Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

[Guest guest]

The government does of course have plans how to take care of the old cows

and bulls and bull calves. if the law passes. Also stiffer penalties for

violation. 7 yrs for killing a cow. Its not my job to stick up for any

government but its not the government's job to find employment for people

who lose their jobs. There is no unemployment insurance or benefits in this

country. 20 yrs ago many workers lost jobs because of big textile

strike in Mumbai and they went back to their villages and did farming.

Many industries have closed down lately because of liberalisation and cheap

foreign chemical imports but the workers become self employed. There s

no restriction. They start selling vegetables , whatever, by the

roadside and actually make more money. The government also gives soft

loans and schemes for work too. So the butchers will just have to look at

their options.

 

The government has a big responsibility to stop cow slaughter and stop the

sinful reactions which will destroy the whole country. It is the

governments first duty to protect the lives of the citizens and the cows

are also citrizens being born in this country and their lives must be

saved. It is very difficult to pass this Bill after 50 yrs of apathy . of

ruling parties and intense opposition from the meat lobby and big criminal

mafia. Its not so popular for votes and it will cause a big uproar .

But its the first step in the right direction.

 

In this region there are no tractors as it is hilly terrain and farmers

are poor. They plow with their oxen in the monsoon knee deep in water.

They use bullock carts for everything. They are very dependent on their

oxen but it si not good what they do. When a pair of oxen becomes

somewhat worn out they take them to the cattle trader and trade them in

for a new young pair. The old ones are fed nicely by the trader and

made to look good and are sold again in the cattle market or finally to

the butchers.

These farmers dont need training, only reawakening of Krsna conciousness

on how to take care of their cattle, and to realise the value of cow

dung after so many years of brain washing to use chemicals. Bulls or

cows the dung is needed for the farm land and there isnt enough of it

today because of increase in cow slaughter. It is a matter of great

urgency. ys labangaltika dasi

 

-

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; Cow Protection Laws should be

practical, not just sentimental

 

 

> Rosalie Malik wrote:

>

> >How can you say that the

> >government shouldnt pass laws out of sentiment? Is a total ban on cow

> >slaughter sentiment? Its due to pass.

> >

>

> A total ban on cow slaughter is not sentiment -- if such a law has been

> formulated to address the complete realities of the situation:

>

> 1. There must be funding to enforce the law.

> 2. There must be funding and arrangements for alternative measures to

> take care of old animals, who would normally be sold to slaughter.

> 3. There must be new job training and job placement for all the people

> who previously depended on the slaughter industry to make their

livelihood.

> 4. There must be support for small family farmers and training and

> encouragement for them to use improved means of ox power. The bull

> calves must be productively engaged.

>

> A total ban on cow slaughter -- if such a law has been thrown together

> in a slap-dash way that does not address the complete range of realities

> of the situation -- is indeed sentiment.

>

> Any sober person who has their eyes open, must realize that passing a

> law without providing adequate means for transition, enforcement, and

> implementation is simply a method of cheating naive voters.

>

> What is the point of passing a law which is formulated so that its

> purpose can never be realized? The purpose of it is to cheat the public

> and get votes from them.

>

> We see this again and again under President Bush. He passes so many

> laws, such as improved education laws -- but there is no money or

> structure to implement it.

>

> The result is that he gets votes -- but does not provide any improvement

> in education.

>

> In the case of passing a sloppy cow protection law -- the results are

> worse. If there is no provision for alternative job training and

> employment for people who are currently in the cow slaughter industry --

> the law is certain to fail. The main results of such an insincere law

> will be an increase of violence between Hindus and Muslims.

>

> If there are no provisions for encouraging improvements in ox power --

> then Hindu farmers will sell their useless bull calves to the Muslims.

> Then, when the Muslims slaughter them, they will kill the Muslims.

>

> A sentimental cow protection law is an excellent means of harvesting

> votes. But it is a bad method of protecting cows or promoting peace in

> a country.

>

> your servant,

>

> Hare Krsna dasi

>

> >

> >

>

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 1/29/04 11:21:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,

npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu writes:

 

 

> The main results of such an insincere law

> will be an increase of violence between Hindus and Muslims.

>

> If there are no provisions for encouraging improvements in ox power --

> then Hindu farmers will sell their useless bull calves to the Muslims.

> Then, when the Muslims slaughter them, they will kill the Muslims.

>

 

As nice as this law seems to a vegetarian, when I first heard of it, I

considered that it will justify intolerance to those not following the same.

