Water For Pigs

It's true that no good deed goes unpunished.Some time last year Anita Krajnc,a human rights activist had a run in with a couple of truck drivers who were transporting pigs to a slaughterhouse west of Toronto. While the truck was stopped,Ms.Krajnc  gave a drink of water to some of the pigs.For her trouble,the owner of those pigs had Ms.Krajnc charged.He objected to anyone touching his belongings.The case comes to court today.

Ms.Krajnc's politics are not my politics.While I do believe animals,including the pigs in question should be treated humanely, I have no problem at all eating pork,or any other meat product,though I do try to purchase meat that is ethically raised and slaughtered.By that I mean that I will not purchase meat if I know it's been raised in inhumane conditions,and I trust our agriculture authorities to ensure that it is.Perhaps that's not enough for some people.Generally I believe certain animals were intended to feed us.

Having said all that,I also have no problem with someone giving water to pigs,or any other sort of animal,and I wonder why the courts are being used to convict this woman,at the expense of taxpayers.Obviously,one would suspect that there were some basis for charging this women,or the police would not have done so.But I'm very curious as to what she did that is so wrong.Was any damage done to these animals as a result of the simple kindness offered by Ms.Krajnc? I fail to see how.It seems as though there is some history here.Something of a difference in ideology between Ms.Krajnc and the owner of these animals.There would seem to be a matter of dissent about business as usual.So,if that's true,I'm not surprised to see the law coming down hard on Ms.Krajnc.There is a price to dissent.

Property rights are not supposed to be absolute.That's especially so when you count as your property things which may incur suffering as a result of not being properly handled.Pigs are certainly not persons and therefor do not have the same rights as persons.Neither are they machines or some other class of inanimate object.You are therefor not free to do with them as you might like,without regard for their well being.And there is no real indication,so far as I've been able to determine that these pigs were being mishandled,though it was a hot day and it would be reasonable to think that they welcomed a cool drink of water. If these animals had been dogs found locked in a hot car we would now be applauding any effort made on their behalf,up to and including breaking a window to relieve their distress.And I'm all in on that one.Yet Anita Krajnc finds herself charged for undertaking an action that saw no damage done.Where is the sense in that? Why should the courts be using as much as one cent of tax dollars to prosecute a person for providing a simple kindness? Is winning that one point in a war between animal rights activists and the meat industry so important that we must spare no help to business? I guess some people feel that there is a point to be proven here,but I fail to see what exactly that point is or why it matters.From my perspective the incident in question was win win.A few pigs were provided with a comfort they would not otherwise have had on their way to be slaughtered.No harm,no foul.There was no attempt to stop that slaughter and indeed those pigs went on their way and inured no loss of value.So do the right thing.Leave Anita Krajnc alone. Stop using my tax money on pointless prosecution.

                                                                                                              blyndpapaya