Wednesday, September 11, 2013

TR, 9:50am class

44 comments:

M. James said...

i think all animals deserves a better lie or way of living rather than just being labeled as food stuff. there are a lot of people that thinks eating meat is wrong but they would wear fur, mink, alligator, and other animals. with that being said i would like to know what is the difference in the cruelty to animals when we kill them to eat them and when we kill animals to wear them?
there is no difference if you ask me because it is all the same. we are still killing the animals! animals deserve as much rights as humans does to survive but if we don't kill them then how can we get the proteins and nutrition our bodies need to survive. when we eat meat it works in our best interest as opposed to the animals interest. but, on the other hand when we do not eat meat it works in the animals best interest because it gets to live longer and maybe raise its young.

Alyssah J. said...

well this is a very touchy subject and although what the young boy said is true, that we should take care of these animals we live in a world where meat is in high demand and while it would be nice to live in a world where everyone is vegan or vegetarian, it's not realistic. Personally I love to eat meat and while others may argue that we don't have to cease eating meat but just treat the animals better but that costs more money and if that was the case of the animals being treated with care without being given chemicals in order for them to reproduce faster then not only would it be more expensive but we would have to wait longer to get the meat we want. I some what agree with what Professor Carl Cohen is saying that in order for the animal to have rights against cruelty, it should be able to understand and distinguish what is right or wrong which the animal doesn't have the capacity to do. I know i'm defending the human side but although I care for animals I don't think unless there was a dire situation will I be able to stop eating meat . In addition to that I will not be oblivious to the fact that animals are suffering because of me therefore I'm torn between two ideas.

Lazaro said...

i don't believe in rights for animals. in fact, i believe the topic of rights, in this case, shouldn't even be touched. instead of looking at animal behavior for answers, we should be critical of our own behavior toward animals. rather than over-complicating our society by debating whether animals deserve rights or if animals are somehow capable of showing emotional functions similar to humans, we should simply be looking within ourselves to be more respectful towards animals (or other forms of life) and, if we need to sacrifice an animal for food, to make sure it is done in an efficient manner that causes minimal stress to the animal.

we have to understand that, in nature, there are no rights. a lion doesn't stop to think and say to itself, "hey, i think it's morally correct if i go hungry today because i don't want to kill that defenseless, newborn gazelle". the whole concept of rights is man-made and it works best if it stays within the confines of our species, and not venture out to try to somehow civilize life by extending the idea of harmonious living and coexistence unto animals.

everything that exists on earth is, in one way or another, part of a food chain. i don't think it would have ever been possible for our ancestors to survive, the way they did, by harboring philosophies such as this one. granted, they did view animals as god-like and were thankful for their resources (hide, fur, meat, milk, and so forth). and yes, they wouldn't have been able to materialize philosophies, such as this one, in the first place because they lacked to brain power to do so (weren't evolved enough).

i'm not saying that we should be sadists and kill animals without proper justification. all i am trying to argue is that a philosophy such as the one provided in this post goes against the fundamental endeavors of life: reproduce, eat, and survive. that's how it has been before us, and that's how it will be after us.

Lazaro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tristan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Carlos Diaz said...

In general, people are so ignorant that they don’t even think about these issues, but certainly everybody knows. Even though, I am aware of this long time ago, it would be very difficult to survive without meat. I have never tried being a vegan honestly because I cannot even stand the idea of not eating meat. I could believe human kind is omnivore. That said I also consume vegetables. Meat and vegetables are just some of the type of foods for human nutrition. The plants do not offer enough nutrients as we need. Besides, I read an article called Were Humans Meant to Eat Meat from emagazine.com where Tom Billings, a vegetarian for three decades and site editor of BeyondVeg.com said in 2002 ‘’animal foods were a reliable source during evolution.’’ I totally agree with him.

One of the students in this class posted that if it possible it is a MUST to make animals’ suffering from little to none. That is for sure the least that we could do. That is an essential animal right. The image on the post said: “Don’t treat the way you wouldn’t like to be treated” which puts me uneasy, and that is when you realize how graphic it is.

Now I should retract in the environmental aspect. Well, that is for a future post as said on the blog.

Maria Londono said...

The subject of animal rights and the consumption of meat has evoked the passions of many in recent years. Many arguments for and against the consumption of meat can be offered. The beef industry would no doubt reason that we need animal protein to be healthy and that these “dumb animals have no self-awareness and no rights” Some may say that to eat meat is our right as the dominant species on the planet and that these animals exist to satisfy our needs. They, after all cannot speak up and defend themselves. However, science has shown that we have much in common biologically with the creatures that share this planet with us, especially other mammals. Mammals exhibit essentially the same nervous system as we humans do, but in a less complex form. They cannot speak, but this nervous system certainly allows them to experience pain and suffering. Can we live with the shameless cruelty we inflict on these helpless relatives of ours? Do these animals have rights at all? These rights are not codified, but we humans must ask ourselves how we can live in a morally correct manner. Researchers have shown that eating animal protein is not absolutely necessary for our health and well-being. We can replace animal protein with vegetable protein and it is even better for our bodies. So indeed one can offer up many arguments in favor of ending meat consumption.Maria J. Londono

Saray Restrepo said...

We have been eating meat thousands of years ago when hunters would go hunt animals and that would be their food supply. I do not think there is a problem with eating meat because we all belong in the food chain and even animals eat their prey, (The scenario when a Lion goes and attacks a gazelle because that is his food). But I do believe that they deserve to be treated way better that they are treated. I disagree when people hunt deer for recreation or when people that practice Santeria make animal sacrifices because it is a tradition in their religion. I agree with the title of the article “treat others the way you want to be treated” in the way that I know one would not like to die because someone more intellectual wants to kills you for their open season or to make sacrifices in their religion. Now in the food aspect, I don’t think that one should give chemicals to the animals in order to grow faster. It is bad for the economy if the food takes longer, but animals do feel pain and they don’t deserve to be treated like that.

Irvin Durand said...


Animals. What are we?

With the Ethos of a butcher's son; I will now attempt to defend all animals, but humans first! If we could feed all human beings balanced diets with mass-slaughtered farm tigers, i would not be against it; we just simply can't. To argue my point, I will use human general welfare as a dependent variable and our management of nutritional resources as a dependent one.
Meat-Eating use to be a routine for me, i would often have meat every day of the week, but about a year ago, I decided to stop. What carries my decision, however, has almost nothing to do with animal sentience, but it all connects back to our own. One night I was eating at my friends house and his parents were cooking organic filet mignons, I was already vegetarian at the time, so I had to decline their offer. These steaks were very expensive, but rich and tasty, and still had all the merits of being animal-righteous, so his parents were shocked by me refusing to feast. At the time I acted compulsively by saying no, all I did was mechanically follow the guidelines of vegetarianism, but I later understood that my No meant more. Time kept on and I questioned myself: "Is all that matter pain? if we remove most of it, are we doing the right thing?" In the case of the organic filet mignon, the cows had lived pretty enjoyable cow-lives, and still I did not eat the steak. Was I wrong not to? Or was I right because we should never kill animals? To tell you the truth, I don't think we should totally stop eating animals, but I would also not eat the filet-mignon; so again, something was not right.
Finally, I ended up realizing that animals are not the ones in need of rights right now, or at least, not the species we coin the term with. On the other hand, Homo Sapiens, a different specie of the animal kingdom, one that is more creative, sentient and complex than any other, against all odds, craves them. We live in a system supposed to maximize our freedoms by allowing us rights, what we forget is that every right limits our own freedoms, in order to secure another's. The right of the rich to feed himself healthily and morally (in regards to animals, only!), is due to him being rich; but the poor needs to eat, so we feed the poor, and we poison the poor, making our society rigidly determined, and that, in the name of beloved freedom ( free-market ).

Irvin Durand said...

Granting animals rights is a cute idea, in fact, it is so cute people on the right are becoming animal rights activists too. What isn't as cute is our failed system, one that disregards real life ethics, that pushes for the short-term, the rapid and the irrational. I do not think the way we currently treat animals is right, but I do not think animals should be favored to human-beings either. When in a society, money correlates with power, and I believe most of you would say that money certainly correlates with power here, then the person who does not have it is condemned to have a few powers, or rights. In my opinion, humans should call themselves animals until the day they stop competing like wild ones. And those of you who want to compete like wild ones, should at least acknowledge that healthy nutritional habits from birth, importantly affect your ability to compete, and that if disparities are present, then competition cannot be fair. Yet, if we say wild means unfair and that humans are civilized animals ( not wild ), don't we have the duty to build just societies?
Morally troublesome phenomenons are not rare in the world today, but if we really care and want to make changes, we should focus our attentions on underlying causes and stop waisting time acting cute with their side-effects. Industrial farms, are the result of an ideology, if the product of industrial farms do not satisfy us we should check out the ideology and understand what needs to be changed.
To conclude, I will say that we should prioritize the attainment of just human rights in our society, to then ameliorate animal rights collaterally as well as many other issues. Because, the day no human being is fed poison at birth, will be the day humans will respectfully farm animals.

Victor D. said...

Although the matter of animal rights has become a sort of cliché when it comes to debates of any kind, philosophical or not, it is still an issue that we face with today. Most people, including myself, rarely ever think of this issue as they are eating meat of any kind. This is because it is so tied into our daily life as a food source that one forgets it used to be alive at some point. I will personally never stop eating meat as I have been eating it my entire life. Do I believe animals deserve certain rights? Yes and no. Frankly, I think the way animals are processed and raised in order to provide meat to people is rather “inhumane”, which is a word that I find interesting when it comes to animals. So I believe that deserve to not be mistreated, but should they have rights? At the end of the day, they are animals and will be used as food, whether people want them to or not, because people want to eat meat. Will this change? No. There is a disconnection between people and their food. As I eat a burger, I don’t think about the cow that it was made of, I think of it as a burger and my lunch. This is how most people think and the reason that animals will most likely not have the same rights as people do. To be honest, I can’t imagine taking meat out of my diet. I would most likely starve.

