Mad Cowboy Essay

Animals, whether cats in the house or lions on the savannah, reserve the right to life. The disregard for animal life has been equated to racism or sexism; acting on principles of disrespect for life and thoughts of discrimination (Animal Testing and Ethics). The continuation of animal testing and experimentation take an enormous psychological toll on humanity, leading to rationalization and flawed justification. To carry on this path would darken the mark this animal abuse is currently leaving on our humanity, one step towards yet another fault in human nature.

“Animal Testing Is Bad Science.” Animal Rights, edited by Noah Berlatsky, Greenhaven Press, 2015. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints In Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010954207/OVIC?u=scschools&sid=OVIC&xid=96434ce4. Accessed 25 Apr. 2018. Originally published as “Animal Testing Is Bad Science:

“Against Meat” by Jonathon Safran Foer (2009, New York Times Magazine) is intended to educate current non-vegetarians on what vegetarianism is, the benefits of it in terms of health and animal rights, and also the struggles of consistently being a vegetarian. Although Foer does not specifically express what a vegetarian is we can assume he is going off the generally known definition of a person who does not consume the meat of an animal, as oppose to a vegan who does not consume any animal products at all. According to an article about vegetarian Americans, 5% or 16 million Americans classify themselves as vegetarian in 2015, compared to the 1% back in 2009, making vegetarianism a growing trend throughout the US (Raw Food World). Foer proves his opinion on vegetarianism by backing it up with facts from the USDA and his own personal experiences with his babysitter, growing up struggling with being a vegetarian that loves meat, and the decision to marry and raise his child vegetarian. Foer does, however, have a few gaps in his argument about nutrition, the costs associated with vegetarianism, and the lack of a definition of vegetarian.

The fundamental question that defined the content of the article was "What gives us the right to exploit other organisms as we see fit?" (Suzuki, 2008, p.681). Humanity had a long history of using animals in testing due to biological similarities (Suzuki, 2008, p. 680). He put a mirror to people by questioning the ways animals were treated in those scenarios, and if the methods and product were worth the suffering of animals. To do this he looked at examples of scientific studies to alleviate human illness, as well as use of animals for entertainment. By contrasting the harsh realities animals face with the rationalization of their captors, the article underlined not only humanity's unlimited capacity for cruelty but also the factors that allow it to keep on doing the same thing no matter what the truth of the matter is. The article was written for those who those who do not know about the scientific exploitation of animals as well as those who have not in the past seen the idea of captivity and scientific treatment of

Brought up in the southern of China, I often heard about that people from there “eat anything with four limbs except tables, anything that flies except aero planes, and anything that swims except ships”. Nevertheless, I eat more fruit, vegetables, nuts, and whole grains but less meat to make careful choices for environmental protection. Similarly, Kathy Freston argues that animal agriculture is one of the top contributors to global warming. In her Huffington Post selection “Vegetarian Is the New Prius,” Freston lists how many emissions of greenhouse gases people make when they eat meat and illustrates the consumption of tree in animal agriculture. She effectively convinces her audiences that the livestock results in the most serious environmental problems and encourages people to lead a greener diet to protect our environment. However, ardent craving, poor health, and perpetual hassle and cost prevent all Americans from being vegetarian.

New England Anti-Vivisection Society’s article displays the facts on how animal testing does not work. Presenting the horrendous cruelty of animal testing methods and the realities of the reliability of the experimentation, the article shows the lack of compatibility between animals and humans. Neavs’s writing shows that testing on animals does not guarantee results in humans. Neavs is reliable and useful because it cites it’s facts to various other sources. Neavs is trying to help end animal cruelty of all forms by providing information about suffering animals and telling people how to get involved or to just donate so the society itself can help the cause more. Using the examples of cruelty and instances of incompatibility between humans

The Day the Cowboy’s Quit takes place during the 1880’s and revolves around the character, Hugh Hitchcock. “Hitch” can only be described as a man of his word, perhaps even to a fault. He enjoys simple pleasures, and idealizes the cowboy lifestyle. Hitch works for the W Ranch, for a rancher named Charlie Waide, to whom he looks up to as a sort of father-figure. At Charlie’s ranch, Hitch and the other cowboys are free to own their own cattle and brand them as such, so long as they don’t steal from him or any of the other ranchers. However, not all ranchers see fit the hands-off approach Charlie takes with his men. Since the W Ranch is only expanding its horizons, the cowboys, and Hitch, although optimistic, and faithful in Charlie, see this free way of life coming to an end. Soon enough, big ranch owners try to force their ways upon the W Ranch, and Charlie resists, that is, until one of his own is found to have stolen cattle. Charlie’s trust in his men falters, and he conforms to the business oriented ways of the other ranchers. Upon word of this, the

Have you ever wondered who the cowboys were; how they lived; or what they did? The American Cowboy's way of life was interesting and unique, and they contributed more to society than one might think. Besides looking after stock and driving cattle, they had to round up huge numbers of cattle for ranchers. This paper will examine the American cowboy's character, what they wore, the everyday things they did like driving cattle and branding calves and the lawlessness of the old west.

