I am morally obliged to be a vegetarian because I believe non-human animals should be granted personhood since they are adequately aware of their basic needs, have the ability and complexity to exist as individuals, are conscious enough to be concerned for themselves and others and are able to survive and triumph without the interference of human beings. This means non-human animals should be granted the basic rights human beings also have like the right to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, suffering, and abuse. Non-human animals should live in an environment that satisfies their basic physical and psychological needs. They should exist in their natural habitat, safe from extinction and the impact of humans. They should also have the right to be free from experimentation and research preformed by humans since they cannot consent to such treatment. Lastly, they should have their rights and interests represented in court and safeguarded by the law. This means, as a human being, I do not have the right to consume animals or use them only to benefit myself because I recognize doing so hurts more beings than it benefits.
As a vegetarian, I stand for equal treatment between human beings and non-human animals. I encourage others to recognize human superiority over other animals is called speciesism and is deemed unethical. To inflict pain and suffering unto other beings just because humans can does not mean we should. In fact, supporting vegetarianism also advocates education and awareness about the current treatment of animals in slaughterhouses, research facilities, zoos and aquariums, as companion animals, as subjects of possible extinction, and as persons capable of experiencing pain, emotions, and consciousness. I do not think anyone has to right to take the life of a living being whether he or she is a human or a non-human animal because, in the end, we are all made up of the same parts; a brain, a heart, a soul.
My question: Where do you stand on the subject?
Monday, December 13, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Book Review on Slaughterhouse: A Preview.
For my book review, I chose to read Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment inside the U.S. Meat Industry by Gail A. Eisnitz. The author is the chief investigator for the Humane Farming Association and her book gives readers a very startling and disturbing inside look to U.S. slaughterhouses. She began her investigation at Kaplan Industries where she found, through endless interviews with staff and the public, that animals were being slaughtered fully conscious. She also visited John Morrell & Company in Iowa and Carolina Food Processors to confirm the notion that animals and the company employees are both being abused. This is the first book to explore the impact that changes such as industry consolidation, increased line speeds, and deregulation in the meatpacking industry, over the last twenty-five years, have had on workers, animals, and consumers. It is also the first time workers have spoken publically about what is really happening behind the closed doors of America’s slaughterhouses.
However, the public doesn't really know what is happening in these slaughterhouses because workers could lose their jobs if they spoke out and employers don't want to welcome the chance of receiving more standards and regulations in the slaughterhouses which would decrease profits. Animals are transported hundreds of miles in harsh conditions just so their lives could end for our desire to have meat for dinner. Eisnitz still manages to remain objective during her research and is able to describe and investigate the treatments of cows, pigs, chickens, horses, sheep, goats, and so on. Once I finished reading the book, my desire to ever eat meat again was gone because the author describes in such detail what happens to these animals through the voices of the workers and the consumers who have suffered illnesses and who even have had family members or friends die because of unhealthy conditions and carelessness in the industry.
I won't go any farther because I want to keep your interest for when I present. I do think everyone needs to read this book in order to know the truths behind the industry. Even though some of it may be hard to get through, being aware of what is happening behind our backs is enough of an incentive for me. I guarantee you will not believe what you are reading at first but the author makes sure to have enough evidence from a variety of sources as to how such an industry can control and full our country.
My question: I was wondering what views students have about the meat industry currently? When you hear the word "slaughterhouse" or the meat industry, what conditions and practices do you imagine? What do you already know?
However, the public doesn't really know what is happening in these slaughterhouses because workers could lose their jobs if they spoke out and employers don't want to welcome the chance of receiving more standards and regulations in the slaughterhouses which would decrease profits. Animals are transported hundreds of miles in harsh conditions just so their lives could end for our desire to have meat for dinner. Eisnitz still manages to remain objective during her research and is able to describe and investigate the treatments of cows, pigs, chickens, horses, sheep, goats, and so on. Once I finished reading the book, my desire to ever eat meat again was gone because the author describes in such detail what happens to these animals through the voices of the workers and the consumers who have suffered illnesses and who even have had family members or friends die because of unhealthy conditions and carelessness in the industry.
I won't go any farther because I want to keep your interest for when I present. I do think everyone needs to read this book in order to know the truths behind the industry. Even though some of it may be hard to get through, being aware of what is happening behind our backs is enough of an incentive for me. I guarantee you will not believe what you are reading at first but the author makes sure to have enough evidence from a variety of sources as to how such an industry can control and full our country.
