We all agree that it is morally wrong to inflict
‘unnecessary’ suffering or death on animals.
But the overwhelming portion of our animal use—just
about all of it—cannot be justified by anything other than
pleasure, amusement, convenience, or habit. If you believe that the lives of nonhumans have moral value
then stop participating in the killing of animals, however
‘humanely’ they are treated.
Most animals are killed for food. According to the Food
and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United
Nations, humans kill approximately 53 billion animals—
that’s 53,000,000,000—for food per year not including fish
and other sea animals. Our thinking about nonhuman animals is very confused.
Many of us live, or have lived, with companion animals, such
as dogs, cats, rabbits, etc. We love these animals. They are
important members of our families. We grieve when they die.
But we stick forks into other animals no different from the
ones we love. That makes no sense.
There is something that you can do.
You can go vegan. Now.
Veganism reduces animal suffering and death by decreasing demand. Veganism is not merely a matter of diet; it is a moral and
political commitment to abolition on the individual level
and extends not only to matters of food, but to clothing,
other products, and other personal actions and choices. But what’s wrong with eating animal
products other than meat?
There is no meaningful distinction between eating flesh and
eating dairy or other animal products. Animals exploited for
dairy, eggs, or other products are treated as badly if not
worse than ‘meat’ animals, and they end up in the same
slaughterhouse after which we consume their flesh anyway. There is every bit as much suffering
and death in a glass of milk, ice
cream cone, or an egg as there is in a
145 million..... killed every Day
6 million......... killed every hour
100,000……… killed every minute
1,680………… killed every second How can we justify this slaughter?
We cannot justify it on the ground that we need to eat
animal products for reasons of health. We clearly do not
need to do so. In fact, the evidence increasingly shows that
animal products are detrimental to human health.
We cannot justify it on the ground that it is ‘natural’
because humans have been eating animals for thousands of
years. The fact that we have been doing something for a
long time does not make it morally right. Humans have been
racist and sexist for centuries and we now recognize that
racism and sexism are morally wrong.
We cannot justify it as necessary for the global ecology.
There is a growing consensus that animal agriculture is an
★ According to the FAO:
★Animals consume more protein than they produce.
For every kilogram (2.2 pounds) of animal protein
produced, animals consume an average of almost 6
kilograms, or more than 13 pounds, of plant protein
from grains and forage.
Because animals consume much more protein than they
produce, grains that should be consumed by humans are
consumed by animals instead. Thus, along with other
factors, animal agriculture condemns many human beings
★It takes more than 100,000 liters of water to produce
one kilogram of beef, and approximately 900 liters to
produce one kilogram of wheat.
The only justification we have for inflicting suffering and
death on 53 billion animals per year is that we get pleasure
from eating them; that it is convenient for us to eat them; that
it is a habit. Why not get better laws and industry
There are animal welfare laws that require us to treat animals
‘humanely,’ but these laws are largely meaningless because
animals are property; they are economic commodities that
have no value other than what we accord them.
And, most important, reforming exploitation ignores the
fundamental question: how can we justify using animals at
all as our resources—however ‘humanely’ we treat them? What Is the solution?
The solution is to abolish the exploitation of animals, not to
regulate it. The solution is to recognize that just as we
recognize that every human, irrespective of her particular
characteristics, has the fundamental right not to be treated
as the property of another, we must recognize that every
sentient (perceptually aware) nonhuman has that right
as well. Courtesy of: