I wrote some more letters

I write lots of letters. I’ve been kind of remiss in sharing them here, but I’ll post a couple that I just wrote, so you can see what keeps me awake at night.

This first one is actually a bit late in coming for the editor to consider publishing it now, so that’s all the more reason to post it here, in response to this piece from Australian newspaper The Age:

Your article asks, “You wouldn’t keep a dog in a cage so small it couldn’t turn around, so why do we think it’s all right to do it to pigs?” But the question doesn’t go far enough. The question ought to be: “You wouldn’t breed dogs for food and eat them, so why do we think it’s all right to do it to pigs?”

Pigs are morally no less significant than dogs. If people don’t see a practice as acceptable for one animal, than surely they shouldn’t see that same practice as acceptable for any other animal.

And here’s one for the foodies, in response to an article in the November issue of Common Ground Magazine called The Carnivore’s Dilemma (yeah, I know, shades of Omnivore’s Dilemma… what dilemma?):

In regards to Chris Cosentino’s quote in your article, “An animal is giving its life for you to eat,” need I remind your readers that the animals do not willingly give their flesh to us? It is taken from them, along with their lives. Rather than eating unconsenting animals, we ought to consider eating a plant-based diet. To quote Cosentino, “It’s just the right thing to do.”



  1. Here is the problem with your logic. Plants are alive as well. They do not willingly give their lives to us as food either. Yet we destroy them for food, shelter, and much more. Based on your same logic, we should not eat plants as well as animals. We should not chop down trees for shelter, paper, and all the other consumables made from wood. I dare say the human race would have a hard time surviving if your logic was followed through to completion.Maybe a better practice would be humane treatment of animals. Plain and simple, we need them for the nourishment they provide, but we do not need to torture them and have them live their lives in pain and agony. We can put them to death quickly instead of the sometimes slow and disgusting way it happens now.

  2. Here’s the problem with <>your<> logic: Plants are not sentient beings with morally relevant interests. If you seriously equate plants and animals, then you might consider brushing up on your biology.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s