| |
Everyone wants to live with a clear and clean conscience.
A clear conscience provides rest and you can be proud of it.
A clear conscience has to do with the conviction that you are
making the right choices. Everyone once had to make a choice
of which he knew it would affect animals, for instance eating
meat. How to deal with the contrasts in making ones choices?
The answer comes with learning how to choose and to detach.
Sometimes it is wise to make a choice, and sometimes you don't
have to choose. But when do you know what is best? We deal with
a number of questions that have to do with choices that, in
the end, also influence the life of animals. The relationship
between mankind and animals is the touchstone of human civilization.
The
text below is divided in 2 alternating paragraphs: "A" and
"B".
"A" represents the one hand, "B" represents the other hand.
A. Positive and negative motivation
The conscience is both the starting as well as end point of
the process of choosing. The conscience puts you before choices
and also evaluates your choices. It is good if a clear conscience
is based upon positive motives. It can however also be based
upon negative motivation. You may f.e. behave ethical out
of being afraid to be punished, in the present or later. This
does not show high standards and also points towards sheer
self-interest. Fear and moral dilemma moreover get in the
way of a true compassion with others (man or animal). Finally,
a negative motivation brings no rest.
B. Purity and others
Once studying purity, you will soon find out that the word
purity or fineness has a somewhat sterile overtone. And sometimes
even draws back. In particular when a "pure" way of life is
being forced upon by others or has its consequences for others,
for example when a society is being "cleansed" from unwanted
elements. In cattle farming: when a farm is being cleared
due to Foot&Mouth or BSE. Then freedom and solidarity are
at stake.
A:
The one, direct side:
Not eating meat
Whoever eats meat, has an animal die for him or her. If for
the sake of your life and health you do not want to sacrifice
animals, you have to become a vegetarian or vegan. That is
a pure weighing. Thereupon it is necessary though to do a
little extra effort in order to stay healthy, because simply
skipping meat from your menu and not adding something extra
can influence your health in a negative way. He or she who
tries to achieve purity by simply giving up, runs the risk
that this may lead to shortages. Also there is a fair chance
that the food becomes too tame. Choose a healthy and varied
menu. If you are serious about it, you will never long for
your old food habits no more.
B: The other, indirect side:
Health and taste
Meat consists of ingredients that your body can use to maintain
a healthy balance. But meat is being degraded first in your
digestive organs.Therefore it is also possible to stay healthy
by feeding yourself these essential ingredients directly.
Almost all the necessary elements are found in plants (vegetables).
All it takes is to practise yourself in tasty preparation
of the right combination of these elements. Do a bit of reading
and research and you will find out that the number of possibilities
to combine vegetables and protein-replacements in an appetizing
and pretty manner, is countless. As a consequence, health
is automatically guaranteed by the variations of your menu.
A: To do - to know
In order to have a clear conscience with regard to animals
it doesn't take doing a lot, but you can however do many things
for animals. On this website we show several examples. It
is important that you do know what your actions may bring
forth for animals. By "actions" we mean your choice of food,
of clothing, of keeping pets or not, and the ways of entertainment
with animals you might favor.
B: To leave out - to forget
To develop a clear conscience in respect of animals it is
mainly a matter of leaving things out: not eating meat and
fish, not wearing fur or leather clothes and not keeping pets
that did not come from a shelter or asylum. What does matter
is to forget that using animals would be essential for your
health or for your or other people's well-being. Those are
mainly fallacies and sometimes such untruths or myths are
the cause of animal suffering.
A: Freedom
People strive for freedom, and are entitled to freedom. No-one
is obliged to turn in his freedom for the sake of others,
but someone who materializes his freedom by never minding
other people's interests, is acting anti-social. Emancipation
does not stop with the black fellow man and with women rights,
but also concerns animals. Animals too have a right to freedom.
The awkward thing is that animals cannot fight for this right.
We, humans, will have to liberate society from an injust treatment
of animals. It ought to be legally justified and supported
that it is a human right to tackle others on injustices they
cause to animals.
B: To set limits
Freedom is a meaningless concept when no limits can be set.
Limits mark a free area. In order to enter someone elses territory,
you have to respectfully ask or negotiate his or her permission.
Respect means keeping an appropriate distance to the other
person. This distance enables the other person to make clear
in a reasonable way what he or she is or is not willing to
allow.
