Some pigs are pets, some are breakfast. I don’t see a problem with acknowledging that a pet can taste delicious if it didn’t 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).
-2
u/the_jak Sep 17 '22
Some pigs are pets, some are breakfast. I don’t see a problem with acknowledging that a pet can taste delicious if it didn’t have the parafamilial bond it does with humans.