From guest blogger, Tessa.
This week I wanted to focus on animal rights and speciesism. Personally, I am probably one of the very few that agrees with Singer’s views and actually practices them. He thinks that we should not have equal rights with animals, but we should have equal consideration of pain and suffering. In this case, in order to practice Singer’s beliefs, one would have to be a full-on vegetarian. Singer thinks we all need to stop giving the industry support, and that testing on animals (as well as eating) is showing a large bias for our species. Singer’s argument is that animals have emotions/desires and appear to my capable of enjoying a good life, so their pain should be taken into consideration equally. Although I have been a vegetarian for seven years, and agree that we should not place pain upon animals, I do still eat dairy. Singer does not believe in eating dairy, because it is still using the animal. My stance is not as intense as his, and I believe it is okay if it is not harming the animals. While I eat cage-free, organic eggs, I’m still not sure that the animals are being treated as well as the farmers claim. Because of this, my actions still would probably not be good enough in Singer’s eyes. All in all, my choice to abstain from meat for 7 years has helped our environment (ecological footprint, methane production, etc.) and also my health. It is not clear exactly how much ‘help’ I have been throughout those years, but at least I know I am trying my best to do my part to protect animal rights and help ensure environmental sustainability.
2 comments:
Tessa,
As we learned more about Singer in class, I and I'm sure others were wondering what Singer thinks of using animals in a non-harmful way. If I use a cow for milk but treat it respectfully, i.e. let it graze on lush pastures and protect it from harm, then how could this possibly be wrong? It produces methane, yes, but so does driving your car to and from work...
Is it not the same if I own a dog just so it can give me happiness and comfort if I feed it, protect it, and generally treat it with respect? I think that some uses of animals can be very beneficial to both man and animal, which seemed like something Singer was a bit closed minded about...
-Lee
One objection to Singer is that there seems to be a degree of morality here. The arguments for animal rights only extend to that which has minimal human cost. A case and point is that while many would condemn factory farming, if a firefighter saved an animal instead of a human from a burning building, most would consider that morally wrong. Yet if we embrace the full force of specieism such an action would be no more reprehensible than that firefighter saving one human over another.
Post a Comment