As Idaho moves to criminalize undercover video with 'ag-gag' law, clip of dairy worker sexually abusing cow surfaces

boing
21

Unicorns are colossal perverts and love anything like that.

3 Likes
22

I don’t eat cows and limit my use of leather, but look at this way; we euthanize pets if they are sick, that doesn’t mean that beating them or abusing them when they are alive is okay. The same could be said of assisted suicide for people, we may put them out of misery, but does that imply we can be the ones putting them in misery in the first place?

3 Likes
23

I can’t find it now, but I’ve never forgotten The Onion’s best headline ever:

Perverted Kellogg’s employee comes in specially marked packages.

4 Likes
24

My priorities would probably be different if I were a cow, but the sexual abuse of a cow seems of less concern than the “ag-gag” law. Most of us aren’t in a position to watch first-hand all the steps our food goes through, unless we significantly change the way we live, and we can’t always count on government inspectors. Investigative journalism, or just well-meaning people with cameras, are the only way we’re going to know if any abuses are going on.

The fact that the industry is willing to pay a lot to keep what they’re doing a secret really worries me.

7 Likes
25

Also, doesn’t this go against the First Amendment? What’s to follow, laws that prohibit whistle-blowing of toxic additives in drugs or food?

3 Likes
26

Would that be the same pale used to contain the cows in the first place?

etymology is fun.

2 Likes
27

If someone were to kill and eat me I´d rather they don´t rape me first.

2 Likes
28

Only applies to corporate persons, duh.

3 Likes
29

While I think it is a violation of the First Amendment various states have some pretty ridiculous “food libel laws”, and the “ag-gag” law may be covered because people can be prosecuted for criticizing food products, even if there’s a sound scientific basis for their criticisms.

30

Libel is supposed to only be appropriate civil action if the allegations are not true. How can you prove the veracity of allegations, if you are denied the right of proof? It’s simply a way to designate everything as libel. I still don’t see how this can be legal.

2 Likes
31

Is there some right to privacy in criminal activity that I am unaware of? Is the state going to start sending in undercover investigators to replace the private individuals that are currently stepping up to do it? Is someone willing to sacrifice their quality of life by working in an unpleasant environment as part of an undercover investigation really going to balk at a fine or a little jail time if this legislation passes?

4 Likes
32

The Indiana legislature is also pushing-through a similar gag bill.

This new bill (after several failed attempts) is based on an old “railroad trespass” statute.

33

Everything that moves kills to survive. That’s a natural part of life and should not be demonized.
Only a few animals on earth will torture another animal before killing it and only one of those animals has the mental capacity to understand why it’s wrong.

4 Likes
34

Of course that should be prohibited – that would be disclosing “trade secrets.”

1 Like
35

Aren’t most of the Ag Gag laws based on criminalizing the act of providing false information in order to gain employment? If so, then they likely pass 1st Amendment tests…

37

Maybe the cow was just asking for it, walking around naked and all.

2 Likes
38

its quite obvious that not all individuals of that particular animal understand.

39

Well, at least they didn’t kill it, right?

40

I would avoid using the naturalistic fallacy and the appeal to nature when it comes to trying to determine what is morally correct. Just because certain behaviors and situation can be observed in the natural world, doesn’t mean that it is the correct moral action to condone the same behavior. An extreme example of applying this fallacy is using Social Darwinism to decided how to treat one another in a pluralistic society. This wrongly justified how those who are weaker in a society can be brutalized because… “Hey look at the animal kingdom. It’s a brutal survival of the fittest world, so I’m justified to crush those that are weaker than me.” I think one can see that there is a continuum in consciousness amongst all living things, from single celled organisms to complex mammals.

“The question is not, “Can they reason?” nor, “Can they talk?” but "Can they suffer?”
― Jeremy Bentham, The Principles of Morals and Legislation

41

There is a vast difference between “Hey look at the animal kingdom. It’s a brutal survival of the fittest world, so I’m justified to crush those that are weaker than me.” and what I actually said which was quite a bit more like: “Being killed for meat is the lowest level of suffering an animal would experience at death if it is done correctly”.

2 Likes