Similar to the fanatic muslims who are intolerant of those who dance and

sing. Somehow respect has to be given to all, or violence is inevitable. Laws

can

be passed, but developing compassion is the only way to end killing.....of

cows, people, the planet. obeisances ekaB

[Guest guest]

-

Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

Saturday, January 31, 2004 1:38 am

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

> The government does of course have plans how to take care of the

> old cows

> and bulls and bull calves. if the law passes. Also stiffer

> penalties for

> violation. 7 yrs for killing a cow. Its not my job to stick up

> for any

> government but its not the government's job to find employment

> for people

> who lose their jobs. There is no unemployment insurance or

> benefits in this

> country. 20 yrs ago many workers lost jobs because of big textile

> strike in Mumbai and they went back to their villages and did

> farming.Many industries have closed down lately because of

> liberalisation and cheap

> foreign chemical imports but the workers become self employed.

 

I can't help but wonder if the picture is as idealistic and simple as it is

presented here. Generally, when people are put out of work by major shifts in

capitalistic movements, there is a lot of agony, social displacement and

increased crime. Generally, people can't simply go back to the countryside and

farm because their land has been sold to someone else. Perhaps it's different

in India.

 

> There s

> no restriction. They start selling vegetables , whatever, by the

> roadside and actually make more money. The government also gives

> softloans and schemes for work too. So the butchers will just

> have to look at

> their options.

 

This is like the response in this country to people who sell drugs. When they

get a prison sentence, some people say, "Give them some job training." The

other ones say, "What for? We have no moral obligation to give them job

training. It's their fault that they were stupid enough to disobey the law in

ther first place."

 

That attitude misses the point. It says, "We are not morally obligated to help

these criminals -- after all, it is they who are the lawbreakers, not us."

 

But the point is not whether the critics are morally obligated to provide job

training for the criminals. It's not a moral point, it's a practical point.

If you don't give them job training for something else, then the overwhelming

probability is that they will simply go back to selling drugs when they get

out.

 

The question is not whether you are morally obliged to provide job training.

The question is whether you want your program to succeed. In places where

criminals are given job training and job placement, the number of criminals who

fall into crime once again is much, much smaller.

 

Similarly, if the government truly wants cow protection to succeed, then it

would provide alternative job training and job placement for those who used to

depend on cow slaughter. Then their program has the best chance of succeeding.

 

On the other hand, if they simply ignore the social causes of cow abuse, then

their program is doomed by their ignoring -- that is to say, by their

ignorance.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

-

Ekabuddh (AT) aol (DOT) com

Sunday, February 1, 2004 0:10 am

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

> In a message dated 1/29/04 11:21:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,

> npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu writes:

>

>

> > The main results of such an insincere law

> > will be an increase of violence between Hindus and Muslims.

> >

> > If there are no provisions for encouraging improvements in ox

> power --

> > then Hindu farmers will sell their useless bull calves to the

> Muslims.

> > Then, when the Muslims slaughter them, they will kill the Muslims.

> >

>

> As nice as this law seems to a vegetarian, when I first heard of

> it, I

> considered that it will justify intolerance to those not following

> the same.

> Similar to the fanatic muslims who are intolerant of those who

> dance and

> sing. Somehow respect has to be given to all, or violence is

> inevitable.

 

And, to the Muslims, the respect for the cow would come:

 

1. From seeing the practical value of the cow and bull, especially by seeing

the bull engaged in work.

 

2. From being specifically *included* rather than *excluded* in various

aspects of cow protection -- especially by being glorified and recognized for

their role in cow protection -- e.g. for designing improved ox equipment,

improved pasture manangement, for working the oxen, etc.

 

ys

hkdd

 

 

 

Laws

> can

> be passed, but developing compassion is the only way to end

> killing.....of

> cows, people, the planet. obeisances ekaB

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

>

[Guest guest]

-

"Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN)" <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Sunday, February 1, 2004 8:40 am

Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

> For this "IT"(or what ever you call it, a Muslim holiday, it is

> the day

> after tomorrow) 5000 camels were brought into West Bengal this

> year. Two of

> them are right down the street from us. I've never seen camels in

> Mayapur.Well, you got to give them credit, at least they are not

> slaughtering cows

> this year.

> Y.s.

> Hrimati dasi

>

 

Hare Krsna! Only too well do I understand your perspective. Sometimes meat

eaters will ask me what I think of the American feast of Thanksgiving, which in

most homes is celebrated by a feast which includes roast turkey. I tell them

that compared to everyday fare of Americans, I think it is a good thing.

 

For one thing, other than the turkey, the table is strewn with numerous

vegetarian dishes. For the second thing, for many people, it is the only day

of the year when the family comes together and says a prayer to God before

eating.

 

But even better than that, it is the one day in the year in which almost no

Americans are eating cows. I'm very sorry about the poor turkeys -- but

considering the most commona alternative, which is cow's flesh, it is at least

an improvement.

 

So, I can well understand your feelings about the camels. Better them than the

cows, but still, may Krsna bless them in their ordeal.

 

ys

 

hkdd

[Guest guest]

Unfortunately the butchers will still be able to kill unlimited goats and

chickens and the poor buffaloes , about whom no one is bothered except PeTA

maybe, and even camels, so their being jobless is not much of a concern.But

their profession is not a constitutional right. The lives of the animals

come first in India , according to a High court decision, that they are

also citizens and have the right to live and be protected.The cow is such a

valuable animal, as Srila Prabhupada says, that her protection is of

greater priority than the right of butchers to practice their trade.

Of course Muslims have seen how the bulls work in this country since time

immemorial. They are indispensable. But the greed for profit from

leather and meat and black market outweighs all othe considerations. On

the contrary as long as cow slaughter does not stop there can NEVER be

peace here between Muslims and Hindus.

 

The best for drug addicts and butchers and everyone else too is to hear and

chant the holy Names of he Lord. Lord Caitanya rebuked the Kazi for

killing cows and bulls and terrified him in a dream of Lord Narasinghdeva

sitting on his chest. It wasnt just a sentiment on the part of the Lord.

ys labangalatika

 

Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and

related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Sunday, February 01, 2004 10:51 AM

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

 

>

>

> -

> Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

> Saturday, January 31, 2004 1:38 am

> Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

> > The government does of course have plans how to take care of the

> > old cows

> > and bulls and bull calves. if the law passes. Also stiffer

> > penalties for

> > violation. 7 yrs for killing a cow. Its not my job to stick up

> > for any

> > government but its not the government's job to find employment

> > for people

> > who lose their jobs. There is no unemployment insurance or

> > benefits in this

> > country. 20 yrs ago many workers lost jobs because of big textile

> > strike in Mumbai and they went back to their villages and did

> > farming.Many industries have closed down lately because of

> > liberalisation and cheap

> > foreign chemical imports but the workers become self employed.

>

> I can't help but wonder if the picture is as idealistic and simple as it

is

> presented here. Generally, when people are put out of work by major

shifts in

> capitalistic movements, there is a lot of agony, social displacement and

> increased crime. Generally, people can't simply go back to the

countryside and

> farm because their land has been sold to someone else. Perhaps it's

different

> in India.

>

> > There s

> > no restriction. They start selling vegetables , whatever, by the

> > roadside and actually make more money. The government also gives

> > softloans and schemes for work too. So the butchers will just

> > have to look at

> > their options.

>

> This is like the response in this country to people who sell drugs. When

they

> get a prison sentence, some people say, "Give them some job training."

The

> other ones say, "What for? We have no moral obligation to give them job

> training. It's their fault that they were stupid enough to disobey the

law in

> ther first place."

>

> That attitude misses the point. It says, "We are not morally obligated to

help

> these criminals -- after all, it is they who are the lawbreakers, not us."

>

> But the point is not whether the critics are morally obligated to provide

job

> training for the criminals. It's not a moral point, it's a practical

point.

> If you don't give them job training for something else, then the

overwhelming

> probability is that they will simply go back to selling drugs when they

get

> out.

>

> The question is not whether you are morally obliged to provide job

training.

> The question is whether you want your program to succeed. In places where

> criminals are given job training and job placement, the number of

criminals who

> fall into crime once again is much, much smaller.

>

> Similarly, if the government truly wants cow protection to succeed, then

it

> would provide alternative job training and job placement for those who

used to

> depend on cow slaughter. Then their program has the best chance of

succeeding.

>

> On the other hand, if they simply ignore the social causes of cow abuse,

then

> their program is doomed by their ignoring -- that is to say, by their

> ignorance.

>

> your servant,

>

> Hare Krsna dasi

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

[Guest guest]

Hmmm... I don't think I understand the purport of what you are trying

to say here.

 

Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) wrote:

 

>I was wrong with my assumption.

>This morning, when I went via my Bullock cart to the temple, I saw a bull

>(about 1.5 years of age) being bathed nicely with a hose by one of the

>Muslim guys who had the camels.

>

If the Muslim is bathing the bull nicely, isn't that a sign of spiritual

progress for him -- that he could eventually leave off slaughtering

animals? In fact, is it possible that he's already become so attracted

to Mayapura's cows that he went out of his way to get camels to fulfill

what he misunderstands to be a religious obligation?

 

> And I think the bath was not out of

>affection...

