What Is Natural Equity?

The starting point of this essay is to establish and lay out an animal rights claim. The point here is not to solely list which specific rights animals have, as that goes beyond the scope of this essay, but to discuss why animals do in fact have a claim to rights, and what this means for humans. The need to understand the intrinsic, or inherent value of animals allows us to see the base from which their claim to rights is derived. Inherent value refers to the idea that animals are valuable in themselves, not in what they provide us. Tom Regan, an animal ethicist, sets out the moral grounding from which we can

More than a million different kinds of animals inhabit the earth. The exact number is not known, for new kinds are continually being discovered. They live in the seas, from the surfaces down to the black depths where no ray of sunlight penetrates. Animals can be domesticated or left in the wild where they truly belong. However, as time passed by, nowadays, animals are endlessly being exploited and fought for around the globe. Different opinions from different countries and races have divided to defend to defend their views and make a stand. This issue about the animals’ welfare should be taken more seriously until we find the right answers.

In addition to his solutions, Pollan’s modern narrative sheds light on the façade of our food industries; asking us to rethink what we know. Despite the mention of certain inhumane acts in All Animals are Equal, Pollan takes us one step further to uncover the reason for which we continue to purchase our corrupt food. We all know animal abuse exists, but the average consumer like myself is more worried about the best price and the fastest way to get a burger rather than how fairly the animals are treated in the process. Whether it be the confined living space of chickens or the mental and physical torture of pigs, we continue to blind ourselves from reality. Is it purely out of selfishness? Or are we too ignorant to come to terms with our wrong doings? Like Pollan explains, it takes seeing the abuse before the shame of our disrespect can be felt (pg.6). After seeing Pollan’s truth, I might now think twice before eating out and the choice to support organic produce can make a dramatic difference for those farmers who promote the ethical lifestyle.

Today, the food industry has not just altered the American diet, but it has also had a negative effect within the labor sector as well as the animals meant for consumption and the lack of government oversight. Eric Schlosser in Fast Food Nation, and Jonathan Foer in Eating Animals, illustrate the mistreatment of labor workers as well as the animal abuse that goes unseen within the food industry. Foer gives such examples of employees who work in slaughterhouses giving accounts of what goes on in the kill floors, and stories of employees who have witnessed thousands and thousands of cows going through the slaughter process alive (231). Eating meat does not have to be so inhumane for example, Foer quotes Frank Reese, who does not permit inhumane practices on his ranch that are cruel, and Reese believes that there are other ways of having a sustainable humane animal agriculture instead of the methods of the large corporate meat industry (238). Namit Arora in the article “On Eating Animals”, as well as Michael Pollan in his book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, address some of the issues that animals face once they hit the kill floor. The food industry has transformed not only what people eat, but how the government has neglected the issues of the wellbeing of labor workers and the animals that are processed for consumption.

The matters pertaining the animal rights and their suffering for the sake of harvesting their flesh have been an issue with a variety of perspectives. Puppies, Pigs and People, a piece by Alastair Norcross, bring to question the treatment towards livestock and what is immoral about the process. The argument proclaims that since we (humans) do not require meat as part of our diet then the exploit of raising animals for consumption (humanly or not) is immoral. On a counter side of the argument, a philosopher, Carl Cohen, states in his work that animals possess no moral rights thus we have the option to eat them despite if it is immoral or not. In the case of who I believe offers the most optimum solution, I believe Cohen is the most accurate in his summation of animal’s roles in our world. I will argue that people have no obligation to abstain from eating animals, but morally speaking animals should be kept in humane living conditions in order for it to meet our obligations towards these creatures.

Most of the animals under this condition will develop illnesses, abnormalities, go insane, or die before they make it to the slaughterhouse (Alfie, 2010). In the U.S., over 10 billion animals are raised and killed each year for food about 9 billion chickens, 250 million turkeys, 100 million pigs, 35 million cows. The vast majority of these are not raised on small family farms but, rather, in the major agricultural facilities called?factory farms, also known as Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The idea of factory farming originated in the 1920s with the discovery of vitamins A and D. When mixed with feed; farm animals were capable of growing without sunlight or exercise, which enabled them to be raised more efficiently in barns throughout the year (Fieser, 2015). Factory farming is a form of capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system that is privately controlled by owners for profit and self-interest (Fieser, 2015). Many philosophers have proposed the principle of equal consideration of interests, in some form or other, as a primary moral value; but, we shall see in more element shortly, not many of them have documented that this principle applies to members of other species as well as to our own. (Singer, 1989). In today society the consumer is much more interested in knowing how the chickens are raised, what they?ve been eating

