There have been several articles in the papers lately about horses that have been found to be starving to death in our community and how difficult it is to find people to adopt the horses. What happens is people get the horses and either they decide they don't want them and abandon them or they get too old to be of use and are not cared for. There are also those that just cannot financially care for the horses with the price of hay and other commodities going up higher in price.
And then we have legislation that is national and supported by some of my state legislators (I am from Kentucky, where we have a long history of horse breeding, riding and racing); that calls for no sell of horses to slaughter houses for meat either nationally or internationally.
I am not interested in eating horse meat personally; but find a dearth of common sense in that we don't see the remedy for the first problem in opposing the legislation in the second problem. Now horses are beatiful creatures and it really kind of does not appeal to me to eat one. But what is the difference in eating horses as opposed to swine or cows? Just because swine and cow are not as attractive; they are fair game?
Of course there are some that would say we should not eat any of God's creatures. And that is the fear of some that oppose the legislation against processing horse meat to sell overseas.
What do you think?
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 40
Bits and Pieces About Cats
Aesop for Today
Should I start a campaign against fast food places because I feel their foods are not healthy for people and creates many negative health responses. No, as far as I am concerned they have a right to make their on choices.
And I'm no less a man.
Of course it just tells me that we are not longer honoring and living by capitalism but steering our ship of state straight into socialism.
Is this an issue of tastes or really an issue of socialism taking precedence over capitalism?
I'm always amazed that the word socialism has such awful connotations for Americans. Honestly, we socialists don't have horn, cloven hoof or even a tail!
They were all alive before being eaten.
In my own case, I love haggis and we eat it often, but I would not serve it to guests, without offering an alternative!
Which is more humane; letting them starve to death or letting the owners have them slaughtered and letting the owner recoup some of their investment if they desire?
Of course they can let them go; but not in my neighborhood.
They survive quite well because they blend into the undergrowth and are difficult to see, so hunting them is a time consuming job. They are small, a little larger than a rabbit and have long tails. They grunt quietly when approached but run quite fast into the surrounding heather.
If you're served up with haggis, be sure it's the real McKoy. It's presented with a plum in its mouth, a bit like the apple and the pig, but because the taste is a little bitter, the plum sauce that goes with it sweetens it. I've heard of tourists being palmed off with alternatives, things like sheep's liver, hearts and lungs, all chopped up with suet, onions and oatmeal, and boiled up in a sheep's stomach! Awful! There's nothing like the 'real thing.'
Make sure you get the side dish, too. It's 'neepsan tatties,' very delicious and another speciality from Scotland.
Glad to have helped!
I don't know that either of those are as wierd as eating crawfish (Cajun style); and I like crawfish.
You forgot to mention the fact that two legs are longer than the rest, to allow it to scoot round the Bens.
Donald, a haggis is a form of savory pudding or sausage-like thing; it is a sheep's stomach used to hold the filling in the same way pig intestines are used in the US to hold sausage meat as a filling. The haggis is filled with a mixture of oats, onion and sheep parts.
Restaurants here in the US that serve a Burns Day dinner and make an effort to do the real thing serve it, piped in by bagpipers and with a reading of an ode to the haggis and saying of the Selkirk Grace, both by Burns. Burns Day has just passed, so you have a few days short of a year to find a restaurant doing it right next year. Don't sucker for one claiming to do it but that serves anything other than the traditional haggis menu--you eat tatties and neaps with that (potatoes and rutabagas). Some restaurants have what they call a Burns Day celebration and then offer gussied up fare that one would expect from a fancy London restaurant any day of the year with nary a haggis or neap in sight--nor a bagpiper nor a Selkirk Grace. This is a complete crock, and you would do well to *avoid* such falseness on Burns Day! Better to honor the memory of the great poet with a wee dram of your favorite single malt at home than to eat food he'd never have recognized in the company of other ignorants.
Yup, I think horses are eaten nearly everywhere *except* in the US! They are staple in the diet in Kazakhstan, Kyrgizstan, Uzbekhistan and neighboring countries. These are also people who love and respect their horses and are the best riders in the world. Hey, lambs and bunnies are cute, but many in the US have no hesitation about roasting the former and barbequeing the latter. So a horse is elegant. Being slaughtered for stew with red wine and root vegetables beats the socks off being out out to pasture to die a slow, cruel death of starvation!
I agree with you Dorine about the slaughter vs. allowing horses to starve being less cruel.