My question: I was wondering what views students have about the meat industry currently? When you hear the word "slaughterhouse" or the meat industry, what conditions and practices do you imagine? What do you already know?
Last Response: To Nicole on Vegetarianism.
Response #23
In Nicole's blog, she responded to Becca's question about whether vegetarians ought to abstain from eating eggs and dairy products as well as the idea of red meat vegetarianism and pescatarianism. Nicole believes that if a person has their own home, buys their own food, prepares their own meals, has enough money and resources to be knowledgeable about the meat industry, and is in good health, then they should choose a vegan lifestyle and live their lives completely meat and animal product free. However, it's not so easy for a lot of people who do not have the money, the resources, the knowledge or the ability even if they wanted to. There are many types of vegetarians; those that only consume animal products but no actual meat to those that only consume chicken but no other animal to the people that just choose to not eat red meat. To be a complete vegan is tough because many products are made from animals which we do not even realize. Such a lifestyle would have to be strictly enforced and thought about on a regular basis. Nicole also stated that being anything more can an octo-lacto vegetarian on campus would be nearly impossible because of the meal plan we are forced to endure and the lack of true vegan options as well as money to buy our own food. Anyone who chooses some sort of vegetarian lifestyle is taking a step in the right direction even if they are consuming or using some animal products, according to Nicole. She then asks, "Why do you think there are so many misconceptions about vegetarianism, like that it is unhealthy or that people go through meat-withdrawals?"
I think it is because people feel threatened that they will have to change their ways so they buy into these fallacies just to convince themselves that vegetarianism is an impossible idea. People like the taste of animal flesh but they don't like to think about what it actually is. In my experiences, people advocate against vegetarianism because they see humans as natural predators who are meant to eat meat. To them, it's natural. It's something they do not think about and do not want to end. The responses I get when I tell people I am a vegetarian are that meat tastes too good, or that plants have feelings to, or our ancestors ate meat and our bodies are created to do so as well. I think it also might be because people do not generally accept what is different because they may not understand it. They might have all of these misconceptions because they never took the time to become more aware about cruelty to animals and a vegetarian lifestyle. They acknowledge whatever negative critiques they hear about because vegetarianism is not universally accepted in our society. They may also focus their opinions around what they see PETA and other extreme animal rights groups doing so their opinions are biased. People do not want vegetarians to force their beliefs on them so they stay narrow-minded and look for any reason to dismiss such a lifestyle. However, I'm not saying all omnivores are like this. I have met some people who respect my views but still enjoy meat for dinner.
Finally, I have found that when people ask me why I am a vegetarian and I respond with my own personal feelings which do not accuse or try to convince them to go vegetarian, I get respect even if they do not agree with my choice. I think it is important for everyone to be aware and educated about the meat industry, other cruelty to animals, and the abilities animals have. Only then can people truly make educated decisions whether to consume animals and animal products or not. I think the lack of education is the largest problem of the many misconceptions and negative attitude towards vegetarianism.
My final questions: Do you think children are capable of making the decision of whether to consume animals or not? Also, if children knew at a young age what they are eating once had a life, would they make the choice not to consume meat?
In Nicole's blog, she responded to Becca's question about whether vegetarians ought to abstain from eating eggs and dairy products as well as the idea of red meat vegetarianism and pescatarianism. Nicole believes that if a person has their own home, buys their own food, prepares their own meals, has enough money and resources to be knowledgeable about the meat industry, and is in good health, then they should choose a vegan lifestyle and live their lives completely meat and animal product free. However, it's not so easy for a lot of people who do not have the money, the resources, the knowledge or the ability even if they wanted to. There are many types of vegetarians; those that only consume animal products but no actual meat to those that only consume chicken but no other animal to the people that just choose to not eat red meat. To be a complete vegan is tough because many products are made from animals which we do not even realize. Such a lifestyle would have to be strictly enforced and thought about on a regular basis. Nicole also stated that being anything more can an octo-lacto vegetarian on campus would be nearly impossible because of the meal plan we are forced to endure and the lack of true vegan options as well as money to buy our own food. Anyone who chooses some sort of vegetarian lifestyle is taking a step in the right direction even if they are consuming or using some animal products, according to Nicole. She then asks, "Why do you think there are so many misconceptions about vegetarianism, like that it is unhealthy or that people go through meat-withdrawals?"
