article thumbnail

The Florida FWC illegally killed 34 pythons and one 10-year-old pregnant Boa constrictor

Reddit Animals

Reptiles that are not treated ethically simply do not make good pets. And their behavior is completely consistent with what we would understand as "animal sentience." Whether we like to admit it or not, we (culturally) view animals on a "sentience spectrum."

Pythons 40
article thumbnail

John Passmore (1914-2004) on the History of Animal Cruelty

Animal Ethics

Once a definite social movement got under way in the West with its objective the restricting of man's treatment of animals, it moved with relative rapidity. Moral philosophers began to regard it as an obvious truth that it is wrong to treat animals cruelly. But not so far as seriously to limit man's domination of the world.

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

On Trial: Animal Torture Videos vs. Free Speech

Animal Ethics

Code, Title 18.48, made it a federal crime to knowingly create, sell, or possess a depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain. It was enacted to prevent helpless innocent animals from being tortured to death. I don’t think so. Code, Title 18.48

article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

2): We disagree with your contention that the First Amendment protects animal “crush” videos. Stevens , the Supreme Court last year overturned a 1999 law banning depictions of animal cruelty on the grounds of overbreadth. To the Editor: Re “ Disgusting but Not Illegal ” (editorial, Aug. In United States v.

article thumbnail

Freedom of Speech

Animal Ethics

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects depictions of animal cruelty. This does not mean that it protects animal cruelty, which is (and ought to be) illegal in every state.

article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

To the Editor: Re “ Animal Cruelty and Free Speech ” (editorial, Oct. The law speaks specifically and narrowly to the distribution for profit of videos that show illegal acts of cruelty actually being performed on live animals (my italics). Why are “crush videos” involving animals any different?

article thumbnail

From Today's New York Times

Animal Ethics

19): The Supreme Court should reinstate a crucial 1999 federal law banning the commercial sale of videos depicting animal cruelty. To the Editor: Re “ A Free Speech Battle Arises From Videos of Fighting Dogs ” (front page, Sept. This is not speech.