Paste your essay in here…In the article titled “All Animals Are Equal” Peter Singer provides facts and arguments that define the act of killing animals for food to be morally unjustifiable. Speciesism is “bias attitude of one species against another species.” In simpler terms, this is the ignorance of humans to discriminate against animals on the sheer observation that the two species have nothing in common. As human beings with life on this planet, it is our moral obligation to give equal consideration to the other lives around us. However, in our world today there is too much hate and discrimination exemplified through racism, sexism, and speciesism.
The basic principle of equality does not require equal treatment among two different species, but Singer argues that equal consideration is required among sentient beings. I agree that species with like interests deserve equal consideration. Obviously, the consideration for homo-sapiens is not identical to the concerns for an animal. But under the basic principle, it is necessary for the interests to both parties to be equally considered. Jeremy Bentham also felt that the principle of equal consideration was a basic moral principle. In order to say that a species has interests, we must recognize that they also have the ability to feel happiness and suffer as well. Nonhuman animals have the interest not to endure pain and death parallel to the same fear held by humans. Many humans’ actions show that they do not care for the interests of other species, despite that it is our moral wellbeing that they deserve the same respect and rights. Singer seems to care more about the degree of suffering that one undergoes opposed to who is suffering. The philosopher strongly feels that the suffering of animals deserves to receive equal consideration as the suffering of humans. Animal interests such as thriving in a life filled with rights and freedom are sacrificed for trivial human cravings like red meat. The interests of the animals cannot be compared to ours, but consideration of suffering inflicted, for instance, on factory farm animals vastly outweighs our enjoyment of cheap and convenient meat. Actions like these are morally unjustifiable and under Singer’s beliefs these actions must end.
In the event that you acknowledge that creatures have rights, raising and murdering creatures for nourishment is morally wrong. The most basic right of animals is the right to be treated as an end in oneself. Raising and killing animals for food uses them as a means to human gratification. The forced breeding does not treat them with means of respect. Regardless of how compassionately a creature is dealt with all the while, raising and slaughtering it for nourishment remains morally wrong.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/using/eating_1.shtml
The argument that animals kill other animals for food does not morally justify the actions of human consumption. In the wild, animals kill other animals for food as means of survival. many years of logical confirmation have exhibited that people have no organic need to expend substance, eggs or dairy items. We can get every one of the supplements we require on a plant-based eating routine, without the undesirable creature protein and cholesterol, and without perpetrating unnecessary enduring and passing on billions of creatures. Humans are making the simple choice not to consume the plant-based foods but prefer the animal products, solely for a little extra taste. From humans’ selfish behaviors, these nonhuman species are being harmed for the pleasure of people.
We are going through extensive measures that force animals to suffer for no other reason that for our own please. As a human population, we claim that is it wrong to cause unnecessary harm onto animals, such as dog fighting and other animal abuse. If harming animals for our pleasure goes against our common values, what makes it morally justifiable for millions of people everyday continue to enjoy meat and chicken and other animals? Opposing the exploitation of humans should mean that we oppose the same for nonhumans that also have sentience. If I do not want to be killed makes it wrong for someone to kill me when it can be avoided, then I think it is held to the same standard that an animal’s interest in not being harmed or killed makes it wrong for us to perform such acts upon them.
Justification for harming animals is sometimes brought up by the notion of how cruel nature is and how dangerous the animals can be. The way farm animals are treated might be described as methods of self defense. Farm animals are very obedient and passive to the dominated conditions that they are brought up in. Domesticated animals, such as farm animals and even house cats, do not have the instincts to fight for their food. They eat feed, while the animals that are not used in farming are naturally hunting for prey and striving in the wild. If breeding animals never started, this fear would not exist and no danger would be presented. Murdering these animals when we have other options for food and killing the natural creatures that do not have any alternative modes of foods are just as inexcusable. John Robbins noted that “a shift away from factory farming to more so-called humane, pasture based farming would only increase the targeting destruction of wild animals.” We need to stop using animals as our methods of food and use other sources to give us energy like plants and beans.
The claim that creatures can't reason "like us" comes up short. To begin with, it implies an all inclusive comparability in human thinking abilities. Obviously, not all people have a similar level of thinking, and the capacity to reason is far less created in numerous people than in the creatures we execute for sustenance. The nonprofit organization “Free from Harm” which promotes farmed animal rescue and education provided me with facts about animal’s intelligence that I did not previously know. On the website it presented, “Pigs are broadly recognized by researchers and specialists to be more clever than three year-old youngsters. Cows appreciate fathoming baffles and can make sense of how to open bolted doors. Chickens are equipped for numerical thinking and rationale aptitudes not found in youngsters more youthful than four years of age.”
Freefromharm.org CITE!!!!!
Creatures assuredly reason, yet even if they did not, we would not be justified to hurting them and using them in ways that are unnatural than we would be supported in hurting people with disabilities, babies, or the elderly. The natural act of free will carries a responsibility to weigh the positive and negative impacts on those around us affected by our choices. Similar fundamental objections are made about oppressed groups, which Singer brought up about sexism and racism before introducing speciesism.
Singer states that, “speciesists allow the interests of their own species to override the greater interests of members of other species,” and humans do this through animal torture, over crowding on farms, and injecting unhealthy chemicals into their bodies. We need to start living by our values as a society. Animal abuse is not morally justified and animals need to receive the equal respect and consideration that they deserve. They are reflected through the decisions that we make and the impacts that those actions have on others. Through our food choices we can display our values. Humans should start looking at all of the packed meat and products purchased at the grocery stores and think about the process of how their food got to their hands. In America, the animal abuse and methods of farming need to be alternated to more natural, plant-based practices. If we value compassion over harm, it is vital that people start to access alternative diets and show care for other species. I believe that there will be significant decreases in death and suffering if vegetarian and vegan diets are followed and animal products are not consumed. Peter Singer makes a very strong argument to defend the consideration of equality between human and animal suffering. We need to improve our interactions with animals besides using them for entertainment, research, and food.