Animal Rights

This post is directly related to the current issue of "Philosophy Now", which has several articles on animal rights, including an interview with Peter Singer. Therefore,  I have been thinking about it and will try to address some aspects of animal rights. I will attempt to stay away from a philosophic point of view. I will also try to dwell on the extreme points of view, because they are entertaining, albeit largely irrelevant.

Animals are People Too: This is the view held by many, to varying degrees of severity. If an animal can have the same characteristics as people, then we should afford them the same rights. To most people, this is limited to mammals; to others, to anything that moves of it's own accord.  The extreme point of view holds that if we are to have any respect for ourselves, then we must also have respect for nature; this means no killing animals for anything. No research, no food, no clothing, no compassionate killing. 

This PETA view is supported by celebrities and and average folk alike; although the celebraties, for some reason, get more press.  Essentially, we should be able to live in harmony with our furry brethren, and if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone.  When it comes to animals that attack people, there is one of two responses: if it was a domestic animal (i.e. dog) then the owner trained them to be vicious and it is the owner that should be punished; and if it was wild, then we shouldn't be in their space to begin with. 

One last supporting argument for this is that many animals are capable of the behaviours that we ascribe to humans: communication, emotion, friendship, monogamy, loyalty. Since there are people who do not have these human behaviours but do have human rights, then we should at least afford animals that have human characteristics basic human rights. 

Animals are our Slaves: This breaks down to the belief that human life, in all it's forms, it the most important form of life that is out there, and every other life is subservient to the mighty human. We are given animals to do our bidding - be it in medical research, or food, or guarding our personal property. Heck, since animals are subservient, we can use them for testing cosmetics if we want. That's their role. 

Key to this argument is that animals are different than people. We really don't know what they think, or if they think; any human characteristics that we think they have are merely things that we ascribe them because we want them to have those characteristics. Is a cat really aloof? Or a dog loyal? We call them that because we want to see them that way. Maybe they can communicate, but they can't record their thoughts - and if they can't record their thoughts, then they are living by instinct alone. 

Also important is that we are omnivorous, and that a regular balanced diet includes animals - vegetarian theory aside. Plus meat tastes good - if we weren't supposed to eat them, they wouldn't taste good. And anything we eat can not be equal to us; it must be beneath us. 

What I think: I think that human life is more important than animal life; but that we should try to treat most animals humanely. I make exceptions for insects. I think that there are some interesting connections that aren't made in this debate. For example, most animal rights groups looked to Aboriginal groups for guidance, until they realized that Aboriginal groups may have had a connection to animals, but still would kill them to suit their needs. Believing in conservation is not the same as believing in animal rights. And people who are Christian should have respect for all God's creatures - but Christians are the ones who have the belief that God put animals on the earth for people to use; while it is the New agers (a generic phrase, used improperly, I'm sure) that have more respect for all life.

How I relate: I have no pets, but used to. I loved my cats and my dog, and I still like them. I also like meat. But I try to shop somewhat carefully - not because I feel guilty, because I don't, but I really find it hard to support animal testing for cosmetic products.