There are problems with both Tom Regan’s and Carl Cohen’s conceptions of the status of animals in society, but, overall, Regan’s is more consistent and applicable to all situations. Cohen also establishes a double standard regarding the definition of a “moral agent,” consequently weakening his argument for the use of biomedical testing on animals. Although I disagree with many of Regan’s ideas about the value of animals, I will not address these points in this paper. I will instead argue for Regan’s position and, in doing so, prove that his argument is more valid than Cohen’s.

“Meats, Dairies, and Eggs, Oh Why” (2014) is an argumentative essay written by Rebecca Dent that explains the benefits of eating a plant-based diet and advocates for the better treatment of the animals affected by the meat industry. Dent supports her assertions by discussing the negative health effects of an omnivorous diet, addressing reasons some might be hesitant to convert to a plant-based diet, describing the advantages of substituting meat for vegetables for both the consumers and the animals, and finally, by including expert opinions and statistical facts. Dent’s purpose for this essay is to highlight the benefits of vegetarianism in order to convince readers to convert to a plant-based diet. The intended audience for this argument is those who currently eat an omnivorous diet so that they would assess and change their eating habits.

Animals can be ferocious and wild, but they can also be gentle and tame. Some are our pets, and some are powerful forces that are to be respected and admired. It is as easy to appreciate a loyal dog as it is to be in awe of a lion in its' natural habitat. But the truth that many people either don’t know or don’t appreciate is that animals are essential to human existence and have played a vital role in improving the quality of our lives. They have been providing us with answers to our most complex medical questions for decades. Their role in finding cures for diseases, treatments for illness, and product safety is immense. First, we will examine how animal testing has

Can it be morally permissible to eat meat when plant-based foods are available? In this paper my aim is it to explain why this is morally wrong to do. One problem with eating meat is humans are putting animals in unnecessary pain. Another problem is that the majority of our environmental destruction on our planet is due to agriculture. Philosophers Peter Singer and Tom Regan, both back up this view with their own arguments.

As the twentieth century approached, America was experiencing a time of considerable expansion. All eyes were looking for ways to make the United States a larger, more powerful, and more efficient country. Because of this wave in American society, there was no movement given more devotion than the settling of the West. The range-cattle industry in its various aspects, and in its importance to the United States and particularly to the Great Plains, has been a subject of focus to Americans since its origin in the mid 1800's. This industry was rendered possible by such factors as vast sections of fertile land, the rise of heavy industry involving the great demand for beef, and

As different crazes and fads are appearing each day, we have come to expect them to simply fade away as the hype passes. However, veganism has stood the test of time in our fad society and is still increasing in popularity. Originally only thought to be a religious lifestyle, many people from different walks of life are becoming vegans. However, this poses many questions and sparks heated debates, mainly from omnivorous people who believe that veganism is against life’s natural order. Vegans, then, argue against an omnivorous lifestyle by bringing up facts about humans’ biological makeup and how humans are, contrary to popular belief, herbivorous by nature, not omnivorous. While both sides present good arguments to some, the veganism lifestyle contains more benefits and less harmful cons than an omnivorous lifestyle.

Consumption of meat by humans creates several problems. First and foremost, raising animals for food compromises the environment. For example, it takes a large amount of natural resources to sustain the meat industry. The use of water, land, and food to raise animals for human consumption is not an efficient use of our limited resources. In contrast, it is more efficient to feed humans directly than to use land, food, and water to feed animals to be used as food. There are shortages of fertile land, clean water, and food in several third world countries. Many of these countries’ resources are allocated to produce feed for animals in developed countries around the world. As a result, the citizens of these countries are stricken with water and food shortages, while their crops are feeding cattle from across the globe. However, this problem can be solved by adopting a vegan diet. The vegan diet will allow a more efficient use of resources that in turn can be used to feed starving men, women, and children throughout the world. Consequently, more people in the world could be fed if the land used to grow feed for animals was used to grow food for humans.