Why Kerala has no beef with beef.

[kaku1]

You are the only person among the sceptics to still use good language...thanks for that. I personally am for the protection of the cow only... Amul's experience with cows is the best example in this regard. That is worth emulating...

Amul dudh, hai asle dudh,, karde tan man ko majboot. Mere saath chalta hai India, Amul dudh peeta hai India.

Dont forget Operation Flood.

Btw what about Man Slaughter.

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Because in a world ruled by human beings, humans are at a different level and cannot be compared with any other creature, living or otherwise. You are coming up with very stupid logic.

That is ridiculous. It is already established that Aghoris are known to eat human flesh. They as a minority has a right over that.

It is your belief that humans rule the world, others believe its GOD who rule the world. That humans are no different from cows in that regard, only marginally better.

If you consider human beings "special" , how can you deny that same right to others to consider "Bovines" as special ?

It is your position that is untenable, mine is perfectly logical.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Not really... imo. But no point in losing sleep over professional trolls.

He is just anti-BJP, anti-Modi, anti-Hindutva! He doesn't even like Rahul or Kejriwal much, he just sees opponents of BJP in them, and I think he can cheer for Lalu also if things come to that.

 

[doppelganger]

Btw what about Man Slaughter.

What about it? Its bannned in all states.

 

[dray]

@dray / @Rain Man

Can you please spell out what your position on this issue is?

I don't know what or how to debate with you unless I do.



It religious because Hinduism is pretty pragmatic about sex.

Where there is a mother, there has to be a father.

We do not believe in spontaneous pregnancies, apples, ribs, etc.

Here is my position:

1. I don't worship cows, I see cows as useful animals, and I believe that's why cows were given special status in Hinduism. But I have no problem with anyone worshipping cows.

2. I never ate beef, partly because I am not completely free of religious dogmas, partly because beef is not easily available in standard restaurants, partly because I am not habituated with it, and partly because of health and hygine related concerns. I don't eat pork also for the same reasons, barring one or two times in a good restaurant. However, I have no issues with anyone eating beef or pork, as I don't have any special emotional/religious sensibilities with cow.

3. I strongly believe that religious preferences should not be forced on anybody or interfere with those who are not associated with it. I may or may not eat beef, but I have no right to impose my preferences on others. Similarly, I won't like anybody to impose their religious beliefs on me against my will.

4. I am not opposed to banning of slaughter of milk-giving cows, as they are a major source of nutrition for a country like ours suffering from child malnutrition.

5. However, I am opposing the decision of banning the slaughter of bulls & bullocks. That was a political decision to screw minorities without any justification, because:

A. Most people don't keep uncastrated bulls at home because they are unproductive and unruly. Only a handful are kept uncastrated for breeding purposes.

B. Most bulls are castrated to make them docile, bigger, and managable for ploughing or cart pulling, but buffalos and tractors also do the same jobs, we actually don't need that many bullocks. That's why you will see that India is the biggest exporter of beef in the world, probably a bigger number of cattle goes to Bangladesh, millions of people consume beef in India, but still India has the largest cattle stock in the world by a large margin, and it is increasing.

C. If you ban slaughter/export of bulls and bullocks, those unproductive and unusable cattle stock of bulls and bullocks will put further pressure on the limited resources (food, water) of the productive cows, causing more harm than good to the thinly balanced eco system for cattles. They will also cause nuisence on the streets, I am talking about a number that run in millions every year, that will become extra on the available resources every year, adding up on the excess of the previous years. Think about it, it's no joke.

D. Millions depend on the income from beef, why to snatch away their livelihood when we cannot offer the basic standard of life to millions?

You are the only person among the sceptics to still use good language...thanks for that. I personally am for the protection of the cow only... Amul's experience with cows is the best example in this regard. That is worth emulating...

Protection of cows, fair enough, it gives the believers satisfaction and others milk and milk related products. But why bulls and bullocks? Don't make it a point scoring thing.

Btw, as far as I know, Amul processes more buffalo milk than cow milk, do give the buffalos their due credit.

 

[doppelganger]

Thanks @Rain Man

Regardless of the fact that this is a secular nation, it is the ancestral land of the Hindus.

The cow is special to us and we cannot see it being slaughtered. All other arguments come afterwards.

We don't eat dogs. Bitches have significantly larger litters than cows do. Cats as well. Do you see us having a dog or a cat problem? There are ways. There will have to be ways.

Livelihoods could and will be affected in the short to medium term. Again there are ways. Shift to cutting goats if you want. Or chicken. Or study and become a bankers or a lawyer or a doctor. Just because you come from a long line of butchers does not mean you can and will only be a butcher in your life.

Prics will go up? Sure, in the short to medium term. And then they will find a natural balance. Breed goats. Already boneless chicken is cheaper than beef. This was told to me by a restauranteer who used to serve beef (carabeef and bullocks).

Today there is demand and supply. Once there will be no supply, the demand will not evaporate. It will shift. It will have to. By law.

 

[dray]

That is ridiculous. It is already established that Aghoris are known to eat human flesh. They as a minority has a right over that.

It is your belief that humans rule the world, others believe its GOD who rule the world. That humans are no different from cows in that regard, only marginally better.

If you consider human beings "special" , how can you deny that same right to others to consider "Bovines" as special ?

It is your position that is untenable, mine is perfectly logical.

1. Aghoris don't kill humans, otherwise they would have been jailed. They don't survive on human flesh, they eat it in small quantity for their sadhana. It is not the same as eating chicken/mutton/beef. And what Aghoris do is not taken well by the mainstream society.

2. Human beings rule the world in all practical sense, even the animal rights are drafted by the humans.

3. Killing for food is perfectly within the laws of the nature.

4. For that crappy logic of yours, if you want to be phylosophical and see humans and bovines are same, then how can you deny the same status to all other living beings; like goats, chicken, lobster, carrot plant, rat, snake, hilsa, spinach plant, the rice or wheat plants and seeds, that lice in the hair or the tape worm inside a child's intestines, those bacterias or the viruses ( including the swine flu one), same status for all, can't kill anyone. You may come back with you highly tenable logic.

 

[gslv]

I'll freely admit I do not know much about them. Nor am I trying to make them some sort of satanic superman cult here. But I've seen peers, fakirs, babas up close and personal in the city. Some are dhongi. Others scare the crap out of you. Yet others are there standing between you and darkness ......

care to elaborate. i am interested to know more about them .

 

[Iggy]

You are the only person among the sceptics to still use good language...thanks for that. I personally am for the protection of the cow only... Amul's experience with cows is the best example in this regard. That is worth emulating...

You shouldn't emulate Amul..It was found by a Christian Varghese Kurian inorder to convert Gujratis to Christianity.. He is also a mallu..So he is probably a sickular too.. Time to regain the lost pride of Hindutva by destroying Amul..

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

1. Aghoris don't kill humans, otherwise they would have been jailed. They don't survive on human flesh, they eat it in small quantity for their sadhana. It is not the same as eating chicken/mutton/beef. And what Aghoris do is not taken well by the mainstream society.

Irrelevant. Canibalism is illegal. Period. You want to be fair on principles, you do not get to cherry pick. The rules have to be same for all minorities.

If you are willing to be "unfair" then beef ban is tenable because the majority is offended by it.

2. Human beings rule the world in all practical sense, even the animal rights are drafted by the humans.

Nonsense. Our drafts does not control our action. Just because there is a law on murder, do murder not happen ?

Human rules are broke all the time. Nature's laws, cosmic laws CANNOT be broken. You cannot deny gravity, or time or life. You have no control over them. You can only manipulate them.

If you cannot enforce it evenly, then your rule is a sham. It is only for the weak and for the poor and for the foolish.

Laws of dharma are not drafted by humans, it is only understood by humans. That is the law that rules the world in all practical sense.

3. Killing for food is perfectly within the laws of the nature.

It is, but for a conscious being, you are held accountable for your actions. Killing humans are also within the laws of nature. Law of nature is not necessarily the law of man.

4. For that crappy logic of yours, if you want to be phylosophical and see humans and bovines are same, then how can you deny the same status to all other living beings; like goats, chicken, lobster, carrot plant, rat, snake, hilsa, spinach plant, the rice or wheat plants and seeds, that lice in the hair or the tape worm inside a child's intestines, those bacterias or the viruses ( including the swine flu one), same status for all, can't kill anyone. You may come back with you highly tenable logic.

LOL at your understanding of logic. On one hand you say might is right, so logic is not required, and when convenient you cluth at logic.

We do not deny the same status to all living beings. Law of dharma is equally applicable on all and for all living beings. But the gap between our conciousness and their makes a difference. Even plant have life.

But slaughter of domesticated animals under our protection and exploitation is more sinful than the slaughter of wild animals. It is unethical and immoral.

Killing of ALL creatures is unethical when we can avoid it.

For Hindus the morality and ethics are defined in our scriptures. You can debate the scritpures, but you cannot debate faith

Since you do not know any scriptures and are ignorant of the moral and ethical guidelines and frameworks, you are foolishly debating faith. Every-time I ask you to name the scriptures you follow, you run away and come back when you feel that question has died out.

The ban on Bovines is a matter of faith. You deny others that faith and cal yourself a give of Freedom ..... now that is crappy logic.

You shouldn't emulate Amul..It was found by a Christian Varghese Kurian inorder to convert Gujratis to Christianity.. He is also a mallu..So he is probably a sickular too.. Time to regain the lost pride of Hindutva by destroying Amul..

. Total HUBRIS and Christian supremacist versions of history

AMUL founder was Tribhuvandas Patel, A Gujarati HINDU.

AMUL was formed when the farmers of Kaira approached Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel under the leadership of local farmer leader Tribhuvandas K. Patel. He advised them to form a cooperative and supply milk directly to the Bombay Milk Scheme instead of Polson (who did the same but gave them low prices). He sent Morarji Desai to organise the farmers. In 1946, the milk farmers of the area went on a strike which led to the setting up of the cooperative to collect and process milk. Milk collection was decentralized, as most producers were marginal farmers who could deliver, at most, 1–2 litres of milk per day. Cooperatives were formed for each village, too.

Kurian was a government employee who was appointed as a dairy engineer at Government Research Creamery, a milk powder factory, in Anand.

Kurian later was a marketing man which is how he made his name. All his appointments were political appointments.

 

[Iggy]

Irrelevant. Canibalism is illegal. Period. You want to be fair on principles, you do not get to cherry pick. The rules have to be same for all minorities.

If you are willing to be "unfair" then beef ban is tenable because the majority is offended by it.



Nonsense. Our drafts does not control our action. Just because there is a law on murder, do murder not happen ?

Human rules are broke all the time. Nature's laws, cosmic laws CANNOT be broken. You cannot deny gravity, or time or life. You have no control over them. You can only manipulate them.

If you cannot enforce it evenly, then your rule is a sham. It is only for the weak and for the poor and for the foolish.

Laws of dharma are not drafted by humans, it is only understood by humans. That is the law that rules the world in all practical sense.



It is, but for a conscious being, you are held accountable for your actions. Killing humans are also within the laws of nature. Law of nature is not necessarily the law of man.



LOL at your understanding of logic. On one hand you say might is right, so logic is not required, and when convenient you cluth at logic.

We do not deny the same status to all living beings. Law of dharma is equally applicable on all and for all living beings. But the gap between our conciousness and their makes a difference. Even plant have life.

But slaughter of domesticated animals under our protection and exploitation is more sinful than the slaughter of wild animals. It is unethical and immoral.

Killing of ALL creatures is unethical when we can avoid it.

For Hindus the morality and ethics are defined in our scriptures. You can debate the scritpures, but you cannot debate faith

Since you do not know any scriptures and are ignorant of the moral and ethical guidelines and frameworks, you are foolishly debating faith. Every-time I ask you to name the scriptures you follow, you run away and come back when you feel that question has died out.

The ban on Bovines is a matter of faith. You deny others that faith and cal yourself a give of Freedom ..... now that is crappy logic.



. Total HUBRIS and Christian supremacist versions of history

AMUL founder was Tribhuvandas Patel, A Gujarati HINDU.

AMUL was formed when the farmers of Kaira approached Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel under the leadership of local farmer leader Tribhuvandas K. Patel. He advised them to form a cooperative and supply milk directly to the Bombay Milk Scheme instead of Polson (who did the same but gave them low prices). He sent Morarji Desai to organise the farmers. In 1946, the milk farmers of the area went on a strike which led to the setting up of the cooperative to collect and process milk. Milk collection was decentralized, as most producers were marginal farmers who could deliver, at most, 1–2 litres of milk per day. Cooperatives were formed for each village, too.

Kurian was a government employee who was appointed as a dairy engineer at Government Research Creamery, a milk powder factory, in Anand.

Kurian later was a marketing man which is how he made his name. All his appointments were political appointments.

Offourse, I knew it..Those Christian missionaries trying to take credit of everything.. Waiting for the when you remove the mask of Abdul Kalam too who is takibg credit of the missile programmes devaloped by Hindus..

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Offourse, I knew it..Those Christian missionaries trying to take credit of everything.. Waiting for the when you remove the mask of Abdul Kalam too who is takibg credit of the missile programmes devaloped by Hindus..

LOL you did ?

Then why were you lying that AMUL was started by Kurian a Mallu christain ?

 

[Iggy]

LOL you did ?

Then why were you lying that AMUL was started by Kurian a Mallu christain ?

Just trying to steal the credit from Hindus..

 

[MokshaVimukthi]

Just trying to steal the credit from Hindus..

Awww iggy boy, tried to troll using a fake christian supremacist history and landed with eggs on his face.

 

[haviZsultan]

Thanks @Rain Man

Regardless of the fact that this is a secular nation, it is the ancestral land of the Hindus.

The cow is special to us and we cannot see it being slaughtered. All other arguments come afterwards.

We don't eat dogs. Bitches have significantly larger litters than cows do. Cats as well. Do you see us having a dog or a cat problem? There are ways. There will have to be ways.

Livelihoods could and will be affected in the short to medium term. Again there are ways. Shift to cutting goats if you want. Or chicken. Or study and become a bankers or a lawyer or a doctor. Just because you come from a long line of butchers does not mean you can and will only be a butcher in your life.

Prics will go up? Sure, in the short to medium term. And then they will find a natural balance. Breed goats. Already boneless chicken is cheaper than beef. This was told to me by a restauranteer who used to serve beef (carabeef and bullocks).

Today there is demand and supply. Once there will be no supply, the demand will not evaporate. It will shift. It will have to. By law.

By this logic Tharparkar Islamkot Chachro and more particularly Sindh should ban cow slaughter because there are Hindus there too. Then Canada US, Britain. Freedom is being curtailed. Especially for minorities in Maharashtra because of this law.