The Rights Of Animals

Yep, Peter Singer's right, if we let him be - in his future, we'll all eat tofu and meat grown from donor animal cells. It'll be chemically altered to taste and shaped to look like the real thing. Once everyone is eating meat grown in petri dishes... how many cattle will be left on the planet? How many chickens, sheep or pigs? How many dogs and cats - will we grow enough meat to feed them in addition to us?

Or will it be too much bother... too expensive... to co-exist with any livestock or pets?

Gosh, I wonder if Singer or these other vegan authors have thought about what will happen when we only have chemical fertilizers for the vegetation cornucopia in our someday utopia? Bet Mother Earth will love that.

humans are animals! we're part of the animal kingdom. if you've had junior high level biology you already know that. animal rights seeks to protect all animals (that includes humans) from UNNECESSARY pain, suffering, and death. Killing any sentient being without need is unjustified and unethical. Data shows that vegans live longer than meat eaters (yes, google it) so cleary we don't need to raise and kill what we don't need to eat.

the idea that animals are non-sentient and don`t make the same choices or are intelligent enough to make decisions just because they have different priorities just shows the ignorance of alot of people who only care about who else they can enslave for their own greed but this changing and hopefully will get better sooner rather than later.

You seriously need to venture out of your Ivory Tower more often. People who grow up hunting, fishing, or around farms are not suddenly going to decide to go vegan one day. You really think that these people who spend far more time around animals than any Ivy League professor will one day arrive at the conclusion that the Ivy League professor understands animal welfare better than they do?

I say this as an on-and-off vegetarian who recently left San Francisco and only eats meat that is "Certified Humane" (google it). I was thrilled to see Prop 8 pass. However, I've also spent a lot of time in the wilderness, and the fact of the matter is that nature is a cruel and brutal place. Animals hunt, kill, eat, and sometimes even torture each other (ever see a cat "play" with a mouse or bird?). There is nothing unnatural about the food chain, and these fanciful, idealistic notions of someday returning to some Garden of Eden is absurd.

We can certainly treat animals better. Profits should never be an excuse for us to torture them. But for the majority of people around the world they will always continue to be food.

I have read the article with interest, and in particular the comments section. It seems the arguments put forward by the vegans are far more sensible, logical and coherent than some of the juvenile responses by persons such as Doc Howl, rustyone, augustpersonage etc, a great number of which simply serve to aggravate instead of entering into a mature discussion. In conclusion, I have to tell you that this article, and the comments, have persuaded me that this is the most ethical way to live, and I have decided as a result to go vegan.

Attention Liberals of Newsweek:

Your ideological bias is showing. Now that you have given a soapbox to a certified douchebag (by reason of advocacy of infanticide and saying that bestiality is no big deal, I fully expect that you will provide space for a rebuttal from the other side of the issue.

I recommend the noted philosopher Tibor T. Machan to provide such a rebuttal. He is famous for debunking errant nonsense such as this.

The biggest problem is that when people eat meat they do not know where that meat came from, what that animal was fed or what conditions it lived in. There is a huge disconnect between that animal and our lives, - we cannot relate to that animal b/c it is not our reality. It is just meat on a plate and it tastes good. That's all we seem to care about.

If animals are given the same rights as people then, would they, the animals, have to adhere to our ways or would we have to adhere to theirs? If the former it true then, how could we ensure that all animals would follow the rules and that our morals and ethics would stay sound? If the later is true we might have to for go certain morals and ethics to be equal unto the standards of the animal kingdom? With that said are we truly helping or hindering the laws of nature/ man, or just stroking our inflated egos? Must be nice to ponder such things when one can go and find readily available food sources, others have not the luxury.

I consider myself progressive, and open to new ideas. I am for gun control. I am for sex ed in schools. Im pro choice. I think every human deserves access to healthcare, education and food. Gay marriage? Sure! Go for it!

But I will never, ever in my life stop enjoying meat, cheese and eggs. Vegans who try to push that nonsense on me can shove it!

