Steve H wrote:Seriously? You don't understand our cultural aversion to eating horse flesh? We don't even have a word for horse flesh, like beef or pork. What does that tell you?
Jeff Cavanaugh wrote:Steve H wrote:Seriously? You don't understand our cultural aversion to eating horse flesh? We don't even have a word for horse flesh, like beef or pork. What does that tell you?
I understand that it exists. I don't think it makes any sense. And I don't think a cultural aversion justifies using words like "tainted" that make it seem as though the producers had put the public health in danger.
taint v. taint·ed, taint·ing, taints. --tr. 1. To affect with or as if with a disease. 2. To affect with decay or putrefaction; spoil. 3. To corrupt morally. 4. To affect with a tinge of something reprehensible.
Steve H wrote:Seriously? You don't understand our cultural aversion to eating horse flesh? We don't even have a word for horse flesh, like beef or pork. What does that tell you?
Some cultures like to eat dogs, cats, and monkeys. This doesn't mean I wouldn't be upset if I found out I was served some.
Adam Arnold wrote:Steve H wrote:Seriously? You don't understand our cultural aversion to eating horse flesh? We don't even have a word for horse flesh, like beef or pork. What does that tell you?
Some cultures like to eat dogs, cats, and monkeys. This doesn't mean I wouldn't be upset if I found out I was served some.
Don't forget some people's religions forbid eating horse and pork.
Mark R. wrote:... the Jewish religion forbids pork as well as anything else with a split hoof.
James Natsis wrote:"the presence of very small trace levels of equine DNA"
I guess a few horses got accidentally mixed into the herd as they rushed them into the slaughterhouse! Either that or they genetically engineered their cows to the point to where they have shared DNA patterns with horses!
Bryan Shepherd
Foodie
386
Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:58 pm
Between Here and There
Users browsing this forum: Claudebot, Facebook and 5 guests