There Is Nothing Wrong With Rearing And Killing Animals Essay

Good Essays
’There is nothing wrong with rearing and killing animals for consumption ’.

Eating animals involves many aspects that may not be morally right. Philosophers may take into account violated rights, interests, human interests vs animal interests, rights argument and virtue ethics. Eating animals poses mainly two problems- is it wrong in principle to raise and kill animals so that human beings can eat meat and fish or Does it stop being wrong if the process involved are carried out humanely? These are two important questions philosophers debate on. This essay will focus on why raising and killing animals for food is morally wrong.

Firstly the fact that killing and rearing animals for human consumption means that their rights are violated. As animals raised for food is being used by others rather than being respected for itself. It is being treated as a means to human ends and not as an end to itself. No matter how human key an animal is treated in the process, raising and killing
…show more content…
Violated interests explain that even the most humane forms of preparing and killing animals for food nearly almost violates the animals most basic interest which is to predominantly keep living. Modern agriculture often violates other key animal rights/ interests as well; to live in natural or decent conditions, to make free choices, to be free from fear again, to live healthy lives without needing medical interventions, to eat a natural diet and to enjoy the normal/social/family/community life of its spaces .

The argument for human interest vs animals interests can be made invalid as humans don’t need to eat meat in order to survive whereas if you kill animals for meat you are permanently killing them. Animals are essentially like us so do deserve to have their interests heard. Human interest in this case is classed as trivial because human beings don’t need to eat meat in order to

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    In conclusion, killing animal have both advantages and disadvantages. Advantages of killing animals are used for food, out of suffering, and dangerous animals. These reasons are the important point that we can kill animals for surviving and helping them. In contrast, we should not kill animals for these following reasons: the cruel thing, the animal extinction, and contrast to religion. In my opinion, killing animals is not appropriate.…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “They cannot live ethically, cognitively and critically in those superior human ways”, Rolston (1988). Ethically, animals are valuable beings whose rights should be respected and given its due.By being herbivorous we can reduce the pain and sufferings of thousands of different lives. Animals are conscious creatures that have feelings and social associations (Grandin & Deesing, 2003). However, animals do not live in an ethical world and are not a portion of the human culture. They can't feel the trouble that they are intended to be eaten.…

    • 1058 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Veganism Vs Vegetarianism

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages

    They’re food of course! Vegetarianism and veganism are wrong because meat is necessary for a human’s diet, it is costly and unethical to distribute vegetarian meals, and animals are on the earth for the benefit of humans and it is more than okay to eat them. Although vegetarian diets seem to be an enlightened idea to help the planet and ease suffering worldwide, this just isn’t true. The side effects of this decision outway and counteract the very issues that they try to solve as well as cause a multitude of other problems. A well known medical journal, WebMD, proves that purely vegetarian diets are harmful to all human bodies.…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In fact, it is proven that meat is not a vital step for keeping good health (Singer para. 18). There are plenty of food options as an alternative to eating meat, yet humans continue to eat these animals for pleasure. Meat is not necessary for survival in modern life like it used to be for ancestors, so continuing to eat meat simply for pure enjoyment of the taste shows that humans often act selfishly. In addition, it is considered a social norm to eat animals, but extremely wrong to eat another human.…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    On Eating Animals Analysis

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages

    “On Eating Animals” Contrary to what omnivores often think, whether or not to eat meat isn't only a matter of taste or personal preference. Due to its many implications spreading concerns of well being for humans, animals, and the environment it is, at its center, a question of ethics. In the article, “On Eating Animals” they work to defend, honor, and clean up the processes by which farm animals are raised to eat and eventually kill. The purpose of this essay is to undermine a general belief. This essay sets out an argument that purports to show, as well as any argument in ethics can show, that eating animals is a current ongoing controversy.…

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Tristram McPherson enthusiastically sets out to prove that killing animals under nearly any circumstance is morally wrong. In “Why I am Vegan”, he lays out a multitude of different reasons which it is wrong to kill even painlessly. McPherson has several very valid and reasonable ideas however they lack any type of support as to why they should be upheld. McPherson spends a lot of the second section considering the autonomy and future of the animals; however, more importantly he compares the killing of animals to the killing of humans. McPherson does not provide adequate reasoning for why the practice of killing animals is morally wrong.…

    • 1716 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The absurdity of the first horn forces us into the second. In the second horn we do kill animals, which allows us to live and live well but makes justice impossible to maintain (1, 4). The second horn states that if we allow justice to apply to animals, then we will be forced to be unjust in order to ensure that we either live well or even live at all. Being required to be unjust in order to live our lives is also absurd. As is the nature of a dilemma, neither horn is acceptable.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This gives the reason for equality as there is not moral explanation why it should not be considered. We make animals suffer greatly in order to satisfy our needs of food. This, according to the author, can be described as speciesism as animals are killed in many horrific ways. It denies any other species interests other from humans in every way because we doing for nothing else but pleasure. Also, Singer suggests that experimenting with other species for human interests is another major form of speciesism.…

    • 816 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Ethics is defined as Rules of behavior based on ideas about what is morally good and bad. I believe it is unethical for humans to cause pain to animals unless strictly for consumption or vital purposes. I believe it is morally right for animals to have a certain level of protection against animal cruelty. People argue that animals do not have the autonomy that human beings have and there for should not be provided rights. Such people believe that animals were only placed on Earth strictly for human use, that they cannot be rational or experience emotions, and lack autonomy.…

    • 776 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Opposing this view, other utilitarian arguments say that vegetarianism is required because killing animals is a violation of their rights and it uses animals as a means to our own ends. The utility-based arguments require that many factors be measured to make a moral decision. Factors such as the number of humans who eat meat and their pleasure and the number of animals killed and their displeasure must be summed and compared. These different arguments regarding vegetarianism are similar in that they use controversial evidence to support their claims, which prevents the argument from being settled (Timmons, 2007, pg. 413).…

    • 796 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays