Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why eating meat is bad for the animals essay
How eating meat affects animals
Ethical eating meat
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why eating meat is bad for the animals essay
Roger Crisp argues in Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism that humans are morally required to eat meat (Soifer, 35). According to Roger Crisp, Vegetarianism is an immoral act; we are morally obligated to eat meat provided the meat is not from factory farms (Soifer, 35-36). Crisp believes we are able to eat non-intensively reared animals, just so long as the animals live an enjoyable life. However he says, “This is not the case in factory farms” (Soifer, 35). Factory farming consists of multiple animals being brutally killed in order to create food for humans. The treatment an animal will face in factory farms is morally questionable; it is these types of actions of which lead humans to the idea of vegetarianism. Crisp’s definition of Vegetarianism is “one is morally required to abstain from meat”. He uses this definition to distinguish Vegetarianism from The Compromise Permission View, otherwise known as CP. CP states “one is morally required to abstain from the flesh of intensively reared animals, but permitted to eat the flesh of certain non-intensively-reared animals” (Crisp, 36). Replaceability is an important aspect to address in non-intensively reared animals as it restores animals in the meat- eating industry. Through further analysis, I will be assessing Crisp’s many arguments against Vegetarianism from the perspective of non-human animal’s rights and liberties, assessing Crisp’s response to arguments based on the suggestion of Human and animal suffering. First, I will define animal’s rights according to The Rights of Animals and unborn Generations, by Joel Feinberg, who determines the characteristics needed in order to have these rights. Secondly, I will take into consideration the ‘Argument from killing’ and ‘the Argument ...
... middle of paper ...
... they are needed in society not only for the economy, but for the pleasure of their own lives and the lives of human beings.
Works Cited
Crisp, Roger (1988). Utilitarianism and Vegetarianism. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 4 (1):41-49.
Feinberg, Joel. Rights, Justice, and the Bounds of Liberty: Essays in Social Philosophy "The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations," Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980, 159-84. Essay.
Phillips, John-Otto. "Legal Theory, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and Mill’s Harm Principle." Philosophy: Law and Society. Chester New Hall, Hamilton, ON. 10 Jan 2011. Lecture.
Soifer, Eldon. Ethical Issues: Perspective for Canadians. 3rd. Toronto, ON: Broadview Press, 2009. 35-43. Print.
Soifer, Eldon. Ethical Issues: Perspective for Canadians. 3rd. Toronto, ON: Broadview Press, 2009. 9-14. Print.
Norcross, Alastair. “Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases.” Philosophical Perspectives 18, (2004): 229-245.
Nye, Howard. PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Lecture Notes – Ethics. University of Alberta.
Gedge, E., & Waluchow, W. (2012). Readings in health care ethics (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario: Broadview Press.
Democracy is more than merely a system of government. It is a culture – one that promises equal rights and opportunity to all members of society. Democracy can also be viewed as balancing the self-interests of one with the common good of the entire nation. In order to ensure our democratic rights are maintained and this lofty balance remains in tact, measures have been taken to protect the system we pride ourselves upon. There are two sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that were implemented to do just this. Firstly, Section 1, also known as the “reasonable limits clause,” ensures that a citizen cannot legally infringe on another’s democratic rights as given by the Charter. Additionally, Section 33, commonly referred to as the “notwithstanding clause,” gives the government the power to protect our democracy in case a law were to pass that does not violate our Charter rights, but would be undesirable. Professor Kent Roach has written extensively about these sections in his defence of judicial review, and concluded that these sections are conducive to dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature. Furthermore, he established that they encourage democracy. I believe that Professor Roach is correct on both accounts, and in this essay I will outline how sections 1 and 33 do in fact make the Canadian Charter more democratic. After giving a brief summary of judicial review according to Roach, I will delve into the reasonable limits clause and how it is necessary that we place limitations on Charter rights. Following this, I will explain the view Professor Roach and I share on the notwithstanding clause and how it is a vital component of the Charter. To conclude this essay, I will discuss the price at which democr...
Cahn, Steven M. and Peter Markie, Ethics: History, Theory and Contemporary Issues. 4th Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Collier, Carol, and Rachel Haliburton. Bioethics in Canada: A philosophical Introduction. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press Inc., 2011. 5-17, 75. Print.
Throughout the last century the concern of animals being treated as just a product has become a growing argument. Some believe that animals are equal to the human and should be treated with the same respect. There are many though that laugh at that thought, and continue to put the perfectly roasted turkey on the table each year. Gary Steiner is the author of the article “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable”, that was published in the New York Times right before Thanksgiving in 2009. He believes the use of animals as a benefit to human beings is inhumane and murderous. Gary Steiner’s argument for these animal’s rights is very compelling and convincing to a great extent.
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2009). Ethics: Theory and practice (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Shafer-Landau, R. (2013) Ethical Theory: An Anthology (Second Edition). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wyckoff, Jason, and M.A Bertz. "The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation? - By Gary L. Francione & Robert Garner." Journal of Applied Philosophy 28.4 (2011): 414-16. Print.
The Code of Ethics for Registered Nurses is a document that details how a nurse in Manitoba is expected to act regarding ethical matters (College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba, [CRNM] 2006). Ethical principles are laid out with the assumption that nurses value and respect the individuality of people (Burkhardt, Nathaniel, and Walton, 2014). This paper will examine a case study and discuss the ethical principles, values and laws that pertain to the case. The stance that the nurse should take in this case study will also be discussed.
Weijer, C., Skelton, A., & Brennan, S. (2013). Bioethics in Canada. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford
Vegetarians are uncomfortable with how humans treat animals. Animals are cruelly butchered to meet the high demand and taste for meat in the market. Furthermore, meat-consumers argue that meat based foods are cheaper than plant based foods. According to Christians, man was given the power to dominate over all creatures in the world. Therefore, man has the right to use animals for food (Singer and Mason, 2007). However, it is unjustified for man to treat animals as he wishes because he has the power to rule over animals. This owes to the reality that it is unclear whether man has the right to slaughter animals (haphazardly), but it is clear that humans have a duty to take care of animals. In objection, killing animals is equal to killing fellow humans because both humans and animals have a right to life. Instead of brutally slaying animals, people should consume their products, which...
Weston, Anthony. A Practical Companion to Ethics. 4th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.
In conclusion, I agree with Tom Regan’s perspective of the rights view, as it explores the concept of equality, and the concept of rightful treatment of animals and humans. If a being is capable of living, and experiencing life, then they are more than likely capable of feeling pleasure and pain, except in a few instances. If humans are still treated in a respectable and right way even if some cannot vote, or think for themselves, then it is only fair that animals who also lack in some of these abilities be treated as equals. As Regan puts it, “pain is pain, wherever it occurs” (1989).