Sebastian Rendon said...

animals have always been, and will continue to affect our lives whether directly or indirectly. it is for this reason so many people strongly feel that we should treat them fairly,after all, we are animals ourselves aren't we? so essentially we should treat them just as well. but as you have seen through history we don't even treat ourselves that great either, but back to the point. i have seen many videos, pictures, and articles involving animals abuse, many of it quite graphic, and every time it kind of makes me feel sick. i am by no means a "stop killing animals all together and become vegetarians kind of guy" in fact i will never turn down a steak. but i do feel that as a living being, we should keep enforcing regulations to make sure the animals that will be in our table to be as stress free as possible, and not make them suffer; in the long run not only will the animal hate life, but will also be good for our food. as for animal testing i think it has always been a necessary evil in our society, it has allowed us to learn alot about what is safe and what is not, but at this point i am sure we have learned enough that the lives and health of many animals could be spared.

Laura Carvajal said...

I do feel terrible when there are photos or pictures of animals that are being mistreated in the huge factories where they are being fed and grown. I don't believe in animal rights because in order to give a right to a living being there must be some type of understanding from that being. And we all know that animals cant speak. This is not however a reason to believe that the pigs or cows or chickens do not feel pain. They very much feel pain like you or me.

The sad part about how the cows for example are treated, is that if there were a way to try to lower the demand on red meat, then that would mean that there maybe be hope for the cows to be treated more fairly. Some people may argue what is fair? Because fair has a different meaning for me and you. Well fair would be trying to make the cows suffer as less as they possibly can.

Cows for those of you who might of not known, don't always produce milk. A cow like any other mammal produces milk only when pregnant. So that means that these companies will probably impregnate a cow more than once to take all the milk the cow offers before deeming that cow useless and sending it to the slaughter house.

Honestly if the people that run these factories were to think a bit more on the moral side and have a bit more respect for these creatures that essentially give us life, then there may be steps taken that might one day treat the cows like humanity did once long ago.

Jazzy j said...

i believe that animals do deserve better treatment . human beings after all are animals. to say that animals that walk on four legs or have short or long tails do not deserve better treatment, would be basically saying that homo sapiens don't deserve better treatment. however i believe that what is on earth is meant to consume. in the bible genesis 9:3 "says every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. and as i gave you the green plants, i give you everything." but according to leviticus11:1-47, there are specifications on what type of animals you can and cannot eat. animals that are not okay to eat would be the pig, the camel, the hare. you not suppose to eat anything in ocean that doesn't have fins or scales,for example shrimp. so basically I do believe animals should be treated fairly because they have feelings too, however certain animals are meant to be consumed and others not, according to the bible. animals whether we are to consume them or not should be treated fairly with love and care. animals have feelings too.

Jose Cerro said...

I believe this topic is quite tired out. However, it all boils down to what we, as individuals, believe is right or wrong. To some, our survival is of the utmost importance, and we must use all means necessary to achieve it. Others would argue that we should co-exist. In the end, we are all part of the cycle of life. It’s eat or be eaten. With or without human involvement, the creatures of today will either evolve or become extinct while new beings begin to appear; this includes us, of course. Hence, in my opinion, our priority as humans should be to survive for as long and as efficiently as we can. The best we could do for these animals we use for our benefit is to make it the least painful and stressful as possible.
Now, if we were to stray from the topic of survival, we could find some acts done upon animals that are outright horrendous. An example of this is the use of dogs for dog fights. These animals are brutalized since they are young and are made to battle one another for entertainment and greed. The dogs that are unwilling to fight are either killed on the spot or used as “bait”, or tests, for the fighter dogs. This isn't necessary for our survival. This and the acts similar to it are what I believe to be horrible acts committed by us that are utterly wrong. However, like I said earlier, it all boils down to what each of us believe is right or wrong.

A. Cherfils said...

i honestly believe that animals deserve to be treated better in the farms they are kept in. I remember in the ethics class i took in the spring, my professor showed us a video of an animal farm and we got to see how they were treated. It was a pretty graphic video and i did feel bad about how the animals were being treated but it wasn't enough for me to be converted into a vegetarian. i want to continue eating meat but i agree that they should be treated better.they are sentient which means that they can feel pain even though they are not able to verbally express it so i think that the way they are treated before being killed and they way they are killed should be less harsh.but as to stop eating meat, i don't think that will happen at all. meat is in fact a part of the food triangle and eliminating it would create an imbalance in my diet

Kyle Lothian said...

