Comments on: Activists sue demanding N.Y. foie gras ban

By: Amy Alkon

Amy Alkon — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 19:19:29 +0000

Gavage (the force-feeding of ducks) is not cruel; the problem is the people who don’t think or take the time to understand it who anthropomorphise the birds.

I suggest J.T. Wenting look up the piece Andrew Gumbel wrote for the London Independent on Sonoma Foie Gras…actually, I think it’s no longer available, but there’s an excerpt of that and a letter from a guy who raises birds for foie gras on my blog.

Hope you don’t mind me posting the link:

http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2003/08/if_its_good_for.html

By: J.T. Wenting

J.T. Wenting — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 08:16:22 +0000

They even got the species of animal wrong.
Foie Gras is produced from goose liver, not duck liver (or should be, to be real foie gras. If they use duck liver in NY they should be sued for fraud, not animal cruelty).

I do agree however that the forcefeeding of the birds to fatten their livers prior to slaughter amounts to animal cruelty.
But if that happens (there is foie gras production where it doesn’t) the breeders should be sued over that rather than banning the product.

By: Tex Mex

Tex Mex — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:00:08 +0000

gould 631:

Force feeding is “the most cruel thing to do to an animal”??

Ever been to a slaughter house, or poultry processing faclity?

I know its “icky” and such, but millions get fed cheaply this way. Not that foie gras is cheap.

Banning foie gras production in the US may force me to break my long standing boycott of French products. It is THAT tasty.

PETA – “People Eating Tasty Animals”

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:18:38 +0000

gould631,

This IS a “crappy lawsuit” – if you want this stopped, you should support LEGISLATION to stop it, not court intervention. The legislature has jurisdiction on this issue, not the judiciary – it’s one of those, mildly important “separation of powerrs’ things… you know, one of the bedrock principles of our entire governmental system?

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 20:10:57 +0000

Can I sue for being aesthically and emotionally injured by being exposed to stupid animal rights groups?

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 17:43:36 +0000

It isn’t the job of the court to “bring about change”.

By: gould631

gould631 — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:43:45 +0000

Good. This food should be banned. I think this is a good use of the courts to help bring about a powerful and positive change. Crappy lawsuits suck, especially now that i have lukwarm McD’s coffee. But I ma all for this. It is the most cruel thinkg to do to an animal.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:08:24 +0000

“Another plaintiff, a New York restaurateur, Joy Pierson, claims that her decision not to serve foie gras has caused her to lose customers at her two Manhattan restaurants, Candle 79 and Candle Café, according to the complaint.”

Um, CHOOSING not to serve ANY dish will lose the customers who prefer that dish. This is INHERENT to the capitalist system. If that gives her standing, then the only logical outcome is to have all restaurants serve exactly the same thing.

That’s the most absurd claim I’ve seen in a long time here, possibly even the most absurd claim I’ve evr seen here, and that would be quite an accomplishment.

By: Jetgirl

Jetgirl — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:45:11 +0000

FYI, Candle 79 and Candle Cafe are both *vegan* establishments.

One could argue that more business is being lost by their decision not to serve dead cow products, rather than stuffed duck products.