>

But if he was bathing it nicely, how do you now say it's not out of

affection?

 

>this world is not a fit place for a Gentleman.....

>

 

Why is the world not a fit place for a Gentleman? Is it because Srila

Prabhupada does not have enough followers to bathe a bull, so instead we

have to hire a non-vaisnava? I guess from that perspective it is sad.

 

Or is it because a Muslim is bathing a bull? Does that mean we are

prejudiced against people with Muslim bodies?

 

Just not sure what you mean here. Maybe you could clarify it a little bit.

 

ys

hkdd

 

>Y.s.

>Hrimati dasi

>

>

[Guest guest]

Rosalie Malik wrote:

 

>The best for drug addicts and butchers and everyone else too is to hear and

>chant the holy Names of he Lord. Lord Caitanya rebuked the Kazi for

>killing cows and bulls and terrified him in a dream of Lord Narasinghdeva

>sitting on his chest. It wasnt just a sentiment on the part of the Lord.

>ys labangalatika

>

 

I just think this kind of simplistic attitude, which stresses punishment

but neglects really addressing the underlying social causes of cow abuse

will not achieve the desired goal of protecting the cows.

 

But, I can see that your perspective is different, so I guess we will

just have to agree to disagree.

 

I certainly respect the work you are doing in India, both on the

practical level of your own farm, and on the political level of trying

to keep cow protection in the forefront of politicians' minds -- no

matter which exact policies they formulate in response.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

I'm reading my e-mail backwards. sooo. someone wrote about the muslims near

Mayapur...."they have brought in camels.....at least they are not killing cows

this year"...... To me in light of the impending possibility of the most

violent warring we can imagine.....I am always a bit queasy when any kind of

seeming predjudice against anothers beliefs is percieved......respect is the

only

real weapon we have ....Then I read the following very wise e-mail.......: In

a message dated 2/1/04 12:50:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,

npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu writes:

> to the Muslims, the respect for the cow would come:

> 1. From seeing the practical value of the cow and bull, especially by

> seeing

> the bull engaged in work.

>

> 2. From being specifically *included* rather than *excluded* in various

> aspects of cow protection -- especially by being glorified and recognized

> for

> their role in cow protection -- e.g. for designing improved ox equipment,

>

"Included" rather than "excluded"....I liked that. obeisances eka

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/1/04 10:30:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,

npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu writes:

 

 

> I'm very sorry about the poor turkeys

 

brought me a giggle. but, I've thought and said similar. I had never heard

of camel sacrifice. Perhaps it is because in the desert there are no flowers

to offer??

[Guest guest]

re job placement . for laid off butchers. They could become security

guards at banks. That should solve the problem. ys labangala

-

Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and

related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Sunday, February 01, 2004 10:51 AM

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

 

>

>

> -

> Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

> Saturday, January 31, 2004 1:38 am

> Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

> > The government does of course have plans how to take care of the

> > old cows

> > and bulls and bull calves. if the law passes. Also stiffer

> > penalties for

> > violation. 7 yrs for killing a cow. Its not my job to stick up

> > for any

> > government but its not the government's job to find employment

> > for people

> > who lose their jobs. There is no unemployment insurance or

> > benefits in this

> > country. 20 yrs ago many workers lost jobs because of big textile

> > strike in Mumbai and they went back to their villages and did

> > farming.Many industries have closed down lately because of

> > liberalisation and cheap

> > foreign chemical imports but the workers become self employed.

>

> I can't help but wonder if the picture is as idealistic and simple as it

is

> presented here. Generally, when people are put out of work by major

shifts in

> capitalistic movements, there is a lot of agony, social displacement and

> increased crime. Generally, people can't simply go back to the

countryside and

> farm because their land has been sold to someone else. Perhaps it's

different

> in India.

>

> > There s

> > no restriction. They start selling vegetables , whatever, by the

> > roadside and actually make more money. The government also gives

> > softloans and schemes for work too. So the butchers will just

> > have to look at

> > their options.

>

> This is like the response in this country to people who sell drugs. When

they

> get a prison sentence, some people say, "Give them some job training."

The

> other ones say, "What for? We have no moral obligation to give them job

> training. It's their fault that they were stupid enough to disobey the

law in

> ther first place."

>

> That attitude misses the point. It says, "We are not morally obligated to

help

> these criminals -- after all, it is they who are the lawbreakers, not us."

>

> But the point is not whether the critics are morally obligated to provide

job

> training for the criminals. It's not a moral point, it's a practical

point.

> If you don't give them job training for something else, then the

overwhelming

> probability is that they will simply go back to selling drugs when they

get

> out.

>

> The question is not whether you are morally obliged to provide job

training.

> The question is whether you want your program to succeed. In places where

> criminals are given job training and job placement, the number of

criminals who

> fall into crime once again is much, much smaller.

>

> Similarly, if the government truly wants cow protection to succeed, then

it

> would provide alternative job training and job placement for those who

used to

> depend on cow slaughter. Then their program has the best chance of

succeeding.

>

> On the other hand, if they simply ignore the social causes of cow abuse,

then

> their program is doomed by their ignoring -- that is to say, by their

> ignorance.

>

> your servant,

>

> Hare Krsna dasi

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

[Guest guest]

Now you've brought me a gigle!

 

In a message dated 2/4/2004 8:21:36 AM Central Standard Time,

Ekabuddh (AT) aol (DOT) com writes:

Perhaps it is because in the desert there are no flowers

to offer??

[Guest guest]

-

Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

Noma Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and

related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Tuesday, February 03, 2004 10:28 PM

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

 

> How can he be bathing the bull out of affection when he is going to kill

> him ? It isnt a even a far fetched sign of spiritual progress. You are

being

> sentimental about Muslims. I;m not anti Muslim , only anti their

stubborn

> attachment to killing animals and saying its their religious right.

> ys labangaltika dasi

> -

> Noma Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

> Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>;

> <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and related issues)

> <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> Tuesday, February 03, 2004 8:30 PM

> Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

>

> > Hmmm... I don't think I understand the purport of what you are trying

> > to say here.

> >

> > Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) wrote:

> >

> > >I was wrong with my assumption.

> > >This morning, when I went via my Bullock cart to the temple, I saw a

bull

> > >(about 1.5 years of age) being bathed nicely with a hose by one of the

> > >Muslim guys who had the camels.

> > >

> > If the Muslim is bathing the bull nicely, isn't that a sign of spiritual

> > progress for him -- that he could eventually leave off slaughtering

> > animals? In fact, is it possible that he's already become so attracted

> > to Mayapura's cows that he went out of his way to get camels to fulfill

> > what he misunderstands to be a religious obligation?

> >

> > > And I think the bath was not out of

> > >affection...

> > >

> > But if he was bathing it nicely, how do you now say it's not out of

> > affection?

> >

> > >this world is not a fit place for a Gentleman.....

> > >

> >

> > Why is the world not a fit place for a Gentleman? Is it because Srila

> > Prabhupada does not have enough followers to bathe a bull, so instead we

> > have to hire a non-vaisnava? I guess from that perspective it is sad.

> >

> > Or is it because a Muslim is bathing a bull? Does that mean we are

> > prejudiced against people with Muslim bodies?

> >

> > Just not sure what you mean here. Maybe you could clarify it a little

> bit.

> >

> > ys

> > hkdd

> >

> > >Y.s.

> > >Hrimati dasi

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> > -----------------------

> > To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> > Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

>

[Guest guest]

Rosalie Malik wrote:

 

>re job placement . for laid off butchers. They could become security

>guards at banks. That should solve the problem. ys labangala

>

This is a perfect example of varnasrama thinking. These people are

involved in a violent occupation of killing animals. And, their

position is one that has no respect in society.

 

But, here is a proposal to take them out of their sinful occupation and

rechannel their violent tendencies from destroying animals to protecting

businesses. And in the process, they also gain a more respectable

position in society.

 

ys

hkdd

 

>-

>Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

>Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

>Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and

>related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

>Sunday, February 01, 2004 10:51 AM

>Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

>

[Guest guest]

The muslim guy was bathing the bull because they bathe the animal BEFORE

they cut his throught.

This was the point i was trying to make. It was a real grave morning that

day.

i mean, in America they kill cows by the hundreds..thousands every day. One

small bull does not seam any big thing, but for me it does...

 

y.s.

hrimati dasi

[Guest guest]

Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) wrote:

 

>The muslim guy was bathing the bull because they bathe the animal BEFORE

>they cut his throught.

>This was the point i was trying to make. It was a real grave morning that

>day.

>i mean, in America they kill cows by the hundreds..thousands every day. One

>small bull does not seem any big thing, but for me it does...

>

>y.s.

>hrimati dasi

>

Hrimati Prabhu, I certainly would depressed if I saw such a sight --

realizing what the actual purport was.

 

As noted, your original post went right over my head. Somehow because

you mentioned the word "temple" I had misunderstood that the worker was

simply washing down one of ISKCON's bullocks -- which we enjoyed doing

all the time at Gita-nagari.

 

I did not realize that this was taking place *off* the ISKCON property,

and that he was bathing his own animal with the purpose of readying it

for slaughtering.