I think it is because people feel threatened that they will have to change their ways so they buy into these fallacies just to convince themselves that vegetarianism is an impossible idea. People like the taste of animal flesh but they don't like to think about what it actually is. In my experiences, people advocate against vegetarianism because they see humans as natural predators who are meant to eat meat. To them, it's natural. It's something they do not think about and do not want to end. The responses I get when I tell people I am a vegetarian are that meat tastes too good, or that plants have feelings to, or our ancestors ate meat and our bodies are created to do so as well. I think it also might be because people do not generally accept what is different because they may not understand it. They might have all of these misconceptions because they never took the time to become more aware about cruelty to animals and a vegetarian lifestyle. They acknowledge whatever negative critiques they hear about because vegetarianism is not universally accepted in our society. They may also focus their opinions around what they see PETA and other extreme animal rights groups doing so their opinions are biased. People do not want vegetarians to force their beliefs on them so they stay narrow-minded and look for any reason to dismiss such a lifestyle. However, I'm not saying all omnivores are like this. I have met some people who respect my views but still enjoy meat for dinner.
Finally, I have found that when people ask me why I am a vegetarian and I respond with my own personal feelings which do not accuse or try to convince them to go vegetarian, I get respect even if they do not agree with my choice. I think it is important for everyone to be aware and educated about the meat industry, other cruelty to animals, and the abilities animals have. Only then can people truly make educated decisions whether to consume animals and animal products or not. I think the lack of education is the largest problem of the many misconceptions and negative attitude towards vegetarianism.
My final questions: Do you think children are capable of making the decision of whether to consume animals or not? Also, if children knew at a young age what they are eating once had a life, would they make the choice not to consume meat?
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Speciesism.
Speciesism is defined as assigning different values or rights to beings and human intolerance or discrimination on the basis of species. The term was coined in 1970, by Richard Ryder. However, the word 'species' does not seem to have a set definition much like 'race'. In our society, we all commit acts of speciesism everyday. For instance, some people see it normal to eat cow for dinner but would never think of doing so with the family pet. We not only put ourselves way before other animals but we treat some animals better than others just because of their species. What I don't understand is that the smallest sexist comment or racist joke can label a person as sexist or racist for their entire life. It can really ruin a reputation. However, if a person eats a pig but treats his or her dog with the utmost respect, no one bats an eyelash. To be honest, I didn't even know the term speciesism existed until I took Ethics & Animals. It's interesting how other 'isms' are serious matters in our society but speciesism isn't really thought about and I wonder why. In fact, when I say I think animals should have rights just like humans and mention the word equality, I get confused looks. I do not understand why it is such a foreign idea to see animals as equal beings.
My question to you is: Topics such as racism and sexism are serious in our society but why do people push speciesism under the rug as if it is unimportant or a nonexistent problem?
My question to you is: Topics such as racism and sexism are serious in our society but why do people push speciesism under the rug as if it is unimportant or a nonexistent problem?
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Response to "PETA and Animal Rights."
Response #22
In Sarah's blog, she talks about PETA's intentions and how animal rights groups need to complement each other's actions but try different tactics to actually make a difference in the lives of animals. She asks the question, "Do you think the goal for animal rights will ever be reached?" I think, with all of the animal rights groups put together with the growing education of students and people about animal treatment along with books, videos, and other means showing how animals are mistreated can all come together to make a difference. The problem is how oblivious the public is and how everyone thinks the people around them just do not care about the welfare of animals. Some animal rights groups, like PETA, turn the public off by the ways they try to bring the concern for animals to the limelight. The shock tactic is a start but people need to be educated and actually shown how animals really aren't too different from humans and that they deserve rights just as we do. I think the goal can be reached if only people were willing to come together to save the animals we are currently hurting. There are so many ways humans cause suffering for animals but this can stop only if humans were willing to do it. Just by simply taking Ethics & Animals, I am much more aware about what animals go through to benefit the lives of humans and I realize how unnecessary it is. We cam start by taking this subject seriously and realizing we would never want animals to do such terrible things to us so why do we have the right to do it to them? Maybe I have more faith in humanity than other people but I think making people more aware and showing them how unnecessary and hurtful what we do to animals is, whether it be slaughtering them for food or testing makeup on them, then maybe we can stop it. However, I do not have faith this is happen overnight but will be a slow movement which has already begun.