I definitely think about these issues on a constant basis. I don’t just examine the flesh as a slab on the dinner plate, I examine it as it is processed from a living creature to a nearly finished marketed product. It does not become an accessory of animal, but an accessory to materialism. We as humans birth ourself into the ignorant cycle of fulfillment that we forget to realize the importance of the food chain and the relevant mental atrocities. We simply see ourselves on the scope of scientific means, gaining ATP and storing energy; savoring the taste buds and breathing better. We do not acknowledge, despite the minimal processes that these slayed animals have versus our kind, the attributing factors of emotional distortion. Because they are necessary for the means to an end, because they do not have the same functionality, because they do not possess the natural instinct to fight back or reinforce behavior; does not exempt them of sense of integrity. They are not irrelevant and we cannot waste them away as a passive act of convenience. The mere disposal of moral doubt does not dismiss the invalidity of human content. Our responsibility does not hold us back strictly to our own kind.

atRifF said...

Good comments, don't mind me.

Hector Santana said...

I think animals definitely deserve to get treated better but being realistic they probably will not be treated well mostly because we see them as a source of food and even some of the animals we keep as pets are mistreated. If animals were to get treated better before getting slaughtered at farms and other facilities the price of everything would increase and in turn we humans would be outraged that we have to pay for something that was once trivial. I like animals but I also enjoy my meat. Sometimes humans take it to extremes for example certain cultures eating monkey brains by placing a monkey in the middle of a table and beating their head in; that sort of treatment is ridiculous and should be banned across the world. Long story short I don't think animals will get treated better anytime soon, and if they eventually do get rights I am sure people will just violate them to get what they want anyways.

Kassandra Guzman said...

The other day I was cutting a piece of cooked chicken and I noticed the vein going through it, so I cut it out and through it away. I figured that was what this whole meat situation has become. I rather not think about it. I rather not think about where it came before my plate. This is ignorant but it is what more than half of the population does and the other half isn't even aware of the type of conditions these animals live in before. I can only speak of this from a selfish standpoint because that is what this is. Other then Jains and some other religions, meat is sacred or certain types of meat are but in a whole, meat isn't really being considered in any economical or ecological way until it is cut and sold. Humans eat meat. They have been eating meat since they were caveman, and yes, you can argue that it was lost its dignity from then to now but that is what humans do. They want everything the most fastest and easiest way as possible and ignore the consequences that follow. As long as we get what we want we just go on, no questions asked. Even though I have cut down tremendously on the amount of meat I eat, I try my best to deny that what is on my plate was born and raised in terrible conditions, probably standing on layers of its own poop and fed unnatural things in order for me to consume. One day I will quit eating animals and be a single drop in the ever growing vegetarian ocean which I hope one day everyone will be a part of.

Cesar Vera said...

The topic of animals that are being processed into to food having little to no rights has been an issue since the process was invented. Now can we as people give something to animals that was created by people for people. That would be like giving a dog cat food, it doesn't pertain to the dog at all because it was made for cats. Humans are the only ones that entertain this idea of "rights", lions don't sit around asking themselves whether they are giving the buffalo they are stalking to kill and feed they cubs. This is not to say that I condone any kind of animal cruelty in any way shape or form, I just don't see the reasoning behind forcing human ideals on to animals.

Cesar Vera said...

*correction- Lions don't sit around asking themselves whether the buffalo they are stalking to kill and feed their cubs is getting the rights it deserves.

Alexander Macchi said...

I believe that animals deserve to be treated better than how they are now. Most people look at animals as a source of food, but the animals that we keep as house pets are sometimes mistreated badly. For farm animals that go to slaughterhouse they should be treated better before they become someone dinner. Some cultures though take it to the extreme when it comes to eating things like criadillas(bull testicles), donkey penis, or haggis(sheep stomach); that sort of thing should be banned everywhere. For house pets people volunteer to help them and try to give them better treatment but just like farm animals some people in the world just do not care. It doesn't seem like animals will receive better treatment anytime soon but even when they do people will not stop to care or think about how the animal should be treated. They will do just as they please not giving a single care in the world.

Shane Campbell said...

Although I enjoyed reading the arguments for better animal rights written by each individual philosopher, I noticed they each focused their frame of thought on the degree to which animals measure up to humans; concerning either moral cognition or pain from a human perspective. With that being said, I'd like to propose my own argument. Actually, it's from an evolutionary perspective. Why don’t we instead focus on the idea that humans are animals and indeed follow the same principles that animals do. From an evolutionary standpoint, all animals follow the principles of survival of the fittest. Their primary motivation is self-preservation. Consider this, is a person not but an animal of the human variety or category? I found it quite amusing when you mentioned the concept of anthropocentricity because it is precisely that innate quality and method of reasoning that makes us animals. All humans both unconsciously and consciously look out for their own well-being and consider their own interest before anything else. If that’s true then it follows that as long as humans are the moral agents, then morals will continue to be framed around our own self-preservation. Therefore, animals will never get better treatment, so long as treating them better conflicts with the personal interests of humans.


-Tashane Campbell

Lisseth Rodas said...

