force-feeding birds. Now, a New York-based foie gras producer, a Los Angeles restauranteur and a Canadian exporter are seeking to overturn the law. They filed suit against the state of California under the claim that the law violates the Constitution’s commerce clause.
According to the plaintiffs, the wording of the law is so vague because it, “defines ‘force feeding’ as using a process that causes a bird ‘to consume more food than a typical bird of the same species would consume voluntarily.’ In practice, the vagueness of this purported standard makes it impossible for anyone to know at what point a particular bird has been fed ‘more food’ than the Bird Feeding Law allows.”
So, will this lawsuit be successful? Only time will tell. For now, though, plaintiffs’ lawyer also plans to file an injunction that would halt the law while the matter is sorted out in U.S. district court.
Read more: http://www.care2.com/greenliving/foie-gras-ban-is-unconstitutional.html#ixzz1zqPnzhmI
It should be noted that the combined donations to environmental and animal causes (of which the enviros take the lion’s share) barely reach 2% of all giving, literally at the bottom of the priorities ruling American giving, with a measly $6.6 Billion received in 2010. This figure is disgraceful when compared to the enormous needs we confront in every area of activism. Furthermore, since we’re on the topic, it must be said that in a more just, egalitarian and properly organized and governed society (read: a truly democratic society), many of these billions would NOT be needed, indeed, private charity itself would not be necessary. For example, allocations to education, international affairs, arts & culture, public society benefit, human services, and health, totaling $120.04 Bn, about 41% of the total given, would be covered by national taxation, as it should, for what are legitimate taxes but the will of the people? (I’m speaking theoretically here, folks, don’t laugh.)
—P.G.
________________________
The original communiqué—
5 July 2012
CA Foie Gras Ban Takes Effect
By Doris Lin, About.com Guide July 5, 2012
http://animalrights.about.com/b/2012/07/05/ca-foie-gras-ban-takes-effect.htm
The foie gras machine, next to some very unlucky inmates. A barbaric custom with no real ethical defence, like fur coats and fox-hunting. The force feeding machine rolls up and down the aisles between rows of caged ducks. [Photo courtesy of Farm Sanctuary]
California’s foie gras ban that was signed into law in 2004 took effect on July 1, 2012. Foie gras is the fattened liver of a duck or goose, and is considered one of the cruelest factory farming practices. The liver is ten times its normal size as a result of force-feeding the birds through a metal tube shoved into their throats. The law prohibits force-feeding birds for the purpose of enlarging the bird’s liver, and prohibits selling the products that result from force-feeding. Because the only way to produce such an unnatural product is through force-feeding, the sale and production of foie gras is effectively banned.
CA is the first state in the U.S. to ban foie gras, but a 2006 ban in Chicago was in effect for two years before it was overturned. Israel, South Africa and several European nations have banned the force-feeding of animals for food production.
Some people have reacted as you might expect – by violating the statute and by filing a lawsuit to try to have the ban overturned.
The animal rights position is that veganism is the solution because any animal use violates that animal’s rights. While some farming practices may be more cruel than others, there is no such thing as humane animal agriculture.
_____________
Follow UPC!
Home | What’s New? | News Releases | Action Alerts | PoultryPress | Resources | Merchandise | Links | E-mail
Comments (original threads)
Thank you for sharing.
I live in California and am so happy this has law has finally taken effect! And no, laws against animal cruelty aren’t unconstitutional!
So animal cruelty is “constitutional”? Funny, I thought in most states it’s a felony.
Whoops. I meant to say, “They serve tons of meals to filthy rich patrons at the rate of $100 per diner that consist of one pretty little ITEM that sits right in the middle of a gigantic white plate…
Of course it’s unconstitutional…to those that only care about money and fame via feeding the oh-so-grand appetites of rich people with so called sophisticated palates. The making of foie gras is a cruel and inhumane process that needs to be stopped. Trust me, those food distributors and la-dee-da retsaurants won’t finds themselves in dire straits by not serving foie gras. They serve tons of meals to filthy rich patrons at the rate of $100 per diner that consist of one pretty little that sits right in the middle of a gigantic white plate. You know that anyplace where you see more plate than food is raking in the dough. They have nothing to worry about. They’re just whining that they can’t have everything their way and they’re being persecuted and how they suffer for their culinary art, blah blah blah. Well you know what? It all ends up in the same place and the same color in the end. They need to get over themselves!
as long as any being lives in fear and death at the hands of man so shall all men live under this same threat. the earth is our shared home and to do good should be our shared religion and under the truth of evolution all beings are our family.
you can tell a lot about a person or society by the way it treats the beings it doesn’t think it has to treat well. silence is acceptance
life has value beyond measure
Peace and Love
Read more: http://www.care2.com/greenliving/foie-gras-ban-is-unconstitutional.html#ixzz1zqPEIfsX
Let’s keep this award-winning site going!
|
Yes, audiences applaud us. But do you? If yes, then buy us a beer. The wingnuts are falling over each other to make donations…to their causes. We, on the other hand, take our left media—the only media that speak for us— for granted. Don’t join that parade, and give today. Every dollar counts. |
|---|
| Use the DONATE button below or on the sidebar. And do the right thing. Even once a year. |
Use PayPal via the button below.
THANK YOU.
3 Responses to “California enacts nation’s first foie gras ban [updated]”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
It disturbs me that every time we take one step forward in protecting animals, we take two steps backward. If this lawsuit is successful those birds are doomed. The politics of food law, i.e., “food disparagement” in the U.S. rules over common sense and sensibilities. It was obviously the will of the people, who voted through a ballot measure, to end the barbaric practice of force-feeding ducks and geese. My feeling of late is that things never change for the better in American society, or in any society, until the people take to the streets en masse. We need to make the one percent feel afraid. They are complacent now. Everything continues to go their way while the poor and middle-class suffer. And, of course, the animals suffer the most. Also, we do need to fund organizations that shine a bright light on these abuses, such as the Greanville Post, and those that fight in court, such as the Animal Legal Defense Fund. I am most appreciative that this information is posted here. Compassion is the most valuable of human attributes. Once our society finds no worth in it, the entire population is doomed to suffer. For what we do to the animals, we eventually do to one another.
The lock down on the right to show what happens to animals in these facilities is a big part of the problem. If people could actually see the suffering animals, I think that would go a long way to mobilize people against such practices. How about a law requiring anyone who chooses to force feed an animal, or participate by buying or selling the products, has to personally experience the same on their own body? Bet it wouldn’t happen then.
Both Tormels and Valerie have eloquently commented on the cruelty aspect of foie gras, so I’ll simply comment on the product itself. I had the misfortune of actually tasting said product once, and it is disGUSTing. No need for it! A ban will not only save geese and ducks from cruelty, it will save people from wasting their money.