“We must fight against the spirit of unconscious cruelty with which we treat the animals. Animals suffer as much as we do. True humanity does not allow us to impose such sufferings on them. It is our duty to make the whole world recognize it. Until we extend our circle of compassion to all living things, humanity will not find peace.” ― Albert Schweitzer, I have chosen to do the option 1 reading packet which will be addressing animal rights. My paper will be focusing on finding ways to reinforce animal rights. Working on this ethics paper and wrestling with my animal rights topic is important because it gives me a chance to talk for the animals and to input all the things that I’ve learned in this class so far into my paper. With this paper, I am going to be talking about how animals and humans are no different but in order to live there are some things that humans must do to animals that will be considered cruel to some people. It is not always what we want to do but what we need to do in order to protect and watch out for ourselves. Making decisions to hurt animals to benefit ourselves may be challenging but if we do not hunt and kill cows, pigs, or even chickens how will we be able to eat meat or use other parts of their bodies for our clothes and other necessities? In my paper, I will have at least 5 articles that I will cite throughout my paper to help back up my ethical dilemma about animal rights. I will begin my paper by talking about the major issues that I found most of the authors arguing about in reference to the articles that I chose to cite in my paper.
The first issue that I will be addressing is the suffering of the animals. Animal suffering is also known as animal abuse, animal cruelty, or animal neglect. Allowing animals to suffer and not caring or in other words being self-conscious of animal’s lives is considered as being immoral. Animals have their own lives, and they think, have feelings, can feel pain, and require love, happiness, and everything else that humans have. The article “An Introduction to the Moral Issues,” in Contemporary Moral Issues: Diversity and Consensus by Lawrence M. Hinman talks about the religious concerns in reference to animal rights. In the article, it states that “many advocates of animal rights and animal liberations maintain that religions, especially Christianity, have contributed strongly to the subjection and mistreatment of animals.” Basically, it is informing readers that the Christianity religion does not agree with the mistreatment of animals and it can be referred to as sacrilegious abuse according to C.S Lewis who is a Christian Theologian. In this article, they talk about compassion and they feel as if a person is less compassionate about animals then they could care less about them suffering but if they are compassionate about animals then it hurts them to see and know that the animals are suffering. In the article, it states that “Compassionate people will be more responsive to the suffering of animals, and that continuing mistreatment of animals in our society dulls our capacity for compassion in regard to all beings.” From reading this article you can see that animals really do suffer, and you can also see that some people care about animals and do not agree with animal abuse, animal cruelty, or animal neglect. In the article “ The Prospects for Consensus and Convergence in the Animal Rights Debate,” in Contemporary Moral Issues: Diversity and Consensus by Gary E. Varner he is having an animal rights debate, and in his debate he talks about the animal's point of view, and also the human's point of view. In the article, it states” Often disagreements turn on empirical rather than moral matters--how much pain animals suffer and what benefits flow from a research project. Even Tom Regan’s defense of animal rights recognizes that in some cases human interests clearly take precedence over animal interests.” I put that segment from the article to show you that animals tend to suffer because of the things humans do but it’s not always intentionally meant to hurt the animals. Animals not only suffer because of environmental issues but they also suffer because of the choices that humans decide to make.
The second major issue that I will be talking about is the things that we as humans do that may be harmful to animals which may include taking things from them. In the article “Our Duties to Animals,” in The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature by Louis P. Pojman it states “Every minute of the day, twenty-four hours a day, one hundred animals are killed in laboratories in the United States. Fifty million animals used in experiments are put to death each year. Some die during the testing of industrial and cosmetic products; some are killed after being force-fed or after being tested for pharmaceutical drugs. Product testing on animals is required by the government before the products are allowed for use by human beings.” In reference to the segment, I just stated it shows how animals must endure so much based on human decisions. Another thing that I am going to state from this article is “Three billion chickens are killed in the United States each year. Likewise, pigs and veal calves are kept in pens so small they cannot move or turn around and develop muscles. They are separated from their mothers so they cannot be suckled and are fed a diet low in iron so they will produce very tender meat. “This is another example that shows how animals suffer because of the things that we humans do for us to be able to eat, stay warm, or even look fashionable. Another article that I am going to use in reference to the things that animals go through because of humans is “A New Argument for Vegetarianism,” In Disputed Moral Issues by Jordan Curnutt. In this article, it talks about the killing and eating of animals. In the article, it then states” One implication of this view is that killing animals for food, whether or not this is done painlessly and independently of the quality of the animal's life, is a violation of their right to respectful treatment since it uses them as a means to our own ends. Hence, vegetarianism is morally required.” Everybody has rights whether they are followed every day or enforced every day. A lot of people do things and say they are not intentional no matter whether it’s right or it’s wrong. There is really no difference between animals and humans because we all have lives and families, but what would humans do without animals?
