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 discussion about the environment usually originates in the massive problems created by the factoryfarming of sentient nonhumans. The arguments against factoryfarming, which most recently were articulated by Jonathan Safran Foer (who has caused quite a stir in the mainstream), are legion. You are choosing violence.
Interests arise, Singer contends, from the capacity to feel pain, which he labels a 'prerequisite' for having interests at all; and animals can and do suffer, can and do feel pain. This, however, is precisely what factoryfarming does.
The column, which you can read here , is a call to arms to factory farmers to fight back against those individuals and organizations working to protect farm animals from the abuses inherent in factoryfarms. To learn more about Arizona's precedent-setting victory for farm animals, see here.
It is natural to feel sympathy for animals who are suffering. Have you visited a factoryfarm or a slaughterhouse? Have you looked at images or videotapes of slaughter? Have you looked at images or videotapes of slaughter? Perhaps the sympathetic impulse would be activated if people saw how their meat is produced.
Today's New York Times gives us Adam Shriver's Op-Ed " Not Grass-Fed, But at Least Pain-Free ," which presents its dilemma at the end: If we cannot avoid factoryfarms altogether, the least we can do is eliminate the unpleasantness of pain in the animals that must live and die on them. Like when they're about to be, say, slaughtered?
Meat, however, purchased at the supermarket, externally packaged and internally laced with petrochemicals, fattened in feed lots, slaughtered impersonally, and, in general, mechanically processed from artificial insemination to microwave roaster, is an affront not only to physical metabolism and bodily health but to conscience as well.
The good news is that if you know someone who needs to be schooled on all of the sordid details of factoryfarming, and appreciates good writing, this is a great book. Factoryfarming considers nature an obstacle to overcome" (34). You never have to wonder if the fish on your plate had to suffer. Ever, in fact.
It's impersonal and hideously ugly and the animals suffer greatly. No factoryfarms, no large-scale operations where animals are crammed together under a roof, never to see the light of day. No argument here. And if those whom you're addressing are willing to drink the KoolAid you're serving, plenty of profit awaits.
An enormous volume of material has already appeared on the conditions under which animals live and die on factoryfarms, and more is almost certainly on the way. What the vegetarian wants, surely, is that we should stop eating meat even if our liking for it exceeds our revulsion at the suffering endured on factoryfarms.
And thanks to federal corn and soybean subsidies, factoryfarms saved an estimated $3.9 It’s time that our tax dollars no longer finance the inhumane conditions—for workers and animals and the climate—of factoryfarms. Mr. Kristof is attuned to issues of human suffering and injustice.
Animals raised for food suffer miserably. Would we say these people were slaughtered in a “people friendly” manner? Confinement is confinement, mutilation is mutilation, and slaughter is slaughter. Animals rescued from so-called humane farming establishments have been found in horrific condition.
Virtually everyone agrees that: (1) It is wrong to cause a conscious sentient animal to suffer for no good reason. Causing an animal to suffer for no good reason is cruel, and our ordinary commonsense morality tells us in no uncertain terms that cruelty is wrong. Most people hold that it is wrong to cause animals unnecessary suffering.
He thinks that the treatment of animals in factoryfarms is morally unjustifiable, and yet, he continues to support those practices financially by purchasing and eating meat and animal products. It goes something like this: Yes, I agree that factoryfarming is morally unjustifiable and ought to be abolished.
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