Lisseth R perspective…
As a meat lover, I don’t think about how the chicken I ate last night was treated or where it came from nor any food on a daily bases. Thinking about how an animal was treated before it landed on my plate makes it unappealing. Society has bigger issues then the subject of animal right. I rather discuss how our nation debt keep rising or why the United States still has troop in Iraq then discuss where my chicken came from.
Many people support animal right yet majority of these people are eating in fast-food restaurant like McDonald, Burger King or KFC. Which the farms have their animals injected with hormones to produces rapid growth and increased milk production. The company that these restaurants buy their meat from use gas clambers and slaughter house to abuse these animals. Right now, millions of mice, rabbits and even dogs including other animals are locked inside cold, barren cages in laboratories across the country. If one believes that animals should have right then we shouldn’t be performing lab experience these animals to prevent illness or cure disease. Therefore finding the cure for cancer will be farther away than it already is. Diabetes and insulin treatments are first tested out on animals for any physical or emotional reaction it may cause then given to us humans. Many of these animals died due to these tests. Is it morally correct to test animals to human treatment or cures?
On the other hand some people disagree with the idea of animal rights. Their arguments include the idea that animals, unlike humans, are not capable of higher forms of thought; that they act solely upon impulse and desire, and aren’t capable of understanding, earning or maintaining their right. Yes there are a few animals that exceed human intelligence like monkeys but not all animals do. Christian theologians used to teach that only humans have soul deserved ethical consideration. This means that animals did not have souls and therefore did not have any moral rights. This can be argued against. But the bottom line what will these animals do with their right? Nothing because in the end of the day they are animals.
With that being said I do believe animals should have certain rights. We should not be cutting rabbits fur to make lovely warm coats or hanging a chicken and slowly cutting off each part into multiply pieces. We should use a method that would cause less pain to these animals and stop hunting animals for their coats. I can’t say I am for animal right because I eat meat nor I am against it because in the end of the day it the circle of life. I present both parties to show their justification; for one to decide on their own not to convince any of the two parties are correct.

Jessica Leer said...

Back then, in the time before farming corporations, people used to hunt for food but in modern days people still choose to eat meat but no longer hunt. Hence for human ease they do meat farming. Now people use hunting as a sporting event and fun. I myself am not much of a red meat eater. That does not mean I do not enjoy myself a good cheeseburger every once in a while. When I do eat red meat I do not think of the animal at that point at all. Because of the fact if I did I would have to stop at that very moment it comes into my mind. If I had some full control of what I eat meaning financial state and a routine schedule I would leave meat all together. Although life has its cycle of the food chain. Miss treating animals 100% against. An animal should not have to suffer because of human satisfaction. Animal testing should never happen; for example, many animals in the ocean have been protected as others should be as well.
Jessica Leer

Roger Obando said...

humans have been gifted with the ability to reason. therefore, we must think that mistreating animals and treating them like nothing but “food stuff”, can have terrible consequences. in nature, it has always been the predator that decides the rules of the game; the prey has to follow whatever the predator says. humans are indeed on top of the food chain, and as predators we have the right to decide for our prey. but seeing as we have the ability to think, we must set up the guidelines according to what can generate the best outcome. if we treat animals like crap, the results will be fatal for our specie. it is in our best interest that animals are treated fairly. it is true that eating meat benefit our diet. it is a fact that our civilization consumes an excess of meat. we can certainly cut down on the amount of meat we eat. as intelligent creatures, we should also be thankful for the goods produced from animals. most of us, including myself, don’t think about these issues when we eat meat. the reason why is because we are not the one killing these animals. we need to be reminded that these animals feel pain, just as we do. the least we could do is give them a peaceful death.

Patrice P. said...

after evaluating from the young boy's perspective on eating meat; I've gathered that though yes, his arguments are very valid and strong, he failed to realize that the human civilization will always be the superior kind and that it will always be healthier for the human body to consume meat for protein, instead of supplement pills and shakes. though i may be being bias because i enjoy eating meat, i will always give vegetarians and vegans the upper hand because their health choices are very strong and difficult. i agree that humans do take great advantage of animals and their habitat, and the way that we make them suffer for our taste isn't right, however, biblically, there is a certain way to kill an animal so that it is healthier for us when we consume it, and that it is painless for the animal. humans consuming meat i feel is all part of Darwin's theory on survival of the fittest. it will forever be in our lifestyle.

ann said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ann said...

The video of the boy shows such an innocent and unlearned response and is moving for both the animal rights advocate and the non-righters alike.

In regard to the questions raised: I think with certainty that animals deserve to be treated better than just food stuffs. And they do deserve certain rights. I think a lot of discord from opposing sides are a matter of semantics. I think using the term “rights” is what causes the most hindrance in advance on the subject. We reserve our “rights” as that which is given to us for simply being human. For those on the side of the fence against animal rights, it is insulting to say animals are deserving at the same level as humans. I can gain some perspective by looking even at my own family. Although I disagree, I can take cue from they who love to spout “those animal rights people” with such vehemence, I fear they may go punch a puppy for balance (only kidding). But words mean things and this is one that is irreconcilable to many. That is not to say however that many of these same people would not agree that animals deserve better treatment. (How is this different from rights? Semantics.) In this instance I think it is important then to begin the debate by reconciling the term “rights”.

Interests, regard, considerations, concern. If we call it the issue of animal interests, it may be easier to swallow, so to speak. But sentience comes into play at this point. Do animals have interests? For no learned reason but my own idea, it seems that animals have different levels of sentience. Holding sentience to mean more than ability to feel sensorially e.g. pain, sensations, such as hot, cold etc., but to mean self awareness, then we cannot put animals on the same level as humans. Many animals don’t seem to have an interest in their future. They don’t know they have a future. It can be argued that some do; dogs, cats and primates seem to more so. But fish, lobster, and other seafood seem not to. The grey area could be cows, lamb, and chickens, but for me it’s pigs.

It would be hard to say that any other are treated worse than the chicken. But the pigs are what make me wonder. What they have to do to kill them without destroying the meat has to say.. something. First I will say cows can see another cow being killed in front of them and keep heading down the line. Pigs however are different. Companies make a zigzagged route so the pigs can’t see around the corners and know that there is danger. They do this in the dark as well. And they play classical music to them. Really. It keeps them calm. If they hear or see another pig being slaughtered, they get anxious or stressed and this causes an adverse effect on the quality of the meat. It could be said that this is instinctual and an innate reaction for survival, and that is what I go with. Admittedly, I don’t really know.

As for the ecological argument two points glaringly stand out. Purely with the thought of humans and their future in mind, the greenhouse gasses caused by factory farming are reason enough to make some changes. This contributor to global warming can be greatly decreased in many ways but no doubt factory farming is a big one. The real sticky part is costs. Supply and demand. If you were a factory/farm owner, you would expand as demands grew higher and become more successful. If there are no laws regarding expansion, I see nothing wrong with that. Laws, therefore are instrumental in keeping the production of animals to a certain minimum (or for the animal regard, in keeping their treatment ethical).

What the individual can do then, is eat less meat and buy local, organic, and free-range. The more and more people who participate, the fewer factory farms will be needed. The second major point lies in the amount of meat consumed in America. It is grossly high. We are simply eating way too much meat than is healthy for us. It has become a part of our cultural habits and one that must consciously be broken. Meat should be an accompaniment to vegetables, grains, and fruit.

Nicholas Collazo said...

although i will never seize to eat meat, i am not one to post a biased opinion based on my own beliefs.

we humans have feasted on innocent animals since the beginning of time, yet our genetic makeup would certainly disagree with our actions.

one could argue that we humans were not built to be carnivores for various reasons, in fact are make-up is relatively close to those of herbivores. that being said we could also argue that meat is not a priority in our "nutritional agenda," therefore, our excessive indulgence in the lives of these helpless animals is not morally correct.

on the opposing side one could argue that although our genetic-makeup may be more comparative to those of herbivores, nature granted us humans great dexterity and intelligence promoting us to the top of the food chain; this enabled us the privilege of choice, to be carnivore if we pleased.

i believe that nature provided each species with its own unique characteristics to survive in the world (survival of the fittest).

that brings us to morality. who is the one to decide the true definition of morality? in reality we humans established morals, but did nature ever intend for their to be any?

Chris Quiroga said...

Do I believe in animal rights? Yes/no, The human race has been hunting for thousands of years but people have forgotten what it means to get your food and respect it. But now its just packaged for us and ready whenever we go to the market. But the thing is we as a people, want to be able to have all our meat all of our burgers. It is not right to do these things to animals making them suffer, and never live a life, just to know that they are going to die. It’s not even good for humans to eat I them due to of all of the steroids they are putting into chickens and cows to meet the demand. I know we cant go head and give these animals rights because if we start with one right saying “ animals deserve the right to a stress free and a pain free death” what’s to stop with other rights saying “that animals are not allowed as a food source”. I believe we just need to put stricter guidelines and bigger fines on the line so that these food corporations can start doing things right and not torture the animals. This will still come to a cost to the consumer in paying a little more money, and maybe we can make a food source that does not involve killing animals.

Chris Quiroga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kevin Acevedo said...

The idea of animal rights comes to mind when civilization really sees the process a animal such as a cow goes through for it to end up all nice and tasty on our plates. In historic times humans will go out into nature for the food.It was need for us to hunt for our own food in the mean of survival. Now in modern times for us to get meat it is easy as entering your nearest food store to choose one's desired meet to consume. Humans being on the top of the food chain the ones that end up eating all the herbivores and omnivores. Even tho we are on top of the food chain it doesn't give us the moral right to mistreat animals in the process of making them into our source of food. Companies that have establish themselves in producing Manufacturer ed meats should have a certain guideline in towards how animals should be put to rest for our consumption. Companies are to busy in thinking with there pockets instead of reasoning with there morality in seeing that the way they are treating animals is wrong even though they are meeting rising demands.

Marko Lazovic said...

