Is veal cruel?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

These articles summarize the issue best:

Veal is the meat from a male calf up to 16 to 18 weeks old. It is not fed any grains or grasses, which gives its meat a delicate texture and a creamy pale color with a grayish-pink hue. Beef, on the other hand, is the darker, red meat from older animals.

https://www.allrecipes.com/article/what-veal/

The lack of iron also causes the calves to suffer from anemia, which gives the animals their prized white flesh whilst making the calves lethargic, weak and unwell. The veal industry purposefully breeds these animals to suffer perpetual illness and malnourishment, a practice which can only be called “cruel.”

https://sentientmedia.org/what-is-veal/

Consider the lobster calf.

[CEO Mindset]

no. veal is based.

[SWE]

Yes, killing for pleasure is inherently cruel

[West_Midlander]

Yes, but change should come from public opinion pressuring private businesses, not government regulation.

[Big Abraham]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

[Ferguson97]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

“Lamb” is usually a misnomer for mutton.

[Geoffrey Howe]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

“Lamb” is usually a misnomer for mutton.

And "veal" is usually a misnomer for beef.

[parochial boy]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

“Lamb” is usually a misnomer for mutton.

This might be one of the things that the Tories are enthusiastically trying to change post-Brexit, but EU regulations state that something can only be labelled "lamb" if the animal was slaughtered before the age of 12 months.

Lamb , and, well, all sheep products are generally a bit less cruel than other animal products overall because it is quite a bit more difficult to factory farm sheep like you can with pigs, cows and chickens.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This might be one of the things that the Tories are enthusiastically trying to change post-Brexit, but EU regulations state that something can only be labelled "lamb" if the animal was slaughtered before the age of 12 months.

Let's just say that those regulations are routinely pushed to the point of being dead letter. Though strictly speaking most of what is sold as 'lamb' in Britain is actually hogget rather than mutton. But for the purposes of this thread, more important is to point out that very young lambs (the sort of things that people think of when they hear the word 'lamb', in other words) are not slaughtered for their meat at all in most big lamb producing/consuming societies, and even in those where they are the practice is considerably less... problematic... than veal production.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

Lambs are kept in the flocks that they are born into and are raised outside on pasture of one kind or another. The flocks are rotated from field to field or have a semi-independent existence on moorland or similar upland landscapes in the case of mountain breeds. The calves used for veal are essentially a by-product of the dairy industry: male dairy cattle have no inherent economic value and veal is a way of giving them one. Practices have improved in recent decades, but they are still kept in constricted, distressing and fundamentally unnatural conditions, and are deliberately malnourished.

[dead0man]

if you regularly eat veal, you're a bastard. Full stop.

[7,052,770]

Yeah, I think it's just too much, even as an enjoyer of meat. I have unknowingly eaten veal a few times that was mixed into meatballs, but I don't think I could ever just order a piece of it and enjoy it.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

[Schiff for Senate]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

This. I know how deplorable killing animals for consummation is, but at the same time, I'd never stop since about 90% or more of the food I like is non-vegetarian.

[Farmlands]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

This. I know how deplorable killing animals for consummation is, but at the same time, I'd never stop since about 90% or more of the food I like is non-vegetarian.

How about pescetarianism? It's what I'm planning and fishing is definitely way less harmful and polluting than factory farms and slaughterhouses. Also, not sure how "deplorable" it is to kill animals for consumption when it's what literally what every carnivore needs to do to survive.

[RINO Tom]

I’m about as far from some PETA sympathizer, and I love meat … but honestly, I try not to order veal.

[Schiff for Senate]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

This. I know how deplorable killing animals for consummation is, but at the same time, I'd never stop since about 90% or more of the food I like is non-vegetarian.

How about pescetarianism? It's what I'm planning and fishing is definitely way less harmful and polluting than factory farms and slaughterhouses. Also, not sure how "deplorable" it is to kill animals for consumption when it's what literally what every carnivore needs to do to survive.

Humans aren't animals like wolves that they need to eat animals - they have a choice, and they choose to eat a lot of meat. To be honest, eating fish really isn't all that bad, but the real problem is eating chickens and cows. When real carnivores like wolves/lions/foxes, etc., eat chickens/cows/their prey generally, they just kill and eat them. Humans, on the other hand, aren't really aware of what happens to the pigs and cows and chickens they eat - the animals are abused, mistreated and seriously tortured before being butchered and slaughtered. Any comparison between how animals eat meat and how we eat meat is totally unreasonable - are these photos enough evidence, or do you need more? Still, returning to your point on fish, I don't think eating fish is nearly as cruel, since as far as I know fish are just killed and eaten, not brutally abused and tortured first. I mean it's not necessarily a good thing to eat fish, but from a moral standpoint, it's much better than eating pigs (see link above).

[NotSoLucky]

I don’t really see how it’s any more cruel than eating lamb. And lamb is delicious.

Arguably Lamb is equally as inhumane. My dad eats it while criticizing Veal, and he doesn't get the irony :/

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Arguably Lamb is equally as inhumane. My dad eats it while criticizing Veal, and he doesn't get the irony :/

No it absolutely isn't, see above!

[S019]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

This. I know how deplorable killing animals for consummation is, but at the same time, I'd never stop since about 90% or more of the food I like is non-vegetarian.

How about pescetarianism? It's what I'm planning and fishing is definitely way less harmful and polluting than factory farms and slaughterhouses. Also, not sure how "deplorable" it is to kill animals for consumption when it's what literally what every carnivore needs to do to survive.

Humans aren't animals like wolves that they need to eat animals - they have a choice, and they choose to eat a lot of meat. To be honest, eating fish really isn't all that bad, but the real problem is eating chickens and cows. When real carnivores like wolves/lions/foxes, etc., eat chickens/cows/their prey generally, they just kill and eat them. Humans, on the other hand, aren't really aware of what happens to the pigs and cows and chickens they eat - the animals are abused, mistreated and seriously tortured before being butchered and slaughtered. Any comparison between how animals eat meat and how we eat meat is totally unreasonable - are these photos enough evidence, or do you need more? Still, returning to your point on fish, I don't think eating fish is nearly as cruel, since as far as I know fish are just killed and eaten, not brutally abused and tortured first. I mean it's not necessarily a good thing to eat fish, but from a moral standpoint, it's much better than eating pigs (see link above).

I generally agree with this, though the way fish are killed isn't great either, suffocation is not really the best of deaths, though it is far superior to torture and slitting necks.

[Meclazine for Israel]

They say you should never discuss politics at the dinner table.

[patzer]

Yes, for sure.

Personally I’d be inclined to ban the raising of animals for killing. Shooting and fishing and stuff are one thing, but the systemic process of raising an animal to be killed for food is entirely unnatural and immoral imo.

[Crumpets]

Option 1

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Yes, cruel and delicious.

This. I know how deplorable killing animals for consummation is, but at the same time, I'd never stop since about 90% or more of the food I like is non-vegetarian.

How about pescetarianism? It's what I'm planning and fishing is definitely way less harmful and polluting than factory farms and slaughterhouses. Also, not sure how "deplorable" it is to kill animals for consumption when it's what literally what every carnivore needs to do to survive.

Fishing for oneself is less harmful, but there are huge environmental/sustainability issues with the sorts of fish one finds in the supermarket. It's part of why I really want to start learning to fly fish, on top of the fact that I just like trout better than I like most of the pelagic fish that's sold at supermarkets in the Northeast.