FoodBanter.com - View Single Post - Eating Puppy Meat Is the Same as Eating Pork, British TV Chef Says

Phred

In article >,
wrote:
>On 10/12/2011 8:36 AM, Stephen Newport wrote:
>> (Sky News) - British TV chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall claimed that
>> eating puppy meat is no more morally objectionable than consuming pork.
>>
>> The celebrity chef previously shocked viewers by eating placenta pate,
>> curried fruit bat, giraffe and calf testicles and now claims that he
>> would not be against a "high-welfare organic puppy farm."
>>
>> Fearnley-Whittingstall, the star of Channel 4's "River Cottage," was
>> asked by British magazine Radio Times whether he would try loin of
>> Labrador or cat liver.
>>
>> "Not unless I was on the point of starvation," he replied. "In principle,
>> but not in practice, I have no objection to a high-welfare organic puppy
>> farm."
>>
>> He added, "You can't object, unless you also object to the farming of
>> pigs. It's an artificial construct of our society, a cultural decision,
>> to make pets out of dogs and meat out of pigs. Both animals could be used
>> the other way round, although pigs probably do make better meat than dogs
>> and dogs better pets than pigs, but it's not a foregone conclusion.
>
>The Vietnamese Pot-bellied (or miniature) Pig makes quite a good pet but
>I don't refuse pork. Given the long intertwined evolutionary development
>of dogs and people, I think dogs deserve to be respected. See the recent
>PBS documentary.

I haven't seen anything from PBS (whatever that is :-) but I read a
paper recently on the domestication of animals in general in which it
was suggested dogs may have domesticated us, rather than the other way
around.

That said, I've often maintained that I couldn't eat an animal with
such noxious shit as a dog! (But as others have pointed out "If you
have cream with it, you could even eat dog shit!" :-)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID