Duck Duck Goose Legislation

**theworm**[$] · #1 04-28-2005, 10:58 AM

Oregon Latest State to Consider Banning Foie Gras

Quote:

Animal rights activists argue that enlarging the birds' livers to produce the delicacy is cruel.

If enacted into law, Oregon would become the second state in the nation to ban foie gras production. In California, a law passed last year bans the force-feeding of ducks and geese to make foie gras starting in 2012.

Laws outlawing foie gras have been proposed in New York, Illinois and Massachusetts.

A good measure to protect animals, or a new form of food censorship? Worthy of legislation?

Quote:

"At a time when we don't have a K-12 (education) budget and a health and human services budget, to go and pass a bill to prevent the force-feeding of ducks that's not even a problem in Oregon, demonstrates to me that we have our priorities out of line," said state senator Jason Atkinson, who predicted that the bill would fail in the House.

Should legislation that protects animals, wildlife, the environment only come after social issues are addressed?

Would you support this law? Do you think its good or frivilous?
I'm very interested in hearing a discussion on this.

**mtomm**[$] · #2 04-28-2005, 11:46 AM

It is a law I'll never break, that is for sure.
PETA will be thrilled, I'm sure.

I tend to agree with this quote:

Quote:

"At a time when we don't have a K-12 (education) budget and a health and human services budget, to go and pass a bill to prevent the force-feeding of ducks that's not even a problem in Oregon, demonstrates to me that we have our priorities out of line," said state senator Jason Atkinson, who predicted that the bill would fail in the House.

realtraveller · #3 04-28-2005, 01:22 PM

Why legislation like this? It's called throwing a bone to a special interest group to shut them up for a time while keeping the donations flowing in.

**theworm**[$] · #4 04-28-2005, 01:23 PM

So prevention of animal cruelty is not worthy of legislation?

**mtomm**[$] · #5 04-28-2005, 01:51 PM

Quote:

theworm said

So prevention of animal cruelty is not worthy of legislation?

They are outlawing the end product not the actual animal cruelty. Seems the states where the ducks are force fed are actually in a better position to legislate it if ending the cruelty is the point.

**theworm**[$] · #6 04-28-2005, 02:03 PM

Quote:

mtomm said

They are outlawing the end product not the actual animal cruelty. Seems the states where the ducks are force fed are actually in a better position to legislate it if ending the cruelty is the point.

Actually they are outlawing both the end product and the force feeding of ducks and geese, but since there are not a lot of ducks and geese bred for fois gras in Oregon, that is not a big point.
I'm not disagreeing with either of you, by the way - I think that issues in the schools etc are more important, but does that mean that we don't legislate any of the smaller things until the big things are done? I really have mixed feelings on this.

I remember when Florida voted as to whether or not to change the state constitution regarding pig farming. I spoke with Slick about it. I am all for the humane treatment of pigs but I voted against it because 1) there isn't a lot of pig farming in Florida and 2) What the hell are we changing the state constitution for.

Anyway. As far as banning the end product - wouldn't that be like saying - you can't produce cocaine in our state AND you can't use cocaine in our state regardless of where it was produced?

I'm curious here and I have mixed feelings, so if I'm playing devil's advocate a bit it really is to get more feedback on the topic.

**mjfrombuffalo**[$] · #7 04-28-2005, 02:52 PM

I'm for banning forced-feeding geese and wish they'd go after turkey farmers next. What they do to make big-breasted birds for us for Thanksgiving is horrible. Outlawing the product is taking a rather principled stand though, which is either admirable or a royal pain in the patootie.

**theworm**[$] · #8 04-28-2005, 03:22 PM

I don't know if its my religious convictions or my vegetarian side or what...
I am not against the meat industry. I do not think that everyone should be vegetarians. I have no problem with anyone who enjoys eating meat - I think its normal. What I do have a problem is with the cocky assumption that humans are supreme on earth and that we can do whatever to other species for our enjoyment. Raising animals for food is not wrong, but not respecting the lives of those animals and raising them inhumanely and in pain is wrong and should not be tollerated.
Just my two cents.
when we stop respecting other forms of nature, we stop respecting our world and environment, and ultimately we will be responsible for our own demise.

**jgibson2**[$] · #9 04-28-2005, 04:15 PM

Outlawing the process will help to make sure that the foie gras producers don't just relocate from California when the law goes into effect there. I think that outlawing the product will help to decrease the demand by forcing restauranteurs and gourmet shops to stop offering it. There will be a small black market, as for virtually any outlawed product, but I doubt it will be significant. Decreasing the demand will help put the producers in other regions into a negative financial situation and make them reconsider their business.

I'm far from a vegetarian, but I don't eat foie gras. I don't eat most veal. I prefer free-range turkeys. They taste better anyway.

**drmomentum**[$] · #10 04-28-2005, 05:12 PM

Foie gras prohibition!

Next up: Organized goose criminals, liver speakeasies, Al Capon.

-JP

**hadassahchana**[$] · #11 04-28-2005, 07:47 PM

What MJ said. I'm not a vegetarian, but I refuse to eat veal, lamb, and I only buy free range eggs etc. I do think there is a place for legislation of this kind as well. And what was with that school quote? It's not like they schoolchildren are selling cans of foie gras door to door, am I right?

Cindy