Factory Farming Animals is Immoral

Thanks Con, now onto my rebuttals. I'm glad to hear that Con agrees with the major premise of my argument against factory farming animals. If you forgot, the first and main premise of my argument was: "It's immoral to inflict unnecessary suffering on nonhuman animals." While my opponent accepts the first premise of my argument, he disagrees with the second premise. Namely, that factory farms inflict unnecessary suffering on nonhuman animals. Con claims that mother pigs kept in gestation crates don't actually suffer from being confined, because they don't know of any other way of living. However, if you were to take a pig on a free range farm and confine it in a gestation crate, it would indeed suffer. This is because it would be a change in the pig's habitual environment. In other words, the free range pig knows of a better life outside the cage. Much like a prison inmate knows of a better life outside his jail sail. The idea that mother pigs don't suffer in gestation crates is absurd. Of course they suffer in these cages. However, Con says they don't because the pigs know of no better life outside their confined area. While this may be true, it doesn't justify treating them like this. Let me provide a thought experiment to show why Con's argument is unconvincing. Imagine a small child named Emily who has been brought up in an abusive home. This little girl has been completely isolated from the rest of the world her whole life, and she has never been allowed to leave her house. On a daily basis her father sexually abuses her, hits her with a whip, abuses her emotionally, and pushes her down the stairs. This little girl knows of no better life whatsoever. She has never lived in any other way. Her whole life has been like this. Now, under my opponent's line of reasoning, this little girl isn't actually suffering. This is because she knows of no better life outside her house. But surely this is absurd to believe. Just because the little girl knows of no better life, doesn't mean she doesn't suffer from her abusive father. In the same way, the mother pig still suffers from being confined in a small crate, even if she knows of no better life outside of it. We should therefore reject Con's completely insane argument for the moral permissibility of gestation crates. Con also brings up the Wayne Bradley farm, which raises 12,000 pigs each year inside. He says that Peter Singer a well known animal liberation activist visited this farm to see how the pigs were treated. Bradley, the owner of this farm, says that his pigs spend much of their time sleeping and make little noise, where you might expect squealing were they distressed. I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to interpret this. I could be wrong, but I think Bradley is trying to hint that because his pigs weren't squealing while Singer was there, it therefore shows that the pigs don't suffer in their crate. However, this is clearly untrue. It could be the case that when the pigs were first put in the crate they squealed and exhibited behaviors that represent stress and frustration. But after awhile of living like that, the pigs gave up hope of trying to free themselves, and now just accept their reality. Bradley also said that while it's true his pigs spend most of their lives in a cage, they are let out for several weeks between each litter. However, does this really justify confining them? I don't believe it does. Pigs are very social and curious animals, and so to confine them for most of their life is a serious injustice. As Edmond A. Pajor an Associate Professor ofAnimal Behavior and Welfare pointed out: "In gestation stalls, sows are prevented from performing many of the behavior patterns that pigs would perform in more natural or less restricted conditions resulting in a negative impact on sow welfare." [1] Out of all the farm animals who suffer on factory farms, Con only decides to attack my claim that mother pigs suffer on factory farms. While completely ignoring the suffering of beef and dairy cows, meat chickens and egg laying hens, turkeys, and baby piglets who don't grow quickly enough. Indeed, what about their suffering? Shouldn't that be addressed? Apparently Con doesn't think so, since he didn't even say anything about it. So even if we were to accept his ridiculous claim that mother pigs don't suffer in gestation crates, it would still be the case that factory farming all the other farm animals would be immoral, since they are forced to suffer and live miserable lives. Conclusion Con's claim that mother pigs don't suffer in gestation crates is false, and should therefore be rejected. Not only that, but Con's case against me is incomplete, and he hasn't even responded to the pain and suffering that is inflicted on all the other farm animals. Source: http://www.mercyforanimals.org...