Our country is becoming so politically correct and so afraid to offend any sensibilities; we are fast loosing many of the freedoms our forefathers fought for. This in my opinion is just another case in point of the politically correct elite pushing an agenda and abrogating another persons freedom to either sell their property or even conduct a business that some others find repulsive because the elite find it repulsive. Of course if they could these elitist would force all of us to be vegetarian because they really prefer we not slaugter and eat any animal; because as some of them will say; animals are people too.
Scotland and Ireland may well both be Celtic countries, but there is much they do not have in common!
Well put Dorine on the more liberal politics there are the less freedom there is.
As for us and the Canadians, well, I suppose as compared with, say, the Japanese...
As for Scots and Irish, for starters, there is the very "small" matter of religion! We all know the Irish are Roman Catholic. Scots, however, are what in the US is called Presbyterian (or Reformed). (DH and I were married in a Presbyterian church with a stained glass window devoted to John Knox, and that is the one from which he was buried after having been a deacon there for 37 years.)
And how about the spelling of whisky/whiskey. Or the dancing. Or how the Irish don't eat haggis, and mix their mashed potatoes with cabbage instead of rutabagas (swedes).
Lots of Scots are actually Episcopalians, Dorine. Oh and quite a few remained Catholic, even after the Reformation - my own family, for instance! Dad always said it was just that our area was so remote that the reformation passed us by... And many of the Isles are still almost exclusively Catholic to this day! Apart from those that the WeeFrees rule, of course!
A lot of that is being lost more in modern times with no wilderness to tame.
The big difference in the U.S. to any of the former British Colonies and the U.K. now is we have a wider mix of all nations of the world than any of the other English Countries.
To bring it back to food; we have a lot more opportunity to eat wierd stuff from more places in our own country; than many other former colonies or the UK. I don't know if that is a dubious possibility or a good thing? I would say all in all, it is a benefit of having many nationalities in one country.
Even fuddy-duddy Europe has a long history of taking on the foodstuffs of other races - we've had waves of immigrants for thousands of years, not just hundreds!
Did you know, for instance, that an Indian curry is now considered Britain's second 'national dish', after roast beef? Or that some schools in inner London have pupils who speak nearly 100 languages?
Which is partially explanatory as to why "My Aussie rellies would not agree with you....! They are proud of their British stock!" The percentage of British stock in the U.S. is probably about 1/3 or less of what the British stock is in Australia; as a percentage of the population. We are happy as allies; but our British stock is no more a badge of pride than would be some of the citizens pride in their Irish, German, African, Japanese, Chinese, etc stock. What really is the stereotypical citizen of the U.S.? I think it is easier to come up with a stereotype of a citizen from Germany, Spain, Italy, Japan, China, Britain, Ireland, Scotland, etc. than it would to come up with a stereotype of a citizen of the United States.
Unfortunately, we are debating closing our borders more and then truly will be more like countries in Europe.
As for UK, well, I was at a market in the West End of London with a far greater variety of various African, Caribbean and E Indian foods and raw ingredients than you can even find in Manhattan or Brooklyn. And unlike US market with international ingredients, these were all in one place. You didn't have to travel all over the city to find each group's goods. In London, dende oil is sold right next to seame oil.
I acknowledge the difference, but I also believe abortion is murder. I think we put more value on animals than we do on people and find that a misplacement of our priorities and a bit of a moral disconnect.
That is true. I appreciate where your heart is on this.
I talked to a man that is a farmer/agriculturalist and we discussed this topic of horses. He is a horse lover, his family had horses and he was a rider. He said he has problems with these laws also regarding allowing the slaughter of horses for meet. Part of the problem is the same as that of needing to put dogs or cats down; and that is too many people have the idea of getting a pet and then after having it a year or so finding how much work is required and then abandoning the pet. Abandoning a horse is an expensive proposition; unfortunately the ones left holding the bag are the people that are boarding the animal. Not allowing them to turn horses over to slaughter houses (of course they can't because there are no slaughter houses for horse) leaves many of them to make a decision of putting the animal down themselves, letting it starve or going out of business. Many end up going out of business and then not being able to afford feed having to let the animal starve anyway.
The remedy of course if for people that take pets be responsible. That does not happen unfortunately. Too many people are selfish and when the pet becomes a burden, they release/abandon it.
Keep up your good work for the animals Sandy. There is not a completely easy answer.