For decades, meat has been a source of nutrition for many people. In today’s society, animals have a variety of uses. Some are kept in zoos or as pets and they are killed and hunted for their meat. Other animals are used for their hides or fur, which can be used as clothing products. Some people appreciate this use of animals; but there are those that do not agree with these uses. There is one specific organization that advocates for the rights of animals to not ever be eaten or used by humans in any fashion and believe that animals should never be used for anything- not even as pets. This organization is called People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). In order to understand the problem of PETA and their extreme views on the …show more content…
Many people invest their time and money in purchasing animals as a pet. It may come as a shock, but PETA also believes that no one should purchase any animal as a pet, and if one does own a pet they should be released. Amanda Radke earned a degree in agricultural communications at the South Dakota State University (“Amanda Radke, Freelance Contributor”). She voiced her opinion on the subject of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in an article, “PETA Hates Pet Ownership; Kills 1,456 Cats and Dogs in 2015.” Radke states, “It’s no surprise to farmers and ranchers that the extremist animal rights group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has a different idea of what constitutes proper animal care.” PETA does not believe in owning any animal as a pet. In order to accomplish this mission PETA euthanizes innocent animals. Radke also states, “While ranchers tend to their stock… PETA employees are busy euthanizing healthy animals.” In agriculture, farmers and ranchers raise livestock, such as pigs and cows, and they could also own dogs and horses as pets. Agriculture is defined as the practice of cultivating plants and heading animals for food, fiber, and other products (Jokisch). If the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals were to accomplish their mission it would not only affect the raising of livestock, but the feces of these animals is also a rich source of nutrients for the production of their crops. Also, it will affect these farmers’ and ranchers’ source of
Both Pollan and Hurst agree that animals should be a part of our diet, however they disagree on the amount and type of meat people should consume. Pollan believes that people should limit the amount of meat that they eat, and that it should be organic (376). Hurst, on the other hand, believes that animals are free to be eaten, and that industrial farming is the only way to satisfy the increasing population. Both authors are concerned about the welfare of animals, but have opposing beliefs on how their wellbeing should be maintained. Hurst believes that animal should be upheld by the use of industrial farming tools that benefit the animals, such as pig gestational crates.
In An Animal’s Place, Michael Pollan describes the growing acknowledgement of animal rights, particularly America’s decision between vegetarianism and meat-eating. However, this growing sense of sentiment towards animals is coupled with a growing sense of brutality in farms and science labs. According to Pollan, the lacking respect for specific species of animals lies in the fact that they are absent from human’s everyday lives; enabling them to avoid acknowledgment of what they are doing when partaking in brutality towards animals. He presents arguments for why vegetarianism would make sense in certain instances and why it would not and ultimately lead to the decision of eating-meat while treating the animals fairly in the process. Pollan
Animal rights and livestock farming Many of us, nowadays, eat and enjoy eating meat but many would agree that this is actually not an ethical action. Michael Pollan, in his persuasive style article “An Animal's Place" published in The New Work Times Magazine, on November 10, 2002 intends to persuade his audience that humans should respect animals and as long as they are treated well in farms and give them a more peaceful life and death it will be fine to eat them. According to Pollan, in today's huge industrial farms, cruel and unbearable things happen that are against animals rights. There is a high possibility that in the future these actions will stop as already some protest for animal rights have begun, because animals have feelings and farms take advantage of them thinking that they are mere machines, making them suffer. The solution to this conflict according to the author who supports friendly farms that respect and give a fun and secure life for animals.
For vegetarians, animal rights should trump human rights. In “Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights,” Tom Regan defines animal rights as “the natural right to life” (307). Similar to Regan, many vegetarians believe that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. By switching to a plant-base diet, people will be able to alleviate the needless suffering and deaths of countless animals. Besides, in the same article, Regan also suggests “to treat animals in a more humane manner” (308).
