The Freegan Challenge to Veganism

There is a surprising consensus among vegan philosophers that freeganism—eating animal-based foods going to waste—is permissible. Some ethicists even argue that vegans should be freegans. In this paper, we offer a novel challenge to freeganism drawing upon Donaldson and Kymlicka’s ‘zoopolitical’ approach, which supports ‘restricted freeganism’. On this position, it’s prima facie wrong to eat the corpses of domesticated animals, as they are members of a mixed human-animal community, ruling out many freegan practices. This exploration reveals how the ‘political turn’ in animal ethics can offer fertile lenses through which to consider ethical puzzles about eating animals.

Prohibition

How do you decide which laws are just, and which to break? How do you know when a democratic government has passed a law you are comfortable breaking? In this work of philosophical short fiction, the narrator admits he is an addict. He takes a taxi to a vacant part of town, and walks the rest of the way to his source. He knocks and enters the restaurant. Only one other patron, a woman. He orders the illegal dish to serve his addiction, a steak. With a glass of red wine he savors the illegal action of eating animal flesh. Just then the place is busted by the police. The narrator hides, but can see the police interrogating the woman and the doorman. In an effort to get information, the younger policeman begins beating the woman and accidentally kills her. The police decide to cover their tracks by throwing the woman in the back alley and making the doorman promise to never tell anyone what he saw. After the police leave, the terrified narrator slips out the back.

The Isolation and Identification Bacteria on Jallalah Animal (Study on the Feeding Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) with Chicken Manure As Foods)

In the hadith, Rasulullah SAW prohibit human to consume meat and milk from manure-eating animal (Jallalah animal). In this study, tilapia fishes were fed chicken manure (being Jallalah). Then, it was analyzed based on the microbe in their intestine. The purposes of this study are to isolate and to identify the types of bacteria, and to determine the pathogenic and non-pathogenic bacteria in the intestines of fish that have been fed chicken manure. Bacteria samples were isolated from the intestine of fish with chicken manure and the commercial fish food as a control. Bacteria identification was done by using morphological characterization, macroscopic and microscopic identification, and biochemical test. The results show that 21 isolated bacteria in the fish intestine that was fed chicken manure and six of the bacteria are pathogenic. Based on this study, it can be concluded that tilapia fish by feeding with chicken manure contains many types of pathogens bacteria. Briefly, tilapia fish is not good for being consumption.Abstrak: Dalam hadis yang diriwayatkan oleh Ibnu Umar, Rasulullah SAW. Melarang memakan daging dan meminum susu hewan pemakan kotoran (hewan Jallalah). Pada penelitian ini, ikan nila diberi pakan kotoran ayam (menjadi Jallalah). Selanjutnya ikan tersebut dianalisis kandungan mikroba yang terkandung didalam saluran pencernaannya. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengisolasi dan mengidentifikasi bentuk bakteri dan mendeterminasi bakteri patogen dan non-patogen yang terdapat didalam saluran pencernaan ikan ynag telah diberi pakan kotoran ayam. Sampel bakteri diisolasi dari saluran pencernaan ikan setelah diberi kotoran ayam dan ikan yang diberi pakan komersil (kontrol). Identifikasi bakteri dilakukan secara makroskopik, mikroskopik, dan uji biokimia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan ditemukan 21 isolat bakteri dalam usus ikan yang diberi korotan ayam yang tergolong ke dalam genus Listeria, Staphylococcus, Alcaligenes, Cromobacterium, Edwardisiella, Micrococcus, Bacillus, dan Kurthia. Dari 21 jenis tersebut terdapat 6 jenis bakteri pathogen yaitu Edwarsiella sp, Micrococcus sp, Staphylococcus sp, Alcaligenes sp, Listeria sp dan Chromobacterium. Kesimpulan pada penelitian ini bahwa hewan ikan yang memakan kotoran ayam mengandung banyak jenis bakteri patogen sehingga tidak baik untuk di konsumsi.

