In many ways, elements of this group wish that animal rights would be even further reduced due to the fact that animal rights are antithetical to their personal and/or political vantage point. Similarly, on the opposing side, there are those individuals that are deeply troubled by the way our current society disregards the worth and dignity of other life forms. In fairness, among this group as well exists zealots that would advocate for an extreme solution to such an issue such as all individuals becoming vegetarians to affect a positive change on animal rights worldwide. As such, as rationally and scientifically as possible, this analysis will work to lay out a moderate framework from which the author will attempt to explain and understand the relevant arguments that exist on both sides of this debate.
The following provides a brief summary of some of the arguments that each side of this debate put forward:
The individuals who campaign for a greater degree of protection and animal rights argue the following:
- Due to the fact that eating meat necessarily entails the slaughter of an animal, it also entails grief, anxiety, and a high degree of suffering on the part of the animal
- Raising animals for slaughter is an inherently callous practice due to the fact that those individuals that are involved in the process begin to become hardened to the hardships and suffering that these animals undergo during this process.
- Evidence from a number of physicians and studies have concluded that a meat-eating is not necessarily beneficial to the health of those who eat it.
It is verifiable that if the entire planet became vegetarian, the amount of food that would be saved from feeding cattle stock and chickens plus swine and all the other meat that a great deal of our food supply goes towards would be more than sufficient to feed all of those that go without food. The other side of the debate urges multiple levels of justification and rationalization for the killing of animals for many reason: Animals are by nature stupid and incapable of understanding what their role in life is therefore it is not necessary to respect their rights to the same extent that we respect human rights. It is moral and acceptable to use the animal for the needs of the human being if such a use helps the human being(s) to continue to live and thrive