 

As previously noted, cow sacrifice, offering of flesh to one's

ancestors, marrying the widow of one's brother, taking of sannyasa, and

horse sacrifice are all prohibitted in Kali Yuga. As such what you saw

was no doubt a depressing sight.

 

ys

hkdd

 

>

>

[Guest guest]

This is an article from Down to EArth Feb20 2004 "India Shining meets

Hindutva"

 

About Uma Bharati and her cow programme in Madyapradesh state. This should

be of interest to the conference as this is the only government in the

world which is enacting cow protection.

 

Uma Bharati is getting serious.The newly elected chief minister of Madya

pradesh has unleashed a development agenda built around the cow family., a

literal translation of the Hindi term gauvansh .,which simply means

cattle. Cow slaughter has become a cognizable and non bailable offence.

She doesnt stop there. She dreams of a state dotted with gaushalas. She has

entrustedher minister Ramakant Tiwari with the full responsibility of

developing a cow based economy. Inspired by the Netherlands she she has

promised government funded gaushalas along riverbanks to promote tourism

of all things. No more shall tourists laugh about how cows are abandoned

on Indian roads/ No more shall people squirm at the sight of a cow dying a

painful death after consuming plastic from the waste.

 

Bharti would have done well to realise why cows are abandoned and left to

chew plastic cud. The common pastures( charnoi) where they used to graze

earlier have all been encroached. In fact the previous government's decision

to distribute charnoi land to dalits and tribals had led to violent

conflicts. Bharti would have dohe ruminant a great favour by sorting out

the conflicts and removing the encroachments. But that would require

political will and foresight.

 

India has the larget livestock in the world., and it is mostly the poor

communities that rely on animal rearing. The reason they are so poor....

and the livestock neglected....is that successive governments have

systematically slaughtered the resources on which tthe two survive. As a

result, they are degrading whatever remains of India's forests and

grasslands. The cow's holy stastatus in India has alot to do with the fact

that the rural economy was entirely based on cattle. draught poer for

farming and transport, dung for soil fertility and fuel and milk for

nutrition. But it would be too much to expect Bharati to recognise that. Her

party, the BJP, is known for having an urban bias. Two of the most

important issues that helped her win the elections. roads and electricity

are concerns of the rich, not the livestock dependent poor. It is well

known that subsidies on power and oil have helped destroy livestock in

India/ Bharati's Hindutva cant help save the cow. Recognising it's conomic

efficiency will. and it will also help poor people But that lesson cant be

learned from the Netherlands.

 

-

Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>;

<Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and related issues)

<Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Monday, February 02, 2004 8:39 AM

Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

 

>

>

> -

> "Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN)" <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> Sunday, February 1, 2004 8:40 am

> Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

> > For this "IT"(or what ever you call it, a Muslim holiday, it is

> > the day

> > after tomorrow) 5000 camels were brought into West Bengal this

> > year. Two of

> > them are right down the street from us. I've never seen camels in

> > Mayapur.Well, you got to give them credit, at least they are not

> > slaughtering cows

> > this year.

> > Y.s.

> > Hrimati dasi

> >

>

> Hare Krsna! Only too well do I understand your perspective. Sometimes

meat

> eaters will ask me what I think of the American feast of Thanksgiving,

which in

> most homes is celebrated by a feast which includes roast turkey. I tell

them

> that compared to everyday fare of Americans, I think it is a good thing.

>

> For one thing, other than the turkey, the table is strewn with numerous

> vegetarian dishes. For the second thing, for many people, it is the only

day

> of the year when the family comes together and says a prayer to God before

> eating.

>

> But even better than that, it is the one day in the year in which almost

no

> Americans are eating cows. I'm very sorry about the poor turkeys -- but

> considering the most commona alternative, which is cow's flesh, it is at

least

> an improvement.

>

> So, I can well understand your feelings about the camels. Better them

than the

> cows, but still, may Krsna bless them in their ordeal.

>

> ys

>

> hkdd

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

[Guest guest]

Dear Mother Labangalatika'

 

PAMHO. AGTSP.

 

Hari Bol.

 

When I was in Indore on the last trip one of the main issues that I heard

very frequently was cow protection based on economic developement. It

seems that because of the erosion of the Vaisya class (AGRICULTURE & COW

PROTECTION) it is very hard to keep ones cows/bullocks in times of

agricultural short comings. The short sighted consensus was for the

village farmer to either sell his animals or just turn them out in the

streets to fend for themselves. The economic developement was based on cow

urine. In speaking with men such as Mr B.K. Thakur and also Mr Virendra

Kumar Jain who runs the Cow Urine Therapy and Research Institute in Indore,

it was confirmed. Although most village people who have cows when the

going gets tough the cows are either sold or turned out dispite" Hindu

Dharma". The push in the Cow Urine program is in essence to preserve

"Hindu Dharma" by once again developing the economic base around the

cows/bullocks.

