I completely misconstrued the title, thinking the article an expose of firefighters who had quietly made off with piglets in the confusion of a blaze, kept and eaten them later. Which was odd but mildly clever.
I have even less problem with the story as it happened.
I have not seen more delicious irony…
I mean, seriously; truly fresh, homemade sausage by a grateful farmer? Yes, please! I’ll fry up some taters of some sort to go with, maybe whip up a side of cole slaw. Someone else can grab the beer.
Where’s the Delightful Creatures tag?
You aren’t human, then? Hmm; I’m a bit skeptical. Or are you including yourself in that claim?
Funny how those generalities (don’t ever really) work, eh? I’ll also note that fattening pigs for consumption is hardly a “new thing”. I don’t see any particular reason for pearl-clutching in this story.
Basically, the click-bait title should be changed to something along the lines of “Grateful Farmer Rewards Firefighters For Saving Livelihood,” or somesuch, as hanni5 implies above.
Did it ever occur to you that these pigs, whose killing you are laughing about, did have feelings? Did have fiends? Did have family? No? That’s what I was talking about.
Was there ever a time in the history of our species when we didn’t kill animals for food? I get how vegans would be put off by this but at worst it’s an example of “how little humans have evolved,” not “how low humans have sunk.”
I read that as “At wurst it’s an example…”
Exactly. Humans have sunk wayyyyy lower than this in just the last 100 years.
Yes, it occurred to me. And yes, I’ve met pigs I liked socially. I also enjoy pork, ham, and bacon. Deal with it or don’t, your outrage — no matter how heartfelt — impresses me not one whit. And once again, no, humans haven’t “sunk” to this point; care to speculate on when the first pig was domesticated? It wasn’t done to make friends with the pigs, you betcha.
Go lecture a bear about the ethics of an omnivorous diet; you’ll have exactly as much luck, although I’m rather less likely to eat you.
Killing animals for food may have been necessary in the past. It is no longer, so, yes, it shows lower ethics to kill these beings now than it was hundreds of years ago. But also mocking other creatures suffering - that is a whole new level of having no compassion at all.
I just feel very sad when I see people not just acting thoughtless but consciously mocking the suffering of others. That is really low to me.
And: yes, the bear is excused because he has no other choice and not the capability to understand. Men have though.
You recognize they were saved from an agonizing death, and met a humane one?
If you want to argue about the latter “humane” part please save the world from the CO2 emissions required. I get it.
City visitor to a farm notices a pig has a wooden leg.
Visitor: Why does that pig have a wooden leg?
Farmer: That pig saved my life. Kerosene lantern hit my head, knocked me out, set barn on fire and THAT pig saved my life.
Visitor: Wow. That is amazing. What a fantastic story. Did the pig lose it’s leg saving your life?
Farmer:Nah. It survived whole. BUT a pig that good… you can’t eat it all at once.
Sorry… I will get my hat and show myself out…
The admission that it’s better that they not suffer is pretty close to admitting that it would be better if they didn’t die. Maybe you agree it would be better that they didn’t die too. I’ve yet to hear a coherent argument why only the former could be true.
If you say so, but not when I say it.
Personally, I’d rather get a painful cut than die in my sleep tonight.
Sounds like a tough neighborhood.
Yes. A tough neighborhood. Where you die in your sleep.
not me. I only utter veiled threats in my sleep. Be Well.
All creatures die. Every single one. Of course, that doesn’t mean they need to live in terrible conditions.