Horsing Around: Why Does the European Meat Scandal Matter?

You may have heard about the big scandal in Europe that began last month when traces of horse DNA were found in hamburgers in the UK. Since the initial report, further investigation has uncovered even more evidence of horse meat being mixed into ground beef. Many consumers are worried that they are unwittingly eating horse - but does it matter? After all, an article in The Week Magazine gives 6 first-hand accounts of what horse meat tastes like, and it sounds, by all reports, pretty tasty.

"Please don't eat me... Please." 

Is horse meat dangerous?

Because of advancements in technology, it is reasonable to fear that horse meat may be dangerous. Meat raised for human consumption is heavily regulated, and in countries where horses are not allowed to be bred for food it is likely that the horses are given drugs or feeds that might disqualify them for safe and legal human consumption.

However, horse meat is actually legal in much of the world. If you read the article I linked to from The Week, the latter 3 testimonies are from people intentionally ordering and eating horse meat at a restaurant - one in Scotland, one in Japan, and another in Paris. I came across an enlightening article from the New York Times indicating that horse meat is even legal in some US states. No horses have been slaughtered in the US since 2007 due to a lack of USDA funding for horse meat inspections, but both Canada and Mexico slaughter horses for meat. If funding were to be restored for horse inspection, there are actually several slaughterhouses across the States that have applied for horse slaughter licenses.

Does it matter that horses are pets?

When I was a young boy, my grandfather had a goat named "Baby Girl." Every time I visited, I would spend some time helping him take care of Baby Girl, and I thought of her as a pet. I found out much later that there had, in fact, been several different goats named Baby Girl and that I, in the oblivious bliss of my youth, hadn't even noticed that I never saw the same goat twice! The Baby Girls all eventually became somebody's dinner. I don't personally find anything cruel about the saga of Baby Girl, but perhaps I would have objected at the time if I had known the truth.

But consider the historical precedent of shepherds in ancient times. Their only job was to protect and care for their flock, and they spent a lot of time alone with their sheep. In a situation like that, it would be difficult not to form emotional bonds with tomorrow night's meal; however, when the time came, the sheep were slaughtered, either for food or as a sacrifice.

Does it make any ethical difference that the owner of the sheep had grown attached to them? Clearly not, since this was a cultural norm for thousands of years. So how is a horse, dog, or cat any different? Ethically, there is no difference between raising sheep for food and raising horses for food - it's purely sentimental, based solely on the emotional attachment that particular people have had for their particular horses.

From a secular standpoint, there are only two solutions: either all animals are lower life forms that we can raise and eat at will (though we may occasionally take joy in a particular animal that we do not intend to eat), or all animals are considered too-sentient-to-eat. Indeed, both of these ideals are found in our culture - but the vast majority of people illogically create their own standards on the issue according to whatever biases they have in favor of certain animals.

Why should we care if we get a little horse?

Ethically, it's wrong when consumers do not get what they expect - they think they're buying 100% beef, but that's not what they're getting (in one case, a burger was found to contain 28% horse!) This has been a major tenet of the food regulations developed over the last century, and rightly so. Consumers have a right to know what's in their food and to be sure of the quality and purity of the food they buy. 100 years ago, you could put whatever cheap filler you wanted in a food to cut costs - even if it was harmful (think arsenic, for example.) The obvious solution to this ethical problem is to establish and enforce consumer protections that ensure accurate labeling and disclosure of what ingredients are used, and this is exactly what governments around the world have been perfecting. If companies start telling consumers outright that their ground beef has a certain percentage of horse, then they probably wouldn't have to change their practices much to become legally and ethically secure.

However, this is not the end of the story. The real problem with horse meat is that God did not create horses to be food:

Leviticus 11:2-3
These are the animals which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth: Among the animals, whatever divides the hoof, having cloven hooves and chewing the cud—that you may eat.

Horses neither have split hooves nor chew cud; therefore, they do not meet God's standard for human consumption. God has not given them to us for food, and it is a sin to eat them.

Leviticus 11:44-46
For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy; for I am holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing that creeps on the earth. For I am the Lord who brings you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God. You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. This is the law of the animals and the birds and every living creature that moves in the waters, and of every creature that creeps on the earth, to distinguish between the unclean and the clean, and between the animal that may be eaten and the animal that may not be eaten.

These aren't just words on a page - it's the way that God wants us to live our lives and what He has said is best for us. Do you think you know better? Do you want to be holy? Yay or neigh?