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
The Argument from Brutalization The previous argument was based on an alleged indirect effect on human beings of not eating meat. It is argued that the killing and eating of meat indirectly tends to brutalize people. People who do not eat meat tend to be less cruel and inhumane to persons than people who do eat meat.
The dark secret behind factory farm profits—cruel and inhumane animal husbandry—is getting out. Factory farmers treat animals inhumanely for no good reason. Since morally decent individuals oppose treating animals inhumanely for no good reason, factory farming is becoming an increasingly hard sell.
The meat industry will say yes, of course, all animals are treated and killed humanely. For some people, it is inhumane to eat meat in any situation, no matter how well the animal is treated prior to and during slaughter. You are not processing their wellbeing, but their carcasses for meat. Here is my opinion.
For example, Carl Cohen, who has argued at length that animals don’t have rights, admits: If animals feel pain (and certainly mammals do,), we humans surely ought cause no pain to them that cannot be justified. Carruthers, The Animals Issue , p. No one disputes premise (3). Running time: 12 Minutes.
Consequently, one ought not to eat meat until actual practice is changed. The question that must be raised, however, is how the conclusion not to eat meat follows from this. So, if one wants to change the present practice, the best means is to stop eating meat. Consequently, one ought not to eat meat. milk production.
The meat and dairy industries want to keep their operations away from the public’s discriminating eyes, but as groups like PETA and the Humane Society have shown us in their graphic and disturbing undercover investigations, factory farms are mechanized madness and slaughterhouses are torture chambers to these unfortunate and feeling beings.
He thinks that the treatment of animals in factory farms is morally unjustifiable, and yet, he continues to support those practices financially by purchasing and eating meat and animal products. Since it would not be wrong to eat the flesh of animals raised in that manner, eating meat is not morally wrong!
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