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
Gene Bauer from Farm Sanctuary appears in this article. Pretty intense, but I hope people read it. There is a disturbing hedonism to eating. I went to a restaurant for a work lunch and everyone ate meat but me, even the animal lovers. We just don't think about where that flesh came from.and most of us don't care.
We've argued in previous posts that factory farming is simply not conducive to animal welfare. Animal welfare is a cost of doing business, not a moral obligation. I'm not arguing about the methods as I'm not a veterinarian, but it's a good example of the clinical discussion of costs when it comes to managing farm animal health.
I came across this 2005 book from the Society & Animals Journal titled Confronting Cruelty Moral Orthodoxy and the Challenge of the Animal Rights Movement. Sounds interesting. Why and how do people campaign on behalf of a species that is not their own?
There is a difficulty about drawing from all this a moral for ourselves. But then we can say this because we can say that all those are bad moralities, whereas we cannot look at our own moralities and declare them bad. This sympathy can be a basis for revising one's moral principles so as to take animals into account.
These were the Guacalillo lagoons (basically part of the Tarcoles River estuary), the Chomes area, and the salt ponds at Punta Morales (Cocorocas). We left the highway at the entrance road to Chomes (a good birding route unto itself) and made one stop to scan the farm fields. Some of the birds at Morales.
He is an unabashed speciesist, putting humans on “a different moral plane from that of other animals” (11) due to various reasons, such as our “vastly greater capacity for symbolic language, culture, and ethical judgment” (11). On page 172, when Herzog writes, “I am conflicted over many moral issues involving animals,” I respond, “No kidding!”
.: One message is that there's nothing wrong with eating animals, and in fact it's fantastic and thrilling and a win-win-win (people-planet-profits) when you eat animals that were "produced" by Polyface Farms. The moral of the story is that it's all about the way we farm animals, not that we farm them that is what needs changing.
The problem of the unjust use of farm animals is large, growing, historical, institutionalized, governmentally encouraged, and fundamentally unregulated at either the state or federal level. Farm animals are treated essentially as raw materials. They are of little use and little used. Because it is unjust it should be abolished.
Some fight for veganism, some against factory farms, some against experimentation, poaching, habitat encroachment, etc. It's not sorry, it just hasn't found its moral, UNITED, ORGANIZED voice. (I believe they can speak, but in their own language that we can understand if we only listen.) There is a group for every cause.
Walk to a small abandoned farm and keep on along the track, crossing a small canal via a small bridge (don’t worry about the gate) just after the farm. This is prohibited under German nature conservation laws and a moral no-go. Follow the track through a gap in the pine tree plantation and immediately turn right.
Perhaps she would argue that there is no double standard, i.e., that there is a morally relevant difference between human animals and nonhuman animals that justifies the difference in treatment. Notice that we (including, I assume, the author) would never allow such treatment of a human being. I can't imagine what it is.
Latimer refers to his previous two posts where he has "documented the ethical and moral shallowness of the 'animal rights' credo itself, which is based more on an anti-human self hatred, taking the form of a 'moral' squeamishness concerned more with stamping out human 'cruelty,' no matter what the social or economic costs might be.
Parker uses the term "anti-modern farming activists," which is new to me. Perhaps it is the industry's inability to evolve morally that is behind the times. The HSUS isn't even anti-hunting ! I prefer "anti-unnecessary slaughter of sentient nonhumans" and it has nothing to do with perceived modernity.
For this audience, you might put together a package full of sustainable goods, including a notebook made from 100% reclaimed paper and chocolates sourced from a cacao farm committed to rainforest preservation. Your team members will have a higher morale in their sales outreach thanks to prospects’ increased receptiveness.
For this audience, you might put together a package full of sustainable goods, including a notebook made from 100% reclaimed paper and chocolates sourced from a cacao farm committed to rainforest preservation. Your team members will have a higher morale in their sales outreach thanks to prospects’ increased receptiveness.
This is a moral principle, and states that 'the interests of every being affected by an action are to be taken into account and given the same weight as the like interests of any other being'. This, however, is precisely what factory farming does.
It is designed to distinguish between two types of farming. Note that this debate is independent of the debate about the moral permissibility of eating fish. If organically raised fish suffer less than nonorganically raised fish, it is an accident, morally speaking.
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 factory farms. To learn more about Arizona's precedent-setting victory for farm animals, see here. 503 ) was approved in the U.S.
To the Editor: “ A Factory Farm Near You ” (editorial, July 31) does not mention any issue of the morality of factory farming—treating living beings as factory products. Cruelty to animals on such a scale should be the centerpiece of any discussion on raising animals for food.
The initial attractiveness of utilitarianism as a moral theory on which to rest the call for the better treatment of animals was noted in an earlier context. Because animals are sentient (i.e., Because animals are sentient (i.e., But utilitarianism is not the theory its initial reception by the animal rights movement may have suggested.
It might be argued that any decrease in suffering for farmed animals is good, morally speaking. Someone might argue that there is no incompatibility between (1) working to decrease animal suffering and (2) working toward the abolition of factory farming. What do you think of this ?