Here is a list of the rights I think all animals should have and can obtain just by making people more aware and changing the ways our society and culture views animals:
Here is a list of the rights I think all animals should have and can obtain just by making people more aware and changing the ways our society and culture views animals:
- The right to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse.
- The right of farm animals (if there must be farm animals) to have an environment that satisfies their basic physical and psychological needs.
- The right of companion animals (if there must be companion animals) to have a healthy diet, protective shelter, and medical care.
- The right of all wildlife to have a natural habitat, untouched by humans, and to have a self-sustaining species population as well as an ecologically adequate existence.
- The right to be freed from cruel and unnecessary experimentation and testing.
- The right to have their interests represented in court and safeguarded by the law.
To deny all animals these rights is to claim human beings have the power to control all other species and, to me, this is true speciesism. To choose humans over non-human animals and claim them as ultimately superior is morally unjustifiable.
My question to you is: Why do you think some people want nothing to do with animal rights and continue to advocate for our superiority (aside from power)? What would we really lose by granting animals basic rights?
New Student Group on Campus!
There is a new student group on campus called S.A.V.E. which stands for Students' Animal Volunteer Efforts and is being organized by Kimberly Capriola, a senior at MCLA. They have had one meeting so far and the next is this Friday at 6:00 p.m. in room 324A of the Campus Center. The club's main focus, as the title states, is sending students out to volunteer at animal shelters and hospitals. The Berkshire Humane Society's volunteer coordinator has produced a list of free slots for people to volunteer and if you are interested, e-mail Terry Bissaillon at tbissaillon@berkshirehumane.org or call her at 413-447-7878, extension 37. However, in order to volunteer as a dog walker or in general, interested students must take a short certification class.
Here is the list:
Dog Walking/ Care:
8-10 a.m. ---1 person on Mondays, 1 on Fridays, 1 on Saturdays
10 a.m.-12 p.m. ---1 person on Mondays
12-1 p.m. --- 1 person Tuesdays, 1 person Wednesdays
3-5 p.m. ---1 person Fridays
Feline Care:
(Cat Mall)
8-9:30 a.m. --- 1 person Saturdays
(Back cat room)
8-9:30 a.m. --- 1 person Sundays
2:30-4 p.m. --- 1 person Saturdays, 1 person Sundays
Front Desk:
(Note: may be slow now & then, need to be a self-starter)
1-4 p.m. --- 2 people Saturdays, 2 people Sundays
anytime within 10 a.m.-2 p.m. --- 1(?) person Tuesdays
10 a.m.-12 p.m. --- 1 (?) person Wednesdays
anytime within 12-4 p.m. --- 1 (?) person Wednesdays
The group may also volunteer at the Eleanor Sonsini Animal Shelter in Pittsfield. At the first meeting, students brainstormed ideas to help animals out and get the public aware of animal cruelty. Also, at the next meeting, students will be able to show interest in e-board positions. Here are other ideas the club has:
-Animal food drives.
-A 5K run to fund-raise for a local animal shelter (each runner would be sponsored by his/her family and friends with whatever donation amount).
-Publicizing animals in need of adoption.
-Publicizing local animal shelter events.
-Petitioning for humane treatment of animals while both learning and spreading awareness about animal cruelty.
If you are interested in the club, attend the next meeting or e-mail Kimberly Capriola and share your ideas.
Note: The club is not official but involved students are working on the logistics and constitution as we speak.
Here is the list:
Dog Walking/ Care:
8-10 a.m. ---1 person on Mondays, 1 on Fridays, 1 on Saturdays
10 a.m.-12 p.m. ---1 person on Mondays
12-1 p.m. --- 1 person Tuesdays, 1 person Wednesdays
3-5 p.m. ---1 person Fridays
Feline Care:
(Cat Mall)
8-9:30 a.m. --- 1 person Saturdays
(Back cat room)
8-9:30 a.m. --- 1 person Sundays
2:30-4 p.m. --- 1 person Saturdays, 1 person Sundays
Front Desk:
(Note: may be slow now & then, need to be a self-starter)
1-4 p.m. --- 2 people Saturdays, 2 people Sundays
anytime within 10 a.m.-2 p.m. --- 1(?) person Tuesdays
10 a.m.-12 p.m. --- 1 (?) person Wednesdays
anytime within 12-4 p.m. --- 1 (?) person Wednesdays
The group may also volunteer at the Eleanor Sonsini Animal Shelter in Pittsfield. At the first meeting, students brainstormed ideas to help animals out and get the public aware of animal cruelty. Also, at the next meeting, students will be able to show interest in e-board positions. Here are other ideas the club has:
-Animal food drives.
