At Least Don't Eat Pigs?

[David Sklansky]

Although the extreme arguments for total vegetarianism can be somewhat refuted by invoking health, human pleasure, and animal's lack of sentience, it seems that pigs should be an exception. This is especially true for those meat eaters who express concern about the humaneness of slaughterhouses. Once they do that, they are admitting that at least some animals have the capacity to suffer, in a way that plants, and probably lower animals, don't. For that reason they are also probably opposed to using higher mammals for experiments with trivial goals, such as making better perfume.

Since pigs have recently been shown to be highly intelligent, on the order of dogs and cats, and since pork products have been recently shown to be relatively unhealthy and certainly not the preferred supplement to an otherwise vegetarian diet, it seems wrong to eat them. At least not unless they are provided a happy life and a humane death. They may taste slightly better, to some people, than some other meats, but that doesn't seem like a good enough reason to put them through things that fish, chicken, and even cows, are less likely to be bothered by as much. Of course you won't hear this stance echoed by PETA and their ilk since they will worry that making this distinction may hurt their all or nothing position. But if pigs are in fact as high up as most experts say, I believe making this distinction is the right thing to do.

[kipin]

Turkey bacon just doesn't taste as good.

[Piemaster]

Meh, I would eat dolphin meat if it tasted good.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh, I would eat dolphin meat if it tasted good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure it does.

[Albert Moulton]

I don't think the edible animal's sentience relative to other animals is a good gauge. Basically, I think people shouldn't eat people, but just about any other edible animal is pretty much fair game.

I think animals should be treated humanely as much as possible, including in slaughter for food preparation, only because I think how people treat animals in their lives and deaths reflect on how they ultimately treat eachother. For example, if farms routinely and puposefully tortured animals as part of food preparation and society was completely indifferent to that suffering, then that society would probably be as indifferent to many aspects of human suffering. It would be a twisted and sad society indeed. However, if animals are born, raised, reasonably treated, and slaughtered for food as quickly, cleanly, and painlessly as possible, then I think the farmers and the consumers are ultimately better for those more humane practices. I guess there is a reason why many serial killers start out as animal tourturers in their early years, and we shouldn't have a society going out of their way to act like them.

I'm a little repulsed by the thought of eating dogs, cats, hamsters, or horses, but only because I think of them as pets. I don't really have a problem with people in other countries eating those animals, however.

I certainly don't mind eating pork products.

Here's a more interesting question, I think. Without citing a higher power, such as a god who has commanded such an act as an abomination, why shouldn't people eat other people? I think they shouldn't, but my arguments would include moral judgements stemming from my belief in God.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh, I would eat dolphin meat if it tasted good.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm pretty sure it does.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do cooked humans taste good too? If it turned out we had a food shortage, so that food was very expensive, and human meat was very healthy, would it be ok to harvest the chronically stupidest occupants of a mental assylum for food? Assume you can't get into any trouble.

[chezlaw]

Wouldn't that be a disaster for pigs? cats and dogs we have as pets but how many pigs would there be if we don't eat them?

maybe your campaign should be "a pig is for life not just for dinner"

chez

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't that be a disaster for pigs? cats and dogs we have as pets but how many pigs would there be if we don't eat them?

maybe your campaign should be "a pig is for life not just for dinner"

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe some people keep pigs as pets

from the perspective of an individual pig, I'm going to guess that if existence of the species depended on most of the species being tortured regularly, they'd prefer to sit it out

wouldn't you?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't that be a disaster for pigs? cats and dogs we have as pets but how many pigs would there be if we don't eat them?

maybe your campaign should be "a pig is for life not just for dinner"

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe some people keep pigs as pets

from the perspective of an individual pig, I'm going to guess that if existence of the species depended on most of the species being tortured regularly, they'd prefer to sit it out

wouldn't you?

[/ QUOTE ]
Stop the torture then, that's not needed.

I don't know if they'd prefer to sit it out, personally if life was good I'd rather have it and then be eaten especially if I don't know I was going to be eaten, but I'm reluctant to speak for the pigs either way.

chez

[zerosum]

[ QUOTE ]
But if pigs are in fact as high up as most experts say, I believe making this distinction is the right thing to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.