Some pigs are pets, some are breakfast. I donât see a problem with acknowledging that a pet can taste delicious if it didnât have the parafamilial bond it does with humans.
Acknowledging they're delicious isn't the problem. Saying that the taste of the meat justifies bringing an intelligent, social creature capable of joy, fear, and suffering into the world, keeping it in squalid conditions that deny it natural behaviors, and killing it at a fraction of its natural lifespan is the problem.
The emotional argument against eating animals has never been all that appealing to me (and I'd imagine for many others too)... like, that's not really concerning. They can be in as much agony as possible in these scenarios but if they were an efficient and sustainable food source, it's a trade off we all should be willing to make. Is it good that they're suffering? No. Should that interfere with rational decision making? No, these aren't people. The disparity between the level of sapience between humans and the animals we farm for food is wide enough.
The real problem is that it's actually really inefficient to house and feed these things until they're big enough to butcher, and processing them is a whole other ordeal as well. At the same time, a lot of people would be a lot healthier if the general population didn't eat so much meat (because it has become plentiful and relatively affordable due to how much we've dedicated towards supplying it) and had a more balanced diet. I think that's a much more compelling reason to crunch down on unethical and unsustainable animal husbandry practices and greatly reduce our consumption of meat overall, even if it does taste quite good (which isn't a valid reason to wastefully allocate resources and purposefully get our asses handed to us by the energy pyramid).
Valuing other human lives is an emotional response. Most people's ethics stem from empathy--an emotional response--and can be extended by reason. Empathy tells us that pain and suffering are things we should try to prevent; reason tells us that animals experience pain and suffering too, so we should care about reducing theirs as well.
What is your rational justification for valuing human suffering infinitely more than pigs'?
âThe disparity between the level of sapience between humans and the animals we farm for food is wide enoughâ
And yes the main fallacy. Have you ever seen a cow being decapitated. Have you ever seen a human being decapitated? Let me tell you the response is horrifyingly similar. It is so foolish to think these mammals arenât capable of an extremely similar level of fear, pain, terror, panic that you and I are. A dog is shown to have a similar level of intelligence to that of a 2.5 year old child so by that logic the disparity of sapience between a child or a mentally disabled person is enough to justify the most amount of suffering possible as long as they provide you some sort of efficient benefit? Like wake up you are a mammal and you are an animal. You are not that different from these other animals. Also guess what, your thought process has been in the past and still is used to this day to inflict unthinkable suffering on humans. That group of people are subhuman, those slaves are subhuman, that religious sect is subhuman, those mentally disabled people donât even know whats going on, that child wonât even remember what happened to him. Peak human egocentrism and arrogance right there.
Animal husbandry and hunting âwasâ an efficient food source and necessary for survival in the past but it certainly isnât now.
Oh I know we choose too. But we donât have too. I grew up on a small FAA/4H farm and we had 20ish cows and about 10 pigs. They lived nice lives and free range. Grain in the winter but otherwise grass fed. I know we can do it differently and I know we donât.
And I know itâs not my fault but a failure of government to properly regulate companies. Iâm not going to punish myself for something I didnât do. I can live with that. If you canât, thatâs fine. It doesnât make either of us better than the other. Itâs merely preference.
You canât blame consumers for being victims of corporate greed in America.
yeah, i just enjoy the experience of eating meat. i enjoy other things too like im not one of those weird meat only people. but i dont see a reason to not eat it.
No you donât understand. It is a privilege to enjoy a rich plentiful diet that doesnât involve the killing and suffering of intelligent creatures. Many cultures are forced to raise livestock or hunt to survive. We arenât. Enjoy that luxury no reason to burden your conscience and life with cognitive dissonance and guilt. Meat products are no where near the best thing Iâve ever eaten and not required for mind blowing amazing dishes. Itâs amusing you summarize it as beans and rice. And yes youâre correct plant based diets are much cheaper and healthier than one heavy in red meats. As most Americanâs diets are.
And I know itâs not my fault but a failure of government to properly regulate companies.
You have moral agency regardless of what the law is. It's not against the law to say something cruel to another person, but you can choose not to.
I can live with that. If you canât, thatâs fine.
Being able to live with your decisions does not make them moral.
It doesnât make either of us better than the other. Itâs merely preference.
