In this essay, I will argue that it is morally wrong to produce animals for food. I will do this by appealing to Leopold’s views on “the land”. First I will explain three views on animal rights by philosophers Tom Regan, Peter singer and Aldo Leopold.
Tom Regan believes that each subject of life is an individual that cares about his or her life, therefore that life has inherent value. This inherent value is equal among all who have it, and one cannot have more inherent value than another. We should treat these subjects with respect and justice equally therefore producing animals for food is morally wrong because they have inherent value. When the point of higher inherent value between animals and humans are brought up, Regan uses children …show more content…
Singer’s views of animal rights is based on the utilitarian philosophy; maximizing the overall happiness and minimizing the overall pain. Singer believes animals can feel pain and pleasure, therefore they need to be considered when deciding the maximum happiness or right and wrong, especially because humans are directly causing this pain. Singer uses sexism and racism to defend his position. