James – (Sarah is) on the right side of most questions? – does she support taxation? If yes, then she’s a thief, and that brings a whole lot of evil with it. Immorality is a slippery slope.

Not that Sarah is worse than the rest of the oink-sector leaders: she simply suffers from the SAME malignancy that the rest do, and brought to fruition, would be no different.

A Harpy…sure, any thief can certainly be called a Harpy, as the word originates from a Latin word literally meaning “snatcher”. And a sadistic one that gets excited at the pain of others (man or beast) doubly so.

Oh, on the animals: that’s truly sad and disgusting. There are a myriad of far more humane methods…but they would all require a reduction in profit margin/throughput, which would not be possible under the oppressive taxation. As taxes go up, corners must be cut to stay afloat. Yet again, “our” government is the problem.

Palin describes everything on her show with a certain child-like zeal. Sometimes it seems over the top and staged (e.g. telling her daughter to opt for reloading rather than retreating, etc.). And if she wants to show someone a bleeding heart, I’m fine with it. I’d be the same way. Internal organs ARE fascinating. I was pleasantly intrigued by this oddly macabre aspect to her personality; hadn’t seen it before.

re: Myron Pauli… my only concern with Palin is that despite her talk of small government, she could be easily persuaded, as President, to invest in government warfare. My preference would be a Gary Johnson. But, as far as the criticism of Palin’s intellect, I don’t think that argument holds much weight any longer. Apart from her vocal tics, I don’t see her as considerably dumber than the ‘electable’ dreck that’s already out there. And Palin v Obama is a no-brainer for me (accidental pun).

I couldn’t do that myself on a large scale basis, but clubbing a fish and stunning it into unconsciousness, if not death, has got to be a little more merciful than just hacking its head off with a big knife or a meat cleaver while its still alive and conscious.

As for slaughterhouses, yes they can be cruel and there are liable to be times when there are unfortunate and sad, tragic mistakes in the process. But let’s face it, they can’t just wait for the animal to die of old age.

What would be worse, dying in a slaughterhouse or being abandoned by your herd when you’re old, or sick and weak, and being left to be ripped apart by a predator, or eaten alive by vermin?

As a Christian, I have to believe that the earth is God’s and that I am His steward. To live in this world, I must eat, but there is a right and proper way to go about practicing my dominion that precludes greed, inhumanity, and the abuse of fellow men and His created order. The proper care of this order seems to me to be one of the most intuitively-obvious-to-the-casual-observer, self-interested conservative ideas around. It would almost – almost, mind you – seem a complete mystery how the radical left ever captured this debate, but we need to revive a proper conservatism that returns food ethics back into our thought and vocabulary. The writings of Wendell Berry, I’m sure many readers here know, are useful in these discussions.

The radical left has captured the debate on this topic.