article thumbnail

J. Baird Callicott on Domesticity

Animal Ethics

One of the more distressing aspects of the animal liberation movement is the failure of almost all its exponents to draw a sharp distinction between the very different plights (and rights) of wild and domestic animals. Domestic animals are creations of man. But that's not what animal liberationists want.

article thumbnail

J. Baird Callicott on Factory Farms

Animal Ethics

From the perspective of the land ethic, the immoral aspect of the factory farm has to do far less with the suffering and killing of nonhuman animals than with the monstrous transformation of living things from an organic to a mechanical mode of being.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Moral Vegetarianism, Part 8 of 13

Animal Ethics

In fact, animals used for food do suffer a great deal. Now there is no doubt that the actual treatment of animals used for food is immoral, that animals are made to suffer needlessly. One argument is this: The present practice of treating animals used for food is immoral and should be changed.

article thumbnail

Moral Vegetarianism, Part 1 of 13

Animal Ethics

A third of a century ago, when the modern animal-liberation movement was in its infancy, Martin published an essay entitled “A Critique of Moral Vegetarianism,” Reason Papers (fall 1976): 13-43. On the traditional position, justification of vegetarianism was in terms of animal welfare, happiness, rights, and so on.

article thumbnail

Animal Advocates' Successes Have Factory Farmers Running Scared

Animal Ethics

The reason that the industry is losing the argument is quite simple: There is no ethical justification for causing an animal to suffer unnecessarily. There is no ethical justification for treating an animal inhumanely for no good reason. There is no ethical justification for killing an animal for no good reason.

Factory 40