4 ms·
How is this hypocritical? Thesis 1: I wish to consume meat/animal products Thesis 2: I want to avoid animal suffering wherever possible It would be completel
by kortex 4y ago
How is this hypocritical?
Thesis 1: I wish to consume meat/animal products
Thesis 2: I want to avoid animal suffering wherever possible
It would be completely consistent to only consume small-farm-raised animals which live a content free-range life, up until the moment it is quickly and humanely slaughtered.
My grandmother raised sheep and chickens. I don't know how the sheep met their end, but the chickens were slaughtered by a quick snip with very sharp scissors to some neck arteries; they were dead in seconds. The most suffering those chickens experienced was annoying grandchildren who loved to chase them.
If, hypothetically, all meat was sourced this way, the subjective experience of those animals is no worse, and most likely far better, than their wild life.
- sweetheart 4y agoLet's set aside the enormous debate that could be had around whether or not killing an animal "humanely" is ever actually possible, and instead assume it is for the sake of argument. Do you think that the person who originally stated that they want to consume animal products while also minimizing animal welfare is _actually_ going through the effort to ensure any animal product they consume was suffering-free? That means the milk powder in the crackers they had at lunch were _verified_ by the OP to have not involved any suffering on behalf of the cow who yielded the milk, or the calf who was born to consume that milk. Do you think that is what happening, and that the OP is _actually_ making sure they only meat from animals who grew up in a grassy field and were killed instantly with 0 pain? I don't. And if you also think that seems unlikely, then I think you should agree with me instead that perhaps we can't really be claiming to value minimizing the suffering of animals while consuming their bodies.