They might lift the ban on Foie Gras what do you think about it?

Question

I really dont care if you are for or against just state ur opinion. Personally i dont think the governments should be allowed to ban certain kinds of food.

just to let you know i mean they might ALLOW restaurants to make it again.

Smoochy the government does have better things to do just to name a few Iran, North Korea, terrorism, war on drugs, national debt, Iraq, healthcare, minimum wage increases, recovery from hurricane katrina so how about that smoochy do you think they dont have better things to do now.

Answer 1

I don't really care, although I don't think it should be outlawed. Yes, I know exactly how it is produced, for all of you who think everyone who doesn't agree with your cause must be very ignorant of what they are arguing about.

"i think u'd be crazy to eat the liver (whose function is to purify the blood of an animal) of a DEAD animal..."

Well, the purpose of the muscles isn't to be eaten, but we eat them anyway. Personally, think your argument would be immature coming from a three year old. 'OMIGOD this came from a DEAD animal!' Well, yes, that's pretty damn obvious. Animals die, (most) humans eat them, fact of life, it's how we evolved. Besides, liver (not necessarily fois gras) is a very nutritious, not to mention tasty, meal, and it's always been eaten, why waste that part of the animal? Now, the argument here is force feeding, but you seem to have missed that completely. Now bugger off and think up a reasonable argument.

Anyway, back to the question. I agree with the asker in that any government shouldn't start meddling in these things. They should have more important things to worry about anyway. They should be standing up for the rights of the people, instead all governments seem to do is find new laws to further restrict them. If the population disagreed with fois gras there would be no market for it, but apparently governments think the people can't make educated decisions themselves and the government should make them for them.
Same was here in Britain when fox hunting was banned. Although opinion was quite split, the larger part of the country didn't disagree with it. What's more the overwhelming majority of people from areas where fox hunting happened agreed with it, yet the government still outlawed it on the basis that they knew better.
I'm not going to get into morality because ethics are relative to everyones opinion. I have mine, other people have theirs. Whether mine makes me insensitive and arrogant is again, only a matter of opinion.

Answer 2

I don't know. In California, the practice is banned starting 2012. I would think the government has more important problems to deal with then the force feeding of poultry. Just another example of the power of lobbyists and more diversions from the real issues.

Personally, I'm indifferent. The way all animals are treated (pigs, I see that what a duccows, chickens) is pretty "inhumane". As a human, I see it as being an omnivore and being at the top of the food chain.

I can see how some people become vegetarians for health and personal reasons, but I like meat and it is part of a well-balanced diet if prepared safely and there isn't too much red meat in it.

EDIT: Smoochy, you make great points. But, I still disagree with your "slippery slope" argument. There is no universal definition of "humane", as you seem to think, and it is precisely up to the individual to decide what that means to him or her. You feel strongly one way, fine, I feel strongly a different way. Considering how many people needlessly suffer in this country today, it seems "humane" to me to prioritize efforts towards different goals, namely bettering a human's quality of life. No offense, but a duck's quality of life really doesn't concern me in the slightest.

Answer 3

I think it's horrible and disgusting. Humans don't ever have the right to torture animals for their own pleasure. That includes cows, pigs, chickens, etc., top of the food chain or not. Humans might very well be at the top of the food chain, but we're also the only creatures (as far as I know) with a conscience and with some sense of morality (religion aside, everyone lives by some code of human conduct).

And why does it matter? It matters because for every person out there that is indifferent to this inhumane treatment, there is someone else ready to capitalize on it. No demand, no supply and no more tortured animals. And I'm not a vegetarian, but I try to make the smartest meat choices possible by buying humanely raised meat, locally, if possible so I can see the treatment of the animals myself.

As far as the government having better things to do, it's a lame argument. People who turn a blind eye to inhumane animal treatment have decided to create their own definition of "humane" and their opinion towards animals may very well cross over into something a bit more "important", if you will.

Answer 4

I think it's a fine idea not to be cruel to animals in the ways done to Fioe Gras geese, but then again I'd like to see all "food" animals treated ethically. Why the hell do people want diseased goose liver?

Answer 5

Quite honestly, I feel that the people who force feed these creatures to produce the oversized livers should have the same thing done to them...

Answer 6

Im for it and I don't eat the stuff. Have you seen how they force feed the poor duck to achieve that oversized liver?

Answer 7

I used to love it, until I saw how it was produced.
I like to eat geese, but I don't agree with torturing them just so humans can have a delicacy.

Answer 8

i think u'd be crazy to eat the liver (whose function is to purify the blood of an animal) of a DEAD animal...