-A 5K run to fund-raise for a local animal shelter (each runner would be sponsored by his/her family and friends with whatever donation amount).
-Publicizing animals in need of adoption.
-Publicizing local animal shelter events.
-Petitioning for humane treatment of animals while both learning and spreading awareness about animal cruelty.
If you are interested in the club, attend the next meeting or e-mail Kimberly Capriola and share your ideas.
Note: The club is not official but involved students are working on the logistics and constitution as we speak.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Response to "PETA."
Response #21
There are a variety of animal right's groups but PETA is the most famous, or rather, infamous. Emily brought up, in her blog, how PETA uses offensive advertisements to advocate animal rights but what they show also portrays false information and is always over the top. In Emily's example, PETA's add shows a half naked woman ready for the TSA scan (the full-body can in order to fly an airplane) whose underwear reads "Be proud of your body scan: Go Vegan." This ad is not only exploitative of the woman in the ad but it assumes the vegan diet always makes a person healthier, thin, and sexy. It also implies people do not want to go through the scan because they are ashamed of their bodies (and not because it is an invasion of privacy, Emily pointed out). PETA tends to play off of a serious problem to get the public's attention but the result is a public who does not take animal rights more seriously because they are revolted by the ways PETA protests and speaks up. Emily asked, "Why is PETA the most well-known animal rights group if their methods of effecting change are so problematic?"
PETA is the most well-known animal rights group because they try anything to be noticed. They like to get a rise out of people if it means maybe someone will look past the offensiveness and actually think about animal rights. They like to shock the public but it only gives PETA a bad reputation. In my blog, I have referred to PETA a couple of times because they do have good statistics and information on their site. However, this does not mean I support how they portray women. When I was googling PETA images to put in this blog, there were so many of naked women shown in cages, tied up, put on display as pieces of meat, shown as bloodied body parts, and so on. I understand PETA wants to give off some sort of message... but I have no idea what that message is because I can't get past the fact that these women are being so degraded. PETA could really make a difference for the lives of animals but I don't think their current methods are really helping animals out.
My question to you is: What should PETA do (or not do) in order to grow in popularity, actually get support from the public, and save the lives of animals at the same time?
The least offensive PETA advertisement I could find... and she isn't even wearing pants.
There are a variety of animal right's groups but PETA is the most famous, or rather, infamous. Emily brought up, in her blog, how PETA uses offensive advertisements to advocate animal rights but what they show also portrays false information and is always over the top. In Emily's example, PETA's add shows a half naked woman ready for the TSA scan (the full-body can in order to fly an airplane) whose underwear reads "Be proud of your body scan: Go Vegan." This ad is not only exploitative of the woman in the ad but it assumes the vegan diet always makes a person healthier, thin, and sexy. It also implies people do not want to go through the scan because they are ashamed of their bodies (and not because it is an invasion of privacy, Emily pointed out). PETA tends to play off of a serious problem to get the public's attention but the result is a public who does not take animal rights more seriously because they are revolted by the ways PETA protests and speaks up. Emily asked, "Why is PETA the most well-known animal rights group if their methods of effecting change are so problematic?"
PETA is the most well-known animal rights group because they try anything to be noticed. They like to get a rise out of people if it means maybe someone will look past the offensiveness and actually think about animal rights. They like to shock the public but it only gives PETA a bad reputation. In my blog, I have referred to PETA a couple of times because they do have good statistics and information on their site. However, this does not mean I support how they portray women. When I was googling PETA images to put in this blog, there were so many of naked women shown in cages, tied up, put on display as pieces of meat, shown as bloodied body parts, and so on. I understand PETA wants to give off some sort of message... but I have no idea what that message is because I can't get past the fact that these women are being so degraded. PETA could really make a difference for the lives of animals but I don't think their current methods are really helping animals out.
My question to you is: What should PETA do (or not do) in order to grow in popularity, actually get support from the public, and save the lives of animals at the same time?
The least offensive PETA advertisement I could find... and she isn't even wearing pants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)