Animals also make clear when others trespass
their borders. But animals that are kept within industrial
farming under unnatural conditions, cannot show to the consumer
anymore that their limits were ignored and borders exceeded.
Man himself should be the judge of that.
A: The individual interest
The quality of life of an individual is partly depending on
his ability to take care of himself and partly on the conditions
that are provided by a society. Every individual has to decide
in his life to what extent he makes use of the possibilities
that society offers and in how far he or she is a supplier
of quality to others. What you do for your own Self, you do
for a fellow creature, be it human or animal. What you do
for an other being, you do for the Self.
Politically spoken it comes down to knowing
when you vote liberal and when socialist parties. Some parties
intend to exceed these two opposite choices by presenting
themselves as liberal-socialists, but that sometimes blurs
the true character of political issues. A similar pure reflection,
may by the way at a certain moment lead to a liberal vote
and at some other moment to a choice for social politics.
Therefore the historical context is important.
With regard to animals kept in cattle farming
the question is whether the interest of the farming business
exceeds the interest of the animal. If a shortage on food
would occur in a society (which happened in Europe during
and after the Second World War), it is reasonable to give
the farmer more freedom in order to produce much food. In
our contemporary Western nations however, there is no famine
problem; the only hunger that can be pointed at is the urge
of the industrial farmer to earn a lot of money. When the
farmer is not subjected to rules and regulations, this would
cost the quality of life to the animals in his stables.
B: The general interest of society
The quality of life within society depends on the offers that
its individuals, who together form a society, are prepared
to bring. "Every" working member pays taxes. Yet money is
not the only thing a society can run itself by. To stick to
social rules, requirements and decency is also of importance,
preferably voluntarily. These matters, in a way, are universal.
To a certain extent it is also necessary that again and again
these requirements are being re-determined. Should that not
be the case, then societies become rigid and can only function
if rules are ignored or offences are being tolerated.
In politics every time again the balance is
settled anew; sometimes liberals win some, sometimes socialists
do and sometimes christian-democrats parties. If this balance
is settled by means of an election-war where themes are an
issue that have to do with the sense of security of people,
than fundamental needs are at stake. The interests of the
animal are once again forgotten: "morals first, then food".
In times of famine it is the opposite but the result is the
same: the animal is forgotten. This matters in as far as people
who want to make money at the cost of animals, see their chances
to do a good stroke of business at all times. They are also
the ones that plead for an international accessibility of
trade markets. In that way more turnover can be generated
and the law of the jungle is in force. In cases like this,
the one with the least clear conscience earns the most money.
A:
The ambition and the ideal
Happiness
He who chases happiness, will lack the repose to experience
such happiness. Feeling happy has something to do with the
right balance between effort and being at ease. But happiness
also has to do with chance. A blisfull feeling is often something
that overcomes you by chance. Many feelings of happiness arise
in the natural scenery. Apparently nature provides for the
place and circumstances that can evoke feelings of joy or
spiritual feelings. Although we cannot look into the heads
of animals, to them this will not be very different. When
an animal can live in its proper habitat in free nature, it
has the best chance of feeling happy now and again. For most
of the living creatures, the best chance on happiness comes
with living a natural life. That means living in an optimal
balance, aiming for freedom. Freedom is, means and purpose.
Love is freedom. Freedom is "pure" to such extent that it
only works when simultaneously applied for by its opposite
(to set limits). To keep this in mind, brings the best chances
of becoming and staying happy.
B: The reality
Well-being
Our well-being is dependent on the correct amount of effort
to fulfil our fundamental needs, but also to grow mentally
and spiritually. If we force our efforts in this respect,
it leads to stress. Our spiritual development is partly focused
on acquiring freedom in order to expand ourselves. As for
the remainder, we are focused on others and on "higher purposes".
For animals kept in industrial farming things are no different.
Too little distraction caused by an unnatural life in the
stables, leads to stress by frustration and underutilizaton
(weariness). Subsequently, in turn this indigence of tribulation
leads to a non-preparedness for the stress of transport to
the abattoir. In fact the well-being of the animal is at stake
in all the phases of its life. For our own welfare, we no
longer require using the animal. Not as a pet and not as a
means of nourishment. For our good and our mental or spiritual
growth, we had better free ourselves from our deep-seated
inclination to make use of animals. This emancipation is a
good step when setting out for a life with a clear conscience.
|