Animal rights is a revolutionary idea that has been rising ever recently, since African-Americans and women both have rights now. This topic is argued in both Michael Pollan’s “An Animal’s Place,” where the modern hippy suggests that animals are mistreated and that organic farming is the best method of farming, as well as Blake Hurst’s “An Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals,” where the sass-mouth, Midwestern, pissy-pants farmer who assures the reader that there is nothing wrong with the way that farming is being handled in America. While these points are very contrasting, both authors strive to prove that their way is the “right” way.

Compare and Contrast Pollan and Hurst In “An Animal's Place”, by Michael Pollan and “The Omnivore’s Delusion”, by Blake Hurst, animal suffering and modern day farming is being discussed. People should be knowledgeable not only on the treatment of animals but what goes into producing animals. Pollan’s and Hurst’s text both have a strong support on both sides of the argument, which could give the people the knowledge of how meat is being produced.

Turning a blind eye to troubling realities is no new concept to western culture. The materialism, capitalism, and industrialization that is ever so prevalent in today’s “civilized” society has contributed to a separation between consumer and source; a veil of consumeristic ignorance. In agriculture, this is especially true. Similar to how the Nazis dehumanized the Jews, western society has essentially disconnected all empathy between humans and certain forms of life, namely livestock, with the only real reason for doing so being human enjoyment of animal products. Humans have also managed to do the exact opposite with other types of animals, namely pets, by personifying animals and creating one-way emotional bonds.

Michael Pollan argues the traditional approaches to animal rights and welfare, as well as the environment that the animals live in, are unacceptable. He addresses the issues and gives his own feedback and opinions about the topic and what he thinks the overall outcome should be. A large portion of the article is spent with ideas running through Pollan's mind and he is trying to gather enough information to realize if the process is correct or not. First, Pollan explains what's wrong with industrial farming. Pollan states that beef cattle are used to standing ankle deep in their own waste, as well as eating corn which they can't digest. Chickens get their beaks snipped off and are placed in cages that are entirely too small. Pigs are taken away from their

In the last few pages of the document, Singer discusses the differences between humans and animals when it comes to consuming food. While some make the argument that animals eat meat and so should we, Singer states that humans have higher moral reasoning so are able to move pass such base thinking. Moreover, since the way that humans consume meat typically is rather cruel to animals. Much crueler then animals treat each other. Singer discusses the lives of farm animals, who are essentially bred to be slaughtered, given very poor lives, and live in constant fear.

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.

In Peter Singer’s piece “All Animals Are Equal”, he begins his argument by an in-depth consideration of notable rights movements, such as the Black Liberation and women’s rights movement, then segues into the justification for equal consideration of rights regarding animals, before finally exposing the immorality behind factory farming and animal cruelty. According to Singer, “the basic principle of equality…is equality of consideration; and equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights” (Singer 1974, 506). Based off proposed animals’ rights to equal consideration, Singer formats his main arguments against factory farming and the mistreatment of animals in general. These arguments stem from

This essay analyzes the ethical argument for veganism through the lens of philosophy using Utilitarianism defined by John Stuart Mill, and Deontological ethics according to Immanuel Kant. Through the use of these theories, I will justify the moral worth and legitimacy of the animal welfare debate that is often used to promote a cruelty-free and vegan lifestyle by analyzing questions of animal sentience, the worth of an animal’s happiness, and the right humanity supposedly has to the lives of other living creatures. Utilitarianism and Deontological ethics will provide two philosophical insights into the reasoning of a life abstaining from harming animals.

In “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable,” Gary Steiner argues against the eating, or using, of animals and animal products. Steiner is the author of multiple books on topics similar to this, and a dedicated vegan of fifteen years at the time of this article. The author begins with an allusion to the recent outcries for the humane treatment of animals being raised for food. However, he points out, no one seems to be concerned about the animals being slaughtered, merely that they were not abused beforehand. Steiner then goes on to explain the two main