The last major issue that I will be talking about is showing you that there is necessarily no difference between animals and humans but in order to survive we have to do things that we would not necessarily like, feel comfortable with doing, or either want to engage in doing. Yes, animals have four legs, fins, or even scales but they still have a heart, feelings, and suffer just like humans do. In the article “Animal Liberation: All Animals Are Equal,” In the Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature by Carl Cohen it states “What equalizes all sentient beings is our ability to suffer. In that, we and animals are equal and deserving of equal consideration of interests.” I chose to add this segment from the article in my paper to show readers that there are some people that really do feel like there is no difference between animals and humans. There are even some people that feel like humans tend to discriminate against animals and make them suffer just so that we can have our needs and wants but everybody in this world isn’t cruel and some people have a heart. It is not about whether we do not care about the animal or the animal's feelings, it is about what sacrifices we need such as having food in our stomachs and having clothes on our backs. A lot of people feel as if it was vice versa and animals treat humans how we treat them then how would we feel? It is not that we want to purposely hurt anything that God put on this Earth but if we were not supposed to hunt animals in order to have food and clothing then why would God give a man the knowledge on how to hunt animals? Nobody just wants to harm animals for fun but in order to make sure they have food in their homes and clothes on their backs than they will end up harming an animal. In the article “The Case against Animal Rights,” In The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature by Carl Cohen, it states “Using animals as research subjects in medical investigations is widely condemned on two grounds: first, because it wrongly violates the rights of animals, and second, because it wrongly imposed on sentient creatures much avoidable suffering.” This statement from the article shows readers that we as humans tend to go overboard in regards to animals and we end up not caring if it hurts them or not, but the only thing that we’re worried about is if us killing that particular animal will benefit us or not. No matter if the animal can feel the pain or not it is still wrong, it violates their rights, and they are still suffering in the end. Another segment that I will like to state from this article is “They are not beings of a kind capable of exercising or responding to moral claims. Animals, therefore, have no rights, and they can have none.” A lot of people will agree and disagree with this because as I mentioned before animals have feelings and so do humans so why can’t they have rights? People will agree with the statement that I provided from the article because when it comes time to vote for a president can animals vote? No matter what the circumstance is you will need to find a solution to solve the problem and in order to do that you must have a case study.
The problem that we are facing today regarding the topic of animal rights is finding out if animals really do have rights and if we think that they do then why, if we feel like they don’t have rights then why not. I asked three of my close friends this question and the first response was “ Yes animals do have rights because they do have a life, they do have families, and even though they can’t respond or talk like humans they still have a right to live.” The next response was “Yes they do have the right to be anywhere they want because humans are messing up their habitat by building houses, so that makes them not have anywhere to go so they end up living under people's houses, and then getting “evicted” because they’re called rodents and humans are calling exterminators. The last response was “Yes, because I feel like animals are like us humans, and not only that, but animals are their own species just like us humans meaning we have stuff in common but just in different ways.” I agree with all my friend's responses because yes animals and humans have different characteristics, but they still have feelings, we all have emotions and can feel pain, and we all have lives to live. After reading more articles and actually thinking about this entire paper it made me think about what if animals were in human's shoes then they would do exactly what we as humans are doing today which happens to be hunting animals and eating them and putting their fur on our backs so that we can have clothes. It is not always about the things we want in life it is about the things that we need in life and the majority of the people that tend to take up for animals are the main ones that eat meat every day.
To sum up this paper, animals can’t voice their opinion of things so how can we advocate for animals if we are the ones that are really harming them and taking them off the planet slowly but surely? Decision-making is one of the hardest things we must make in life, but whether we like it or not sometimes we have to make decisions that we deep down inside do not want to make but we must make.
References
Carl Cohen,” The Case against Animal Rights,” in The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature, 2d ed., ed. Louis P. Pojman (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004), 878-883
Gary E. Varner, “The Prospects for Consensus and Convergence in the Animal Rights Debate,” in Contemporary Moral Issues: Diversity and Consensus, ed. Lawrence M. Hinman (upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996), 487-495
Jordan Curnutt,” A New Argument for vegetarianism,” in Disputed Moral Issues: A Reader, ed. Mark Timmons (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 207), 498-508
Lawrence M. Hinman, “An Introduction to the Moral Issues,” in Contemporary Moral Issues: Diversity and Consensus, ed. Lawrence M. Hillman (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1996), 460-469
Louis P. Pojman, “Our Duties to Animals” in The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature, 2d ed., ed. Louis P. Pojman (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004), 850-851
Peter Singer,” Animal Liberation: All Animals are Equal,” in The Moral Life: An Introductory Reader in Ethics and Literature, 2d ed., ed. Louis P. Pojman (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004), 861-877