 

It has been ascertained that it takes Rs/20 per day to maintain a

cow/bullock. The urine program is paying now Rs/5 per liter of urine. So

if a person can collect only 4 liters of urine a day per animal then the

economic problem of supporting that animal is solved. The concept that if

a cow is not milking or if the bullocks are not working then they are

liabilities. The gathering of cow urine and utilizing it as the base for

herbal remidies is spreading slowly but surely and the humble village

farmer in many cases is breathing a sigh of relief as he dosent have to

sell his animals or turn them out on the street.

 

Another factor working against the cow/bullock based culture of India is

the TRACTOR,PETROLEUM, HYBRID SEEDS.

 

The tractor is taking the place of the bullocks both in field work and in

transport of goods. Tractors dont eat grass or straw or other agricultural

by products. The tractors and diesel fuel create a dependence on the

indusrtrial sector of society.

 

The hybrid seeds are being engineered to grow within a narrow window of

opportunity with petrochemical fertilizers, herbacides and insectacides. A

good many of the seed companies seem to be owned by the oil companies.

More dependency for off farm inputs.

 

The hybrid strains of rice grow much shorter than the old open pollinated

stains of rice that were grown for countless generations by the village

farmers. The rice straw was (is) one of the main foods for the

cows/bullocks, but now that the hybrid varieties are being grown there is

also less feed for the cows/bullocks. The tractor,oil companies and hybrid

seeds are working against the cow/man/land relationship and in my opinion

helping to kill "Hindu Dharma" or one might say to quote Srila Prabhupada

"Sitting in the Lap of Material Nature and depending on Krsna.

 

Just a quick thought.

 

yr servant

Balabhadra das

 

Visit us at: www.iscowp.org

 

 

> [Original Message]

> Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

> Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; Noma T.

Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

> Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection

and related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> 3/16/2004 12:50:05 PM

> Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

> This is an article from Down to EArth Feb20 2004 "India Shining meets

> Hindutva"

>

> About Uma Bharati and her cow programme in Madyapradesh state. This

should

> be of interest to the conference as this is the only government in the

> world which is enacting cow protection.

>

> Uma Bharati is getting serious.The newly elected chief minister of Madya

> pradesh has unleashed a development agenda built around the cow family.,

a

> literal translation of the Hindi term gauvansh .,which simply means

> cattle. Cow slaughter has become a cognizable and non bailable offence.

> She doesnt stop there. She dreams of a state dotted with gaushalas. She

has

> entrustedher minister Ramakant Tiwari with the full responsibility of

> developing a cow based economy. Inspired by the Netherlands she she

has

> promised government funded gaushalas along riverbanks to promote

tourism

> of all things. No more shall tourists laugh about how cows are abandoned

> on Indian roads/ No more shall people squirm at the sight of a cow dying

a

> painful death after consuming plastic from the waste.

>

> Bharti would have done well to realise why cows are abandoned and left to

> chew plastic cud. The common pastures( charnoi) where they used to graze

> earlier have all been encroached. In fact the previous government's

decision

> to distribute charnoi land to dalits and tribals had led to violent

> conflicts. Bharti would have dohe ruminant a great favour by sorting out

> the conflicts and removing the encroachments. But that would require

> political will and foresight.

>

> India has the larget livestock in the world., and it is mostly the poor

> communities that rely on animal rearing. The reason they are so poor....

> and the livestock neglected....is that successive governments have

> systematically slaughtered the resources on which tthe two survive. As a

> result, they are degrading whatever remains of India's forests and

> grasslands. The cow's holy stastatus in India has alot to do with the

fact

> that the rural economy was entirely based on cattle. draught poer for

> farming and transport, dung for soil fertility and fuel and milk for

> nutrition. But it would be too much to expect Bharati to recognise that.

Her

> party, the BJP, is known for having an urban bias. Two of the most

> important issues that helped her win the elections. roads and electricity

> are concerns of the rich, not the livestock dependent poor. It is well

> known that subsidies on power and oil have helped destroy livestock in

> India/ Bharati's Hindutva cant help save the cow. Recognising it's

conomic

> efficiency will. and it will also help poor people But that lesson cant

be

> learned from the Netherlands.

