[JamesLefrere]

>This is why it is far more ethical to eat animals who have been raised in conditions that allow them to thrive happily and wholesomely.

I used to think that, but it's not a defensible point of view if you examine it a little more critically. Animals like pigs (or rather, their very very recent wild ancestors) have needs and behaviours that simply aren't useful to agriculture, and they can't possibly life fulfilling lives (not to mention that they should also be living for about 15 years rather than under a year).

The least we can do is to not eat them. It took me a long time to accept that, but that's how it is.

[Valmar]

> Animals like pigs (or rather, their very very recent wild ancestors) have needs and behaviours that simply aren't useful to agriculture, and they can't possibly life fulfilling lives (not to mention that they should also be living for about 15 years rather than under a year).

Why does it have to be about usefulness? They can live happy lives close enough to how they might live in the wild, at least until they're killed, if for food, no?