Peran Perguruan Tinggi Dalam Meningkatkan Pemasaran Produksi Kelompok UPPKS Rambutan Kelompok Usaha Kecil Pembuat Rengginang pada Kampung Dangdang Rt.01 Rw.01 Di Desa Dandang Kecamatan Cisauk Kabupaten Tangerang

Kelompok Usaha Peningkatan Pendapatan Keluarga Sejahtera (UPPKS) di Desa Dandang Kecamatan Cisauk Kabupaten Tangerang, yang diberi nama Kelompok UPPKS “Rambutan”, merupakan kelompok kegiatan usaha kecil kreatif perlu didukung semua pihak agar terus berkembang menjadi kelompok usaha kecil yang tangguh dan membawa dampak pada dilingkungannya serta anggota kelompok usaha tersebut. Keluarga Sejahtera adalah keluarga yang dibentuk berdasarkan atas perkawinan yang sah, mampu memnuhi kebutuhan hidup spiritual dan materiil yang layak, bertaqwa kepada Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, memiliki hubungan yang serasi, selaras dan seimbang antar anggota dan antar keluarga dengan masyarakat dan lingkungan. Keluarga Pra Sejahtera adalah kelaurga-keluarga yang belum dapat memenuhi kebutuhan dasarnya (basic needs) secara minimal, seperti kebutuhan akan pangan, sandang, papan, kesehatan dan pendidikan. Sedangkan, keluarga sejahtera 1, yaitu keluarga-keluarga yang telah dapat memenuhi kebutuhan dasarnya secara minimal, namun belum dapat memenuhi kebutuhan social psikologisnay (socio psychological needs) seperti, kebutuhan ibadah, makan protein hewani, pakaian, ruang untuk interaksi keluarga, dalam keadaan sehat, mempunyai penghasilan, bisa baca tulis latin dan keluarga berencana.Kata Kunci :PemasaranABSTRACTProsperous Family Revenue Improvement Business Group (UPPKS) in Dandang Village, Cisauk District, Tangerang Regency, which is named the UPPKS Group "Rambutan", is a group of creative small business activities that needs to be supported by all parties so that it continues to develop into a resilient small business group and has an impact on its environment. and members of the business group. Prosperous Family is a family formed based on a legal marriage, able to meet the needs of a decent spiritual and material life, devoted to God Almighty, have a harmonious, harmonious and balanced relationship between members and between families with the community and the environment. Pre-prosperous families are families that have not been able to meet basic needs (basic needs) to a minimum, such as the need for food, clothing, shelter, health and education. Meanwhile, prosperous family 1, namely families that have been able to meet basic needs to a minimum, but have not been able to meet the needs of social psychological needs (socio psychological needs) such as worship needs, eating animal protein, clothing, space for family interaction, in a healthy state , have an income, can read and write latin and family planning.Keywords: Marketing

The Psychology of Meat Consumption

This chapter starts with a brief outline of the historic development of the interspecies relationships and discusses the role of norms in changing behavior. Norms play a role in maintaining the ideology of carnism which enables people to eat the flesh of certain animals due to the invisibility of meat production and to the mechanisms of objectification, deindividualization and dichotomization of livestock. According to the meat paradox theory, people alleviate the unpleasant feelings about eating animal flesh by diminishing the minds of the eaten animals. The 4N (normal, natural, necessary and nice) rationalizations which justify eating meat in current society are also pointed out. Furthermore, the role of values, attitudes and different type of motivations are discussed. In conclusion, possible ways of employing community-based social marketing are offered.

Utilitarianism and Animal Cruelty: Further Doubts

Utilitarianism has an apparent pedigree when it comes to animal welfare. It supports the view that animal welfare matters just as much as human welfare. And many utilitarians support and oppose various practices in line with more mainstream concern over animal welfare, such as that we should not kill animals for food or other uses, and that we ought not to torture animals for fun. This relationship has come under tension from many directions. The aim of this article is to add further considerations in support of that tension. I suggest three ways in which utilitarianism comes significantly apart from mainstream concerns with animal welfare. First, utilitarianism opposes animal cruelty only when it offers an inefficient ratio of pleasure to pain; while this may be true of eating animal products, it is not obviously true of other abuses. Second, utilitarianism faces a familiar problem of the inefficacy of individual decisions; I consider a common response to this worry, and offer further concerns. Finally, the common utilitarian argument against animal cruelty ignores various pleasures that humans may get from the superior status that a structure supporting exploitation confers.