Cows may be sentient, I don't know. But chickens? I've worked with chickens. I've meet tomato plants with more brains than chickens.

And my African Grey parrot loves to eat chicken.

I think he has some good points that are taken to an extreme degree. Certainly, we can raise eggs, veal and meat animals to a more humane degree. However, nothing has been posited to explain why it is uniquely evil for us to eat meat, yet animals we revere as magnificent and worthy of worship are top predators (lions, tigers, wolves, eagles and so on). Additionally, if we were vegetarians that, through cruelty, indifference or indulgence became carnivores, you may have a point. However, primates are OMNIVORES and the hunting part of the term hunter-gatherer allowed us, in part, to evolve into the sentinent beings who could contemplate these issues in the first place. Your article would have more power and persuasive power if you called for ethical farming of meat animals, a return to grass-fed livestock and a reduction of meat intake to something more approximating our ancestors (hunter-gatherer - not all you can eat at the Poderoa Steak House). Of course that would remove the main goal of your article - not to educate or persuade, but shock and antagonize.

How dare you mock my beliefs? It???s so typical of vegans to try and turn the situation around and not take responsibility for your actions of killing innocent plants. I hope everyone is aware of the new movement out there for plant???s rights. If it was up to those PETA and Vegan people they would just destroy and ruin all plant life as we know it, just to satisfy their unethical hunger for fruits and vegetables. Please when you have the chance all of you must join the ranks of the F.E.T.P; The Fair and Ethical Treatment for Plants. We must all join together so that the vegans do not eat all of food supply. If they aren???t watched carefully they will surely eat up all the nuts, fruits, and vegetables available, basically killing off entire breeds of apples and perhaps even carrots! Many of you might not already know it but it???s the vegans who want more fertilizer for the plants all so they can have bigger carrots! And what kind of sick person would want to eat a puppy? Obviously vegans have no morals or even ethics if they suggest we eat puppies. I heard the other day a vegan tried to legally marry a goat in Maine.

Of particular note, there are certain animals (sentient?) in California (mountain lions?) and elsewhere that eat humans without any regard for human suffering. Will someone be talking with them about switching to vegan? The point of this comment is that there is an erroneous assumption, with this article and some of the comments, is that the food chain that evolved with human life on earth no longer applies. I believe this false assumption invalidates a substantial portion of the article. Yet, none of us want to see an animal suffer, and for that reason alone actions to minimize abuse may be necessary.

PhillipS; You are right that it is both of our rights to eat what we want. However this article states that it may be up to voters to decide for us. That crosses many, many personal and moral lines. I choose to feed my family wild meat as our ancient forefathers did. I also choose to grow a big organic garden and feed my family from that vs. having my produce shipped 3,000 miles from Cali. Of the deer, partridge, turkey that I personally have killed and eaten in the last 4 years it took a total of ONE bullet for each. Each animal died in seconds. It took them much less time to die by my gun (also a right of ours) than to be eaten by a cyoote from the haunces us in the deep snow... As natural as that my be.

Animal Welfare or Animal Rights?
Here are some of the differences:

As animal welfare advocates. . .

??? We seek to improve the treatment and well-being of animals.

??? We support the humane treatment of animals that ensures comfort and freedom from unnecessary pain and suffering.

??? We believe we have the right to "own" animals -- they are our property.

??? We believe animal owners should provide loving care for the lifetime of their animals.

As animal rights activists. . .

??? They seek to end the use and ownership of animals, including the keeping of pets.

??? They believe that any use of an animal is exploitation so, not only must we stop using animals for food and clothing, but pet ownership must be outlawed as well.

??? They want to obtain legal rights for animals as they believe that animals and humans are equal.

??? They use false and unsubstantiated allegations of animal abuse to raise funds, attract media attention and bring supporters into the movement. (The Inhumane Crusade, Daniel T. Oliver)

www.naiaonline.org