In her work “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights,” Vicki Hearne challenges common beliefs of animal rights, arguing that animal rights groups do very little to actually benefit animals. She argues that natural selection should be allowed to take place for wild animals, and animals such as cats and dogs should not be seen as property. To persuade the audience to support her position, she uses ethos, pathos, and logos. Her credibility as a trainer makes the logic behind her views reliable, her logic reinforces the examples she uses, and she appeals to emotion using her relationship with her Airedale, Drummer, to support everything her argument is saying. Through these strategies, Vicki Hearne effectively counters the current, popular views of the
The American Society for the Prevention of cruelty to Animals “We are their voice” this is the motto of The American society for the prevention of cruelty to animals (ASPCA) because they believe in standing up and fighting for the ones who can not stand up and fight for themselves. ASPCA was North America 's first established humane society and today is one of the world’s biggest. This interest group tries to influence the political process by asking for donations accompanied by a picture of a physically abused animal, on almost every page on their website to help raise money to help their cause and work against bills such as Ag-Gag legislation. Over the past couple years there has been the introduction of the Ag-Gag legislation. The farming
Suppose you hear of a case where a human is torturing their dog or cat; you are very displeased and upset by this because you too have a dog and/or cat that you love dearly. You question how someone can torture such sweet innocent animals. Now take a minute and think if you would be just as upset to hear of a chicken or a pig treated in this cruel way. Would it bother you as much to learn of a pig being torched from birth or to hear of a puppy being torched from birth? Most people would say it bothers them more to hear of a puppy being torched than to hear of a pig being torched; but why is this?
When you get an animal you provide for it so it can be healthy and strong just like children. Organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals just look at the bad incidents and don’t take into account how much we have expanded from livestock. They think that in FFA or 4-H we just fatten up our livestock and when the time comes we just give them away to be slaughtered like nothing, as if we never got emotionally attached to our animal. But they are wrong. We provide everything that is needed.
Although Jeremy Rifkin, Bob stevens, and Lois Frazier have all written about their view on animals and how they are treated globally, but when bringing in animal rights groups like ASPCA and PETA, different bias and tactics are newly introduced. Of all the articles, Jeremy Rifkin uses the most credible sources such as lab studies and examples. In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” Rifkin uses sources such as Purdue University and the European union when talking about situations. One situation he writes about is how pigs need social activity so the pigs are not “lacking mental and physical stimuli [which] hand result in deterioration of health”.
Animals are great and make our lives better but when they are suffering and all we can do is extend their pain for a few months and pay thousands of dollars it just isn’t worth it. Americans nowadays spend money on tons of things that aren’t worth it, but spending thousands of dollars on dying animals is ridiculous. Furthermore, people even treat their animals as family like for example “Eighty-Three Percent refer to themselves to as their parents pet’s mom or dad” (The Last Meow). As a former pet owner I can say that it is ridiculous how people consider animals as their family and use that to justify spending thousands of dollars to keep them for a few months longer.
To begin, when talking about animals it can be a very sensitive subject mainly because the way animals are treated on farms, and how no one feels the need to question these actions. This is because many people feel this issue doesn’t concern them. In this essay Matthew Scully discusses the issue on how animals are treated and how they should be given more respect, and attention. Matthew Scully argues that animals in these factory farms are wrongfully treated, he uses biblical references and addresses the morals of humans to get conservatives to act on this matter.
In today’s world, there is a division among the people in the world regarding whether or not it is ethical to eat meat. After researching about eating meat and vegetarianism, I have come to the conclusion that it is indeed ethical to eat meat in today’s society. Sure, eating meat might have its drawbacks, but I have found that the benefits of eating meat far outweigh the negatives of eating it. Eating meat not only helps improve people’s health, but it also helps strengthen our economy and it has little difference in the environmental impact that involves in the farming of vegetables. Eating too much of anything usually results in a negative outcome.
The meat packing industry disregards animal’s emotions and their rights all together by the malicious treatment of animals. The way animals are being treated is highly unfair. Being slaughtered for their body parts and suffering just to be used for protein or an asset to humans is unbearable. An animal’s life is at equal values to a human and deserve the same rights as
Thesis Not just for our health but also for animal’s welfare, we need to be aware about what procedures animals are passing by and how they are being treated. Many of the most fatal sicknesses that affect humans can be prevented if we involve more in those harsh procedures that they suffer and try to look for new solutions to make it stop. Introduction Many times we are not even aware that our cold actions are not just affecting the defenseless animals but ourselves, our country, our economy. We don’t even think of how those actions are affecting the rest of the population, we just care about selling products and making money.
There has been a long conflict in ethical decisions between environmental ethics and animal rights. The focus of environmental ethics is the natural community. Whereas the focus of animal rights is the individual animal. In Eric Katz’s “Is There a Place for animals in the Moral Consideration of Nature?” he addresses this problem between environmental ethics and animal rights.