This July 1st, a California law passed in 2004 finally came into effect banning the production and sale of foie gras--fattened goose or duck liver, an expensive and delectable delicacy usually found to high-end restaurants: California's Foie Gras Ban Goes Into Effect While Bloomberg and the health brigades campaign for large-soda prohibition in New York, PETA and other similar groups in the "animal rights movement" have spent years condemning foie gras as just about the most evil foodstuff on the planet because of the process of fattening the liver, which is called gavage. According to the animal rights people, metal tubes are "rammed" down duck's throats, force-feeding them and causing their livers to become "diseased." In reality, ducks are desinged to swallow fish larger than their heads whole and they naturally gorge and fatten their livers to some extent in preperation for migration. Thus, gavage is simply an artificial inducement and extension of a natural process in waterfowl. There is no evidence that I have seen that the gavage process causes pain or undo hardship to these animals, provided its done right and they're well-taken care of otherwise. Indeed, foie gras ducks are generally much better cared for than livestock on "mainstream" industrial farms. Therefore, this campaign seems to me like an attempt by the animal rights movement to pluck very low-hanging fruit. Pit snooty, rich, cork-sniffing gourmets against cute, widdle duckies and Joe Schmoe will have no problem decided who to root for. Having rabble-roused a hate storm against the "barbaric" delicacy, they can use it as the thin end of the wedge to set precedent for banning or restricting more animal products. Or so it seems to me. What do you think?
I'm not really an animal rights type person, but torturing animals just to make them tastier is pretty messed up. Anyway, you can get geese to gorge themselves. You don't have to force-feed them.
Good. Anything banned which involves cruelty to animals to satisfy the gluttony of the rich, is to be applauded.
Poor people are on average, more obese (gluttonous) than the wealthy. Stop perpetuating your asinine cliches. Wealthy people are usually better educated and personally responsible, and more likely to eat healthy (pro-athletes and Hollywood celebs excluded, and coincidentally they're usually liberal), whereas poor people are more likely to pork out at Burger King several times a week.
'Personally responsible'. You mentioned cliches? Oh, and by the way foie gras is about as 'healthy' as peanut butter-over 43% fat content.
Getting them to gorge themselves is probably not commercially viable. It's expensive enough as it is. I have seen no evidence that their "tortured" or even really stressed by this process. It's far crueller to tie poultry upside down for slaughter.
Just another stupid policy, same as the ones that prevent us from eating certain aged cheeses and unpasteurized milk. The nanny state knows what's best for me, I'm sure of it...
Don't care. If you are in Cali and simply must eat this stuff it is still legal on FEDERAL land. There are a couple of restaurants in scenic places that serve it. Really though the gastronomical travails of the 1% don't really keep me up at night. There is a war in Afghanistan.
So you're saying that you're only willing to defend individual rights if it's a "big issue" and you're personally invested in it?
