Arguing that humans should not consider the pain
caused to the non-human animals they eat because
those animals do not consider the pain they inflict
on what they eat is pure STUPIDITY.

Yes, eating other animals as they die a slow painful
death is VERY common in nature. Well, so is RAPE.

Since dolphins don’t consider the pain caused to the
non-reproductive female they rape, why should a human
not be allowed to rape another?

Humans are logical and can reason. Reasoning and
logic forbids us from justifying rape merely because
it exists in nature, and it should forbid us from NOT
considering the pain we inflict on other species to
please our taste buds.

This entire discussion is pretty silly. 

There’s something very unnatural in the assertion that a predator should consider its prey’s pain threshold.  Only humans, due to their ease in obtaining food (usually handed to them by someone else), have the luxury of taking this into consideration.

Do lobsters consider their prey’s pain as they crack open the shell of a live clam or crab or grab a live fish and tear it to pieces?  I doubt it.

There are so many questions regarding our food supply.  For thousands of years we’ve been living in harmony with and also eating animals as part of the human diet.  Only in the past hundred years has that connection has been severed.  We always refer to the connection the Native Americans had, but actually all of mankind has been intimately connected to animals and the land for tens of thousands of years.  How is it humane to take animals for hundreds of miles cooped up in a cattle truck, with no room to hardly breathe, let alone move.  People are so disconnected from their food supply that they’ll poison their yards, kill all the dandelions ( a prized herb and green till they upset the green lawn image)poison their water supply, manufacture plastic bottles to contain water and then pollute the landscape with plastic that uses oil to produce.  Since we’re so unaware of what we’re doing and what’s happening around us, we seem to jump on the bandwagon on each new issue.  Until we are responsible for what we do to all animals, and the land and water, people will continue to jump on each new issue, I think just to assuage their nagging conscience.

When living in a society that has based it’s food industry on exploiting sentient beings and nature, it’s certainly not easy to eat without supporting violence and cruelty at some level.  In other word we must choose the option that required the least amount of violence.  Ms. Goodman points out that, “Even vegans find no moral purity in his book for eating grain “harvested with a combine that shreds field mice.’’ The idea that Ms. Goodman comes to the conclusion that Whole Foods decision only disconnects us from our food is rather ridiculous.  Whole Foods choice not to sell live lobsters is a more moral decision which gives their customers a better option and has spurred debate on this issue which is much needed.  It seems to me that Ms. Goodman, like most humans refuses to recognize that all creatures have intrinsic value and do not deserve to be treated like objects to exploited, but rather subjects to be communed with.  If we all began with this premise the debate of whether to boil alive lobsters or not would not exist.

First and foremost the discussion is about HOW the creature dies; the agony and cruelty endured.  It seems evident that that is too much of a nicety to deal with for Ms. Goodman.  If we won’t give up eating our fellow creatures (which we should and can do, readily), we must at least attend to the MOST HUMANE means of killing them for food.  Killing humanely seems like an oxymoron as does so much human endeavor.  But, in fact, in every instance the same should be the goal.  In thinking of your own demise, Ms. Goodman, I’m sure if you had a choice, you’d choose to die in your sleep rather than being skinned alive, boiled alive, or eaten alive.

The humane way to sacrifice a lobster for a meal is to take the live one (freshest and best this way) and plunk it into a pot of cool, fresh water on top of the stove. Cover the top and turn on the heat. Long before this animal can “feel” pain, the oxygen in the water dissipates with the increasing heat. Thus the lobster becomes unconscious long before it can “hurt.”

P.S. Lobsters don’t scream. They have no vocal cords.

Kudos to Whole Foods and any other store, city, or whatever that decides to quit selling live lobsters to be boiled alive and screaming!  Now, if we could just get them to quit selling meat altogether, what a more humane and peaceful planet this would be. 

GO VEGETARIAN for a better world.

Farm Sanctuary and PETA both have wonderful vegetarian starter kits that you can order online FREE.

I think it is the way the lobster has to die that is upsetting everyone. Other animals that are raised for food suffer and in the end are killed. We, as the ones standing on two legs with things we talk about like, “left brain, right brian,” as the head of the food chain, we need to make sure the animals lead a humane life and are put to death in the least painful way possibe. That is of course if you eat meat or other animals. I do not. They are living, feeling creatures and we have a responsibility to treat them with respect even if we are going to kill them in the end. It would all be so much easier if we just would not eat animals! But that will never happen for most of the human race, so be kind to them and make sure they have a humane death!! You would want the same.