The notion of animal rights is a noble idea albeit one that is often misused by its adherents. For example, many argue that animals have rights because they feel pain and/or are sentient like humans and thereby deserve rights similar to rights held by humans. This view is one which is on a certain level untrue. The possession of a few human qualities such as feeling pain and being sentient does not render animals human. Gopher babies are blind at birth and breastfeed from their mothers just like human babies; however, I doubt we would ever consider gopher babies as the same as human babies and deserving of the same rights and protections afforded human babies. Would we ever take away a gopher's child on the ground that it is being a negligent gopher? Of course not, such an incident would be ridiculous. Similarly, in many countries healthcare is considered aright and in the US the ability to buy firearms is considered a right, yet we would never afford these same rights to animals. Would anyone cry foul that gorillas cannot go to HMOs and that koalas can't buy shotguns? Of course not, because the application of human rights onto animals because those same animals have a few human qualities is in many respects incomprehensible. Animals are not humans, and a few human qualities do not render them human; thus the treatment of animals as if though they were humans is fundamentally flawed.

Gabriela Garzon said...

In my opinion, I feel that we cannot be so callous as to kill another living being, and not feel any sort of empathy towards it, I agree with Kant in that respect. The least we can offer these creatures is to empathize with their cast in life, because there is no chance that they will ever stop being bred for slaughter, if thousands of years of history have anything to say about it. So, should they have rights? Yes. The right to be respected, treated as what they are, not animals but the means to your survival. I do not think keeping our livestock in deplorable conditions, and feeding them measly scraps is any way to treat a living being or the food you are eventually going to consume. But out of sight, out of mind is a powerful coping mechanism, and I’m sure that when you are eating dinner at night, the last thing on your mind is how well the pig that you’re eating, was treated.
-Gabriela Garzon

Anonymous said...

Professor Triff ,
M. James is Marquita.

Jonathan Rogers said...

why is it that people become infuriated after watching a hidden video of cows being inhumanly slaughtered, but when they see a program on animal planet showing a zebra getting dismembered by a nile crocodile everybody cries "natural selection"? are we not at the top of the food chain?
i believe that the treatment of animals for commercial purposes has certainly reached an extreme. For me it's not so much the excruciating pain that the animal endures as it is slaughtered, but rather the life of misery and pain it is given. obviously all humans at some point die, and society has come to accept the fact that the moments before death may be torturous.The problem is when us humans limit an animal's lifelong freedom to a floor tile or severely hinder them permanently by stuffing their digestive organs for their entire lives. as human beings with morals we can not raise animals in agony and submit them to severe and horrible conditions for just a piece of stake on our plates

Maurice Modest said...

If the saying were true that you are what we eat then most of us would be in bad shape. Many of us take for granted the fact that we can walk into the local supermarket and pick out the piece of meat that we would like. We can choose whether or not we want certain parts of the animal. We pick the best of the steak and the leanest of meat. Everything from walking in from checking out has to be clean, orderly and sanitary otherwise we would condemn the place for being below our standards. True practices and conditions have improved since the days of The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, but in some regards we are in worse condition than we were thousands of years ago. Our ancestors feasted on an assortment of vegetation and ate animals when it was available. We used our intelligence to domestic animals to keep our supply of animals and animal byproducts for consumption all year round which has propelled man to where we are today; however, we are abusing our once treasured resources. Just because we have the means to grow, raise, and produce animals at such high numbers does not mean that we should keep them in such wretched conditions. Injections of growth hormones to speed up the development process and being kept in small areas to roam our food is barely alive when it is sent off to the slaughter house to meet a brutal death. I am not saying that killing animals is wrong because I do enjoy burgers and a nice steak once in a while, but there are other ways to keep our animals.
Looking at other cultures which maintain a sense of sacredness such as Judaism and Japan may provide an example of how to treat the animals while they are alive to get better quality food. The image of the cow that is going to be your own food standing in its own fecal matter is disturbing which is why that part is never shown when your meat is prepared. In Japan where they give cows massages to marbleize the fat and decrease the stress level so the meat is tender and more appealing to the pallet that might be an extreme. In Jewish culture kosher meat comes from the humane killing of the animal reduces the stress hormones which have an effect on your body when you consume it. I personally feel as though animals have to be viewed with more respect than just “food stuff” because mass producing meat is very different than mass producing pencils. Organic material and things that are consumed effect human quality of life because as science is proving you are what you eat, but not even science can escape the sometimes brutal treatment of animals. For the sake of science animals can endure some pretty painful things being the test dummy for many of the products that are eventually used on humans and some that never make it past animal testing. Using animals for science blurs the line about what is ethical and what is not. I personally feel that test for the sake of progression is good as long as the treatments are not cruel and unnecessary.

Joshua Lopez said...

