Free-range pigs -- not so happy

  • Thread starter Thread starter spencelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Also, with bullfighting, the pleasure comes FROM the cruelty. We enjoy watching the animals get hurt. When eating food, my pleasure is not because the animal got hurt, but because the food is good.
Suppose that for an avid bullfighting fan, the pleasure comes from watching the matador use his sword in a skillful manner; the pain to the bull is simply an incidental but necessary part of a good bullfight. Would that make bullfighting okay?
 
Why not choose the path that inflicts minimal harm?
Because you can’t grow steak in the garden.

There is nothing wrong with inflicting death on animals for the purpose of food. Use of animals for food is one of the moral uses for animals according to the Catholic Church.
 
Because you can’t grow steak in the garden.

There is nothing wrong with inflicting death on animals for the purpose of food. Use of animals for food is one of the moral uses for animals according to the Catholic Church.
So torturing an animal is okay so long as you use him or her for food?
 
I totally agree. Why is this comparison always made? I think animal lovers are pretty aware that animals are not people.

I am a Catholic and believe 100% in giving animals love, compassion,and freedom to live without pain or cruelty. I don’t believe in treating them cruelly in any way. Yes God gave us “dominion” over the animals. I get that. Animals are also God’s innocent creation.

What else I know is that the way I experience God the most on this earth is through his beautiful innocent animals. Because of this, I am not inclined, nor do I agree with anyone cutting off chicken’s beaks in mass, killing them with guns, keeping them together in disgusting small spaces until they go insane, etc. To have dominion over them is not in my opinion to torture or abuse them. Sorry but I"m just crazy that way.

I look at my beautiful innocent dogs…who feel emotion just as I do, who are hungry just as I am, who thirst just as I do, who BLEED and feel pain just as I do…who I love in my life just as much as any human…who are God’s creatures who He made and loves…and I just can’t see myself shooting one for the fun of it and cutting off his head and putting it up on my wall as a trophy. I find that behavior to be deviant atrocious, and generally mentally defective.

Does it not occur to anyone that one of the reason us crazy animal lovers feel the way we do because animals are completely innocent? They cannot sin. They are pure. Because they don’t sin, some of us hold them in a very high regard. Domesticated animals give pure, unconditional love, even when humans abuse them, and in that regard, they have something over us humans. They also have no voice. They cannot run and scream to the police when they are being mistreated. Because of that, we as higher moral beings have a responsibility to protect them and generally not cut on them and kill them and perform experiments on them. WE have to be their voice. Remember when Jesus said “Whatever you did for one of the least of these, you did for me?” Argue with me all you want that he just meant people. I will smile and know differently in my heart who God has spoken to time and time again on this matter.

Who are any of you to say that I am wrong just because “they are not people.”

If serial killer hunters want to hunt, great. Go for it. I won’t and never will. It’s a free difference of opinion. But no one has any right to tell any animal lovers such as Spencelo and myself that we are bad, weird, or crazy for this. I think we are possibly more perceptive and a heck of a lot more gentle in our hearts than all the nayasyers on here.

And I have a feeling God would appreciate our gentle hearts and feelings on this matter for wanting to protect and love His creation. Conversely, is it a sin for others to blow an animal’s head off? Maybe not, but I personally think it implies a serious mental defect.

Just a thought.
👍👍👍

Well said! Awesome.
 
Not quite accurate. Although I hold that the principle of equal consideration of interests should apply to animals, I have not relied on it in most of my arguments. You have said so. Perhaps you need to clarify, then.

One could say the same thing about your beliefs; if we probe far enough, we’ll arrive at the same answer – you believe in God’s moral authority because you believe it. If you attempt to advance reasons for that, I can keep asking why for every reason you give, until you either run out of answers or start to repeat them. I believe in God’s moral authority because I believe in God. There’s a difference. I readily acknowledge that if a person wants to be purely skeptical about absolutely anything, nobody can persuade him like a child who asks “why” after everything an adult says, no matter how much the adult’s responses make sense. That’s well known. You can even end up denying your own existence, which some have, despite the obvious fact that you do exist. We’re not arguing here about whether God exists, but about whether there is any moral imperative to give the same value to animal life as to human life. Your position is subjective. You believe animals should be given equal weight with humans because you have decided to think it. While you can be skeptical about the religious foundations of my beliefs, you have to at least grant that it’s a standard outside myself. I didn’t simply spin it out of my own head.

Such as what? Animals can experience a wide range of feelings and emotions, such as pain, distress, anxiety, boredom, depression, grief, anger, and sadness. Do you deny any of this? I can tell you do not have a whole lot of experience of a wide range of animals. If you had, you would not believe this. While I would agree that some animals experience some of those emotional states in an analogous sort of way, I would most assuredly deny that most experience some of them at all, and certainly that they experience them in the same way we do. The one physiological state you mention, pain, is, indeed, experienced by most animals. But for the most part, they do not experience it in the same way we do. The pain thresholds of many are far different from our own. Some do not experience as painful things we experience as painful. Some experience as painful things we would not experience as painful. And they do not reflect on pain the way we do.
 