>

> -

> Noma T. Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

> Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN) <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>;

> <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and related issues)

> <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> Monday, February 02, 2004 8:39 AM

> Re: Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

>

>

> >

> >

> > -

> > "Hrimati (dd) ACBSP (Mayapur - IN)" <Hrimati.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

> > Sunday, February 1, 2004 8:40 am

> > Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

> >

> > > For this "IT"(or what ever you call it, a Muslim holiday, it is

> > > the day

> > > after tomorrow) 5000 camels were brought into West Bengal this

> > > year. Two of

> > > them are right down the street from us. I've never seen camels in

> > > Mayapur.Well, you got to give them credit, at least they are not

> > > slaughtering cows

> > > this year.

> > > Y.s.

> > > Hrimati dasi

> > >

> >

> > Hare Krsna! Only too well do I understand your perspective. Sometimes

> meat

> > eaters will ask me what I think of the American feast of Thanksgiving,

> which in

> > most homes is celebrated by a feast which includes roast turkey. I tell

> them

> > that compared to everyday fare of Americans, I think it is a good thing.

> >

> > For one thing, other than the turkey, the table is strewn with numerous

> > vegetarian dishes. For the second thing, for many people, it is the

only

> day

> > of the year when the family comes together and says a prayer to God

before

> > eating.

> >

> > But even better than that, it is the one day in the year in which almost

> no

> > Americans are eating cows. I'm very sorry about the poor turkeys -- but

> > considering the most commona alternative, which is cow's flesh, it is at

> least

> > an improvement.

> >

> > So, I can well understand your feelings about the camels. Better them

> than the

> > cows, but still, may Krsna bless them in their ordeal.

> >

> > ys

> >

> > hkdd

> >

> >

> > -----------------------

> > To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> > Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

[Guest guest]

ISCOWP (Balabhadra Dasa & Chaya Dasi - USA) wrote:

 

>Another factor working against the cow/bullock based culture of India is

>the TRACTOR,PETROLEUM, HYBRID SEEDS.

>

>The tractor is taking the place of the bullocks both in field work and in

>transport of goods. Tractors dont eat grass or straw or other agricultural

>by products. The tractors and diesel fuel create a dependence on the

>indusrtrial sector of society.

>

 

Of course, the tremendous irony of the struggle to switch to

petroleum-powered agriculture in third world countries is that within 30

years the era of petroleum powered agriculture will probably be finished

in the western countries, and all over the world.

 

Right now, with the widespread use of animal traction still in practice,

the third world countries are poised to be in a superior position to

western countries when petroleum powered agriculture becomes too

expensive to pursue.

 

If they had intelligent political leadership, they would be emphasizing

the importance of improved animal traction techniques and equipment --

rather than turning onto the dead-end street of tractors and petroleum

agriculture -- where they will surely be suffering as much as the west a

few decades down the road.

 

ys

hkdd

 

>

>

[Guest guest]

The ban on cow slaughter is Dharma

-

Noma Petroff <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>

Rosalie Malik <labangalatika (AT) vsnl (DOT) net>

Cc: JC <jnk (AT) blr (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; <Kalavatidevi108 (AT) aol (DOT) com>; Cow (Protection and

related issues) <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Thursday, January 29, 2004 9:31 PM

Cow Protection Laws should be practical, not just sentimental

 

 

> Rosalie Malik wrote:

>

> >How can you say that the

> >government shouldnt pass laws out of sentiment? Is a total ban on cow

> >slaughter sentiment? Its due to pass.

> >

>

> A total ban on cow slaughter is not sentiment -- if such a law has been

> formulated to address the complete realities of the situation:

>

> 1. There must be funding to enforce the law.

> 2. There must be funding and arrangements for alternative measures to

> take care of old animals, who would normally be sold to slaughter.

> 3. There must be new job training and job placement for all the people

> who previously depended on the slaughter industry to make their

livelihood.

> 4. There must be support for small family farmers and training and

> encouragement for them to use improved means of ox power. The bull

> calves must be productively engaged.

>

> A total ban on cow slaughter -- if such a law has been thrown together

> in a slap-dash way that does not address the complete range of realities

> of the situation -- is indeed sentiment.

>

> Any sober person who has their eyes open, must realize that passing a

> law without providing adequate means for transition, enforcement, and

> implementation is simply a method of cheating naive voters.

>

> What is the point of passing a law which is formulated so that its

> purpose can never be realized? The purpose of it is to cheat the public

> and get votes from them.

> A sentimental cow protection law is an excellent means of harvesting

> votes. But it is a bad method of protecting cows or promoting peace in

> a country.

>

> your servant,

>

> Hare Krsna dasi

>

> >

> >

>

>

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Cow-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net