This is a controversial subject that everyone has an opinion on. Yes, I do believe in animal rights but to the point where they shouldn't be treated like scum. Even though, they are animals they deserve rights too, but us humans limit them. Basically, animals cannot live the life we humans do. Like raise their children, grow old, and so on and so forth. I understand we kill animals in order to survive but not to the point where we physically abuse them and torture them, so, many families can have some food in the table or something to wear. It traumatizing to see how humans treat animals, from injecting hormones and feeding them substitutes to save money. But that's just the way it is. No matter what there will still be people that would treat animals good or bad. Therefore, We need animals in order to survive, we have fangs in our teeth for a reason. Animals are beautiful creatures that roam around the planet like us, but if they were treated like humans I think we all die of hunger because we've evolved for many years to get where we are to eat meat which provides protein and nutrients in our body in order to grow and stay alive. I believe we should treat animals like they do with the cows in Japan where we mainly get the Kobe beef, basically the paradise of a cow. Even though, the meat might be more expensive but that's if animals actually were treated a little better. - Joshua Lopez

Valentina J. said...

interesting how in india they do not have animal rights and they do not eat animals.
should animals have rights when it comes to them being eaten? at this point animals will never have rights when it comes to being eaten because humans will never stop eating them, at least not completely. should animals have rights when it comes to being hunted for fun or made into clothes? yes, they should have rights when it comes to this. we wouldn't like it if someone made us into clothes or hunted us to put our head on their wall, would we? no, we wouldn't. humans wouldn't find that very pleasing so why is it fine to do it to animals. now the real question is "should there be animal welfare?". yes, there should be animal welfare. it is not fair for them to suffer how they are suffering. what says its fine to cut a pigs tail or a birds beak? what makes it fine for birds to be squished into battery cages with decomposing corpses so it could be cheaper for these companies and they can make more money? animals deserve better than just being labeled as "food stuff". they feed us and we should appreciate that. i can't say lets treat animals better but still eat them everyday because that would be more expensive and we would have to wait longer for our meat. i can't say we should stop eating animals because that will never happen. humans love meat, including myself. i could say lets cut our meat intake because that would be the perfect way to treat animals better, while still giving us humans the pleasure of a juicy steak. once a week would be the best option since some people eat animals almost everyday, they wouldn't be able to do it once a month which would even be better. if we ate animals once a week we would spare hundreds of animals from suffering. if we ate animals once a week there wouldn't be the need to hurry the process of raising them the wrong way. animals would be raised properly, naturally, and most importantly without suffering so much.

Jonathan Morales said...

Animals, at least those used as a food supply, should be treated better. This also brings the question of, how do we do so? What is the border line between when it is food and/or when it is over consumption. Just imagine how in some belief we give thanks to a higher power for the meal, shouldn't we also give thanks the said animal in it. To be able to know that we are being fed by the sacrifice of an animal. In other words, do we respect the animal? If we do, shouldn't the animal be respected? I believe they should. I agree with the fact that in the wild, animals have predators thus it is normal for us to disregard a lion hunting and eating a gazelle or a zebra but it is cruel to see livestock as nothing more than numbers and figures. Why? Maybe it is because we have seen that we don't necessarily depend on other animals for food and its nutrients. The amount of protein received from eating a steak can acquired in the same amount by eating beans and other vegetables and nuts, plus there are always supplements. Besides, if the animal is just thought as livestock, as numbers and figures, what happens to the feces and such of the animals. Over cultivating these animals, injecting them with hormones, and feeding them foods that they are not suppose to eat, can and will eventually cause health problems like a disease of some sort and guess what happens to those who have consumed them.
-Jonathan Morales

Anonymous said...

As a meat lover, I don't think about the harm animals are put through before they make it to my plate but I can't even look at pictures of dead animals because i cringe at the thought. We gain many foods through animals even the simplest such as eggs and milk. Although animals do provide us with great, healthier protein, they should not be mistreated in the process. Now a days, animals are overfed and given the wrong food so they can be bigger and cheaper. Mistreating the animals this way is unhealthy for them and in the end for us. Animals do deserve the right to be treated properly and through a pain-free death.

-Suey Vendrell

Angel P said...

I don't see how this article is about the consumption of meat at all. Professor Triff made a good point in class the other day, that mans acquisition of meat has changed from that of hunting in the wild with possible yet considerable danger to ones self to a simple act of going to the grocery and picking out which slice of beef looks the best. But nobody is arguing whether or not meat should be eaten (though admittedly it somewhat ties in with the animal cruelty argument, that one so opposed to the mistreatment of animals wouldn't even consider eating one isn't a farfetched idea). I myself am an avid fan of both the red and white meats, and yes, animals should indeed by treated better, but for the sake of playing the devil's advocate, consider this: Without industrial, mass produced meat, the human population as it exists today would be impossible to sustain (As one student pointed out in class that it is wrong to raise cows on corn, can't the same be said for humans?). Until we make a largescale modification to the way we live and reproduce, there can be no real change to the way we raise and process our meat.

Additionally, the meat raising and processing industries tend to attract the sort of people that would treat animals cruelly. If you want to see change in that regard, go and work at the meat farm and be the change you wish to see. As a side note, isn't it better they get out their murderous intentions on cattle then on people? Not everyone can afford to see a psychiatrist.