I don’t believe I’m poisoning any wells. I’m simply pointing out that, on your view, you must maintain that the pleasure of a tasty meal outweighs all the future pleasures than the animal would have had if not killed, which strikes me as obviously implausible.
So left to themselves pigs sit around in retirement, slippers on, having cups of tea reminiscing about the pleasures of the orchard?

Look, if domesticated pigs were not food they would not exist AT ALL. They are not missing out on future pleasures, since those pleasures would not exist for them in any way, shape or form.

Stop anthropomorphizing animals. It’s bad for you. Makes you think strange thoughts.

Go have a real breakfast and get out to an abortion clinic to stop babies getting killed.
 
What else I know is that the way I experience God the most on this earth is through his beautiful innocent animals. Because of this, I am not inclined, nor do I agree with anyone cutting off chicken’s beaks in mass, killing them with guns, keeping them together in disgusting small spaces until they go insane, etc. To have dominion over them is not in my opinion to torture or abuse them. Sorry but I"m just crazy that way.

Domesticated animals give pure, unconditional love, even when humans abuse them, and in that regard, they have something over us humans.
I do not argue with your emotional responses to animals. You have a right to feel the way you do.

But you should disabuse yourself of a couple of beliefs, because they are not accurate.

First, while possibly some producers treat chickens as you describe, I have never seen one that does, notwithstanding that I have been in many a poultry producing facility.

Second, your dog may well give you something very analogous to pure, unconditional love, but that is actually quite rare among domesticated animals, and quite possibly limited to dogs alone. Even with dogs, it would be a rare one that would not, if the situation was right, race you to a bit of food in order to consume it before you do. It needs to be recognized too that (we are assured) dogs are descended from wolves. We have bred them intensively for millenia in order to select for certain traits and against others, so they are more useful to us in many ways. But it’s well recognized that one can, in some ways, “domesticate” a wolf, and obviously our ancestors did or we would not have dogs. But a “domesticated” wolf is never fully trustworthy, no matter what.
 
Written by vegans…:rolleyes:
…using soy-based inks…

Spencelo- You sure are persistent and might I add, you give no quarter.

Are you pro-choice?

Question:
Why do we (humans) have the digestive system and appetite and teeth for meat eating in the first place? Was this a mistake? Do you think these human features are evolving out of us?
 
So left to themselves pigs sit around in retirement, slippers on, having cups of tea reminiscing about the pleasures of the orchard?

Look, if domesticated pigs were not food they would not exist AT ALL. They are not missing out on future pleasures, since those pleasures would not exist for them in any way, shape or form.

Stop anthropomorphizing animals. It’s bad for you. Makes you think strange thoughts.

Go have a real breakfast and get out to an abortion clinic to stop babies getting killed.
Gotta admit…that was pretty funny. Got a visual of piggies in their jammies. 😛
 
Returning, just to do it, to the initial topic and article. It seems exceedingly strange to me that this guy who touts to others the merits of the “free range” animals whose meat he sells, thinks of himself as a virtual criminal for doing it. One has to wonder about either his sincerity or his sanity. On the one hand, he’s telling potential customers “Oh, this meat is wonderful for you. Healthful and all.” On the other, he’s saying “There’s no good reason to eat meat at all, and we shouldn’t.”

There’s a word for that, and frankly, it makes one wonder whether one ought to credit anything he says on either score.
 
Your position is subjective. You believe animals should be given equal weight with humans because you have decided to think it. While you can be skeptical about the religious foundations of my beliefs, you have to at least grant that it’s a standard outside myself. I didn’t simply spin it out of my own head.
Actually, the root of my moral beliefs is that suffering is intrinsically bad, from which I can derive the principle of equal consideration of interests. And it is no more subjective than your religious beliefs. Your charge of subjectivity seems to be because either (a) I don’t share your religious views, or b) I can’t answer ever ‘why’ question (well, neither can you).
I can tell you do not have a whole lot of experience of a wide range of animals. If you had, you would not believe this. While I would agree that some animals experience some of those emotional states in an analogous sort of way, I would most assuredly deny that most experience some of them at all, and certainly that they experience them in the same way we do. The one physiological state you mention, pain, is, indeed, experienced by most animals. But for the most part, they do not experience it in the same way we do. The pain thresholds of many are far different from our own. Some do not experience as painful things we experience as painful. Some experience as painful things we would not experience as painful. And they do not reflect on pain the way we do.
This is simply a product of a lack of moral imagination and not being well-informed.

livescience.com/17378-rats-show-empathy.html

sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100803212013.htm

greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/expanding_our_compassion_footprint/

alternet.org/story/150424/animals_have_emotional_lives,_too

uchospitals.edu/news/2011/20111208-empathy.html

phys.org/news6250.html

psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/200907/stalking-hunting-stress-and-emotion
psychologytoday.com/blog/…ss-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top