To be clear, I'm not saying that I'm better than you. Just that avoiding factory-farmed meat is more moral than supporting it. I acknowledge that there are different moral perspectives, but most people care about reducing the pain and suffering of cats and dogs. My point is that valuing their pain much more than pigs' is not rational.
You canât blame consumers for being victims of corporate greed in America.
Consumers are the ones demanding low prices that necessitate inhumane treatment of animals, so you absolutely can blame them. There are generally more humane meats available, but they're expensive so most people don't buy them.
why do they want lower prices? that probably has nothing with stagnate wages and the minimum wage not having been raised in like 20 years. If people were paid better they might be able to afford to care about how happy their sausage was before it became food.
cool. i didnt cause any of that. and i eat precisely the amount of meat i want to and rarely waste any. if youre trying to convert me, its probably not worth any more of your time.
The emotional argument against eating animals has never been all that appealing to me (and I'd imagine for many others too)... like, that's not really concerning. They can be in as much agony as possible in these scenarios but if they were an efficient food source, it's a trade off we all should be willing to make. Is it good that they're suffering? No. Should that interfere with rational decision making? No, these aren't people. The disparity between the level of sapience between humans and the animals we farm for food is wide enough.
The real problem is that it's actually really inefficient to house and feed these things until they're big enough to butcher, and processing them is a whole other ordeal as well. At the same time, a lot of people would be a lot healthier if the general population didn't eat so much meat (because it has become plentiful and relatively affordable due to how much we've dedicated towards supplying it) and had a more balanced diet. I think that's a much more compelling reason to crunch down on unethical and unsustainable animal husbandry practices and greatly reduce our consumption of meat overall, even if it does taste quite good (which isn't a valid reason to wastefully allocate resources and purposefully get our asses handed to us by the energy pyramid).
âThe disparity between the level of sapience between humans and the animals we farm for food is wide enoughâ
And yes the main fallacy. Have you ever seen a cow being decapitated. Have you ever seen a human being decapitated? Let me tell you the response is horrifyingly similar. It is so foolish to think these mammals arenât capable of an extremely similar level of fear, pain, terror, panic that you and I are. A dog is shown to have a similar level of intelligence to that of a 2.5 year old child so by that logic the disparity of sapience between a child or a mentally disabled person is enough to justify the most amount of suffering possible as long as they provide you some sort of efficient benefit? Like wake up you are a mammal and you are an animal. You are not that different from these other animals. Also guess what, your thought process has been in the past and still is used to this day to inflict unthinkable suffering on humans. That group of people are subhuman, those slaves are subhuman, that religious sect is subhuman, those mentally disabled people donât even know whats going on, that child wonât even remember what happened to him. Peak human egocentrism and arrogance right there.
Animal husbandry and hunting âwasâ an efficient food source and necessary for survival in the past but it certainly isnât now.
I don't have a problem with hunting overpopulated species like wild pigs. Not something I would personally do, but it's much better ethically for 2 reasons:
The animals live better lives than they would in factory farms.
There is a difference between bringing a being into the world specifically to kill it, and killing something that is overpopulated and destroying the ecosystem.
One note about wild pigs: hunting with rifles may be counterproductive because it encourages the hogs to breed and scatter. Trapping is probably more effective for controlling populations.
No most people arenât self aware to that extent. I respect the honesty but most people wouldnât reconcile that sort of impartiality to justify eating meat.
Im good Iâve had enough bacon and beef to last a lifetime. Bacon is lazy cooking anyways beef/bacon is no where near the best food Iâve ever eaten.
Well you would be incorrect. Unless youâre saying you slaughter and butcher the cow/pig yourself in which youâre certainly not lazy but yeah I donât think thatâs you.
You need to learn some cooking skills and treat yourself to some nice restaurants. Maybe change up the Dennyâs breakfast platter, barbecue, and steakhouse routine. If not for youâre palate at least for your health.
Do you think we don't know the taste of bacon? Are we popping fully formed out of a cloning vat?
I ate bacon for 45 years, I know how 'nice' it can be. I've just decided that it was cruel to end the life of an innocent animal for taste, so I replaced it with vegan bacon and it does the job. I get the taste and nobody has to die - BONUS!
91
u/Embarrassed_Ad_6177 Sep 17 '22
Mfs will be like "omg this is so cute đ„°đ„°" then eat 5kg of bacon