My view, then, is not that which it has often been taken to be in discussion and which Singer, Regan, Clark, and others blast in their work; I am not suggesting that, because they lack language, animals can be factory farmed without suffering. Animals are moral patients, but not moral agents.
I have always felt a sense of connection to animals since as far back as I can remember, and the current manner in which they are treated in factory farms disturbs me. Currently, I do not believe that killing an animal is prima facie morally wrong.
Modern livestock farming on a grand scale also wastes a colossal amount of feed grains on animals which, in times past, would simply have fed off the land. There is no doubt a good deal of truth in this last point as well, and we are here presented with a serious moral problem concerning the world food supply. One can only agree.
However, I agree with Mr. Foer that factory farming has to go. Rather than eating dogs, we all ought to eat exclusively small-farmed, free-range meat. Arguments like "Let Them Eat Dog" caricatures the antifactory farm position, which is a shame because it's an important argument to hear.
If we’re going to raise farm animals and then kill them to eat them, we should say so. They do so because it’s the moral and ethical thing to do, and it’s in their best economic interest. Catherine di Lorenzo Woodbine, Ga.,
Once I put two and two together and realized where my food came from and the moral inconsistency of it all there was no turning back. My temptation when dealing with others was to simply say, "hey look this is what modern factory farming is all about," and voila people would make the change.
20): Blake Hurst, a former hog farmer and president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, cautions that “we can’t ask the pigs what they think.” I served on the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, which released a report in 2008 that detailed exactly how much these “efficiencies” are costing America. Hurst hammers three times).
At mid-life crisis, the mother, Lili, decides to leave her husband (Gabe’s father) and return to take up farming on her family estancia in eastern Uruguay, far from the delights of Montevideo where most of her rambunctious, rollicking family resides, overseen, not always approvingly, by Gabe’s quirky abuela.
Twice in the past 24 hours (once here and once on Stephanie's blog, in the comments )I have come across the following statement: "[insert animal here] are safe from predators, get fed regularly, and are better off on farms than if they were in 'the wild.'" The choice isn't the wild or the farm. Besides, we have choices.
Unwanted farm dogs are another source. The selling of dogs from the pound for this purpose is morally wrong. Animals for research purposes are coming from municipal shelters, breeders and the greyhound trade. From the Herald Sun. In 2007, 394 dogs died during procedures for canine and human research.
For an explanation of this feature, click on “Moral Vegetarianism” at the bottom of this post. As he puts it, “Until we boycott meat we are, each one of us, contributing to the continued existence, prosperity, and growth of factory farming and all the other cruel practices used in rearing animals for food” ( Animal Liberation, 167).
The good news is that if you know someone who needs to be schooled on all of the sordid details of factory farming, and appreciates good writing, this is a great book. There's not enough evidence for an accusation of moral relativism, but for me the message is a mixed one. Factory farming considers nature an obstacle to overcome" (34).
An enormous volume of material has already appeared on the conditions under which animals live and die on factory farms, 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 factory farms.
Farm animals also benefit from the humane farming movement, even if the animal welfare changes it effects are not all that we should hope and work for. If the goal is not moral perfection for ourselves, but the maximum benefit for animals, half-measures ought to be encouraged and appreciated. Lerner Woodside, Calif.,
As such, they are likely to be better moral reasoners , as well, both in their ability to identify moral reasons and in their ability to appreciate these reasons. Consequently, they realize that all of the suffering and frustration that animals are subjected to in factory farms is entirely unnecessary.
To the Editor: Re “ A Farm Boy Reflects ” (column, July 31): Hats off to Nicholas D. While this legislation would be an important step in transforming inhumane animal production, we must also call for change on the federal level, where the farm bill subsidizes this sector to the tune of billions of dollars.
Ethical vegetarianism is the thesis that killing and eating animals is morally wrong whenever equally nutritious plant-based alternatives are available. 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. Premise (4) is widely acknowledged.
It is asking the burger-stuffer to come clean ; to show just why it is that his greed should be indulged in this way, and just where he fits into the scheme of things, that he can presume to kill again and again for the sake of a solitary pleasure that creates and sustains no moral ties. Duty requires us, therefore, to eat our friends.
12): While this is a step in the right direction toward reducing the animal abuse inherent in all factory farming (from the chicken’s point of view), it’s still a long way from what nature intended. Let chickens be chickens, and avoid the whole moral dilemma by going vegan. Jean Bettanny Port Townsend, Wash.,
McArthur Swamp / Rat Farm. McArthur Swamp / Rat Farm. McArthur Swamp / Rat Farm. McArthur Swamp / Rat Farm. Las Trancas farm fields (Rt 254 to Playa Panama). Las Trancas farm fields (Rt 254 to Playa Panama). Las Trancas farm fields (Rt 254 to Playa Panama). Punta Morales–Cocorocas salinas.
There are moral reasons to go vegetarian: recognition that it is wrong to contribute to unnecessary animal suffering the injustice of exploiting animals and killing them for no good reason If human have rights, then many nonhuman animals also have rights, and confining and killing these animals for food violates these rights.
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