SENATE BILL: Bovine Protection Act (Withdrawn)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Who do you think?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

This is ridiculous. Dogs are one thing. How about we just ban the consumption of meat entirely?

[Napoleon]

I'm undecided on this. I've never consumed veal and find the production of it to be cruel, however, it seems to be widely accepted within our culture.

So, please convince me either way.

[bgwah]

This is ridiculous. Dogs are one thing. How about we just ban the consumption of meat entirely?

I doubt your proposal would gain much traction.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

This is ridiculous. Dogs are one thing. How about we just ban the consumption of meat entirely?

I doubt your proposal would gain much traction.

Why should we apply the standard set for dogs to veal? Veal is hardly a taboo in our society. Sure, the baby cows are treated poorly, but unfortunately many animals are before they are slaughtered. If someone is offended by veal, they have every right in the world to refuse to eat it, but banning it nationwide is a bit nannystatist even for me. If you have a counter argument, I'm listening, but at face value it seems a bit too extreme.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I refuse to support this bill as it is.  I'd have no problem banning the sale and importation of non-free-range veal.  But there is nothing necessarily cruel about raising and slaughtering calves (just like lamb).

Free-range veal are calves allowed to roam the pasture with unlimited access to the mother's milk and pasture grasses.  In a controlled pasture environment, you could still get the desirable qualities of veal without any poor treatment of the animal.

I will leave it up to the sponsor to amend the bill, since it completely changes the entire spirit of it.  If he does not wish to change it, I have no doubt the bill will fail.

[Napoleon]

The term nannystate refers to a government with a plethora of laws aimed at "protecting" individuals from themselves. This bill is protecting an animal from cruel treatment.

The debate, I suppose, is centered around whether or not it is worse to kick a child in the balls before slaughtering it or waiting a couple more years to slaughter it with a similar result.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Is there a sharp cut-off point for age between veal and beef?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

In all fairness to the term nanny state, this bill is protecting us from ourselves - our nature to slaughter and mistreat animals. No doubt we do do that, but as I said earlier, if we are going to start something like this, we might as well go full circle and ban all production of meat. Outside of free-range products, most animals are mistreated to some extent before they meet their end.

[Fuzzybigfoot]

This bill has my full support.  Killing small cows for food seems pretty wrong. 

[Ban my account ffs!]

This bill has my full support.  Killing small cows for food seems pretty wrong. 

Would you also support banning the slaughtering of lambs?  You might have the Jews on your case then.

Banning the slaughter of calves because "oh they're so cute" is pretty irresponsible.  Especially when we can make a law that ensures the animals are treated humanely in their short existence.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

This bill has my full support.  Killing small cows for food seems pretty wrong. 

Would you also support banning the slaughtering of lambs?  You might have the Jews on your case then.

Banning the slaughter of calves because "oh they're so cute" is pretty irresponsible.  Especially when we can make a law that ensures the animals are treated humanely in their short existence.

I don't see anything stopping us from amending this bill to tackle just that.

[bgwah]

This isn't supposed to be some feel-good latte liberal bill.

[Sbane]

This isn't supposed to be some feel-good latte liberal bill.

Then why differentiate between veal and beef? Why not ban meat altogether?

[bgwah]

This isn't supposed to be some feel-good latte liberal bill.

Then why differentiate between veal and beef? Why not ban meat altogether?

That would never pass, silly. 

[Sbane]

This isn't supposed to be some feel-good latte liberal bill.

Then why differentiate between veal and beef? Why not ban meat altogether?

That would never pass, silly. 

So cows get to live a few more years before they die? Ok.....

Why is this even necessary then?

[Fuzzybigfoot]

This bill has my full support.  Killing small cows for food seems pretty wrong. 

Would you also support banning the slaughtering of lambs?  You might have the Jews on your case then.

Banning the slaughter of calves because "oh they're so cute" is pretty irresponsible.  Especially when we can make a law that ensures the animals are treated humanely in their short existence.

1.)  No, but only because of what you just said. 

2.)  We can always hand out subsities to the meat industry to make up for the lost product, maybe in the form of bonds or something?

[Fuzzybigfoot]

This isn't supposed to be some feel-good latte liberal bill.

Or is it??   DA-DA-DAAAAA 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Amendments, anyone?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Amendments, anyone?

Outside of amending it to, I guess, make it a law aimed at treating baby cows humanely, we might as well vote on this now or table it. I, for one, cannot see how anyone could reasonably justify passing a bill like this.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I don't think there's enough support here to ban veal. I'd like to offer this as an amendment in its place, to promote humane treatment not just of calves but other farm animals as well:

Farm Animal Protection Act

1. The use of veal crates and gestational crates shall be illegal as of July 1, 2012.
2. It shall be illegal to import veal into Atlasia as of January 1, 2012.
3. Effective February 1, 2012, all animals raised for human consumption must only be slaughtered according to humane practices to be outlined by the Department of Internal Affairs in consultation with veterinary and humane societies, and with accommodation to Kosher, Halal and other religious practices.
4. Violations of this act may be subject to fines of up to $100,000 per incident, and/or closure of operations in cases of multiple abuses.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I still think it is extreme overreaching for the federal government to ban importing veal. There is no reason why it should do that. If we are really going to cry about how we treat the cattle before they are slaughtered, we might as well make uniform rules and regulations for all meat, not just veal. Of course, that will force countless hoops for the farmers to jump through, but that is up the us to decide, I guess.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

okay, a ban on veal imports might not be the best way to go about things, but there ought to be something to help make sure that the meat that comes in isn't from farms or companies that abuse animals. Is that practical? I don't know.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

okay, a ban on veal imports might not be the best way to go about things, but there ought to be something to help make sure that the meat that comes in isn't from farms or companies that abuse animals. Is that practical? I don't know.

It's a little hard simply because we could argue over how to constitute "animal abuse" for days and days. One could argue there is no such thing as "humane slaughtering," for example. I think social awareness has caught up in many areas to this issue, but putting restrictions on how farms can raise their livestock will only increase costs, increase prices in the store, and hurt Atlasian citizens who are not as well off as many of us. I'm not saying we should deregulate the industry, but animal abuses are not nearly as widespread nowadays to warrant an action such as this by the federal government.

If the regions want to pass laws regulating their meat industry further, then it is fine by me! But I just think it is a bit much for the federal government to be doing.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: Vote to begin soon.