This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
I know on some level, I think that’s something almost all of us can get behind…no one, except the most callous and cold-hearted of the human race things its fine to torture animals, or deny that they are capable of pain and suffering. This makes perfect sense. The logic of this is ridiculous.
I came across this 2005 book from the Society & Animals Journal titled Confronting Cruelty Moral Orthodoxy and the Challenge of the AnimalRightsMovement. Readership: This book will be of interest to anyone who wishes to understand the animalrightsmovement in England, the United States and Australia.
The animalrightsmovement is not for the faint of heart. How we change the dominant misconception of animals—indeed, whether we change it—is to a large extent a political question. To overcome the collective entropy of these forces-against-change will not be easy.
former president of the Animal Legal Defense Fund and founder of the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP), died on February 15, 2024, at the age of 73. Wise was a trailblazer in the fight for legal rights for animals.
Both, of course, were seen as victories, but the article's author, Richard Foot, asks: Do such successes mean the animalrightsmovement is winning its long, controversial campaigns to gain the same legal protections for animals as those ascribed to humans? restaurants by animalrights activists."
Because animals are sentient (i.e., can experience pleasure and pain) and because they not only have but can act on their preferences, any view that holds that pleasures or pains, or preference-satisfactions or frustrations matter morally is bound to seem attractive to those in search of the moral basis for the animalrightsmovement.
It is not that they do no wrong, but that “right” and “wrong” here make no sense. And that explains, in part, the appeal of the animal-rightsmovement. Choosing to live with animals rather than humans is a kind of masturbation: all pleasure, no responsibility. My children can do all these things and more.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content