MY ESSAYS

HAPPY AS A CLAM NOT EATEN

HAPPY AS A CLAM NOT  EATEN

I used to think that eating mollusks (clams, mussels, scallops, oysters) was okay, because according to Pete Singer they were simple organisms without nervous systems and he implied that it was okay to eat them, because he doubted they could feel pain. So even though I considered myself animal-free, when dining out, I’d make that exception. Of course, then comes the baby shrimp, then the jumbo shrimp, then the fish chowder, a little cheese, a small egg and next thing you know I’m eating the whole camel.

So, I do understand the concept of the slippery slope. But I think there’s more to it than that. Firstly, I don’t know if Pete Singer was accurate, but even if he was, other sea life get killed when dredging for Mollusks. Secondly, and this is regarding scallops: Years ago, when vacationing on the Oregon coast, we went to a small seafood restaurant, where I ordered scallops. The owner warned me ahead of time that they weren’t like the scallops most people were accustomed to. In other words, it was the whole scallop, not just the muscular hinge that held the top and bottom shell together. I didn’t mind, thinking I’d try something new. Well, he was right. Oh, I got the hinge part, and attached to that was the animal that lives inside the shell. It looked a little like an embryo attached to an umbilical cord with hair on it.

Oysters are hard to open, and clams and mussels have to be steamed in order to kill the animal inside, so that it releases it’s grip on the shells via their muscles, thus via their nervous systems. No matter how simple one considers the nervous system to be; it’s still a nervous system that controls the shells that protect the animals inside. So, now per this writing, for me at least, they’re off limits. I suspect that the reason for the hard-to-open shell is evolution’s way of protecting them from predators.

Years ago, I claimed not to eat animals with faces. It all made sense then, to go ahead and eat mollusks because they didn’t have faces, and it fell in line with Pete Singer’s theory. In case you’re wondering why I’m now calling mollusks animals, well, I just explained why. But, I’m not the only one who does.

According to Webster’s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, Mollusks: clams, scallops, mussels, oysters are defined as invertebrate animals.

Fish, according to Webster dictionary, Third College Edition: are defined as cold-blooded vertebrate animals.

Arthropods: shrimp, lobster, crab are defined by Webster as invertebrate animals with jointed legs.

Those definitions are based on science, not Madison Avenue (advertisement campaigns to make you think you’re eating something other than animals). Hey, I was surprised too. Time to evolve with new information.

Of course now that I’ve pointed this out, the Jews who write the dictionaries will change the definition to support slaughter, just like they changed the bible to suit their Jewish agenda, and the works of  famous writers to erase the truth of the times they were written in. At some point it will be the actions that tell the truth and not the words used to describe a slaughter, a burnt offering or a holocaust as justified in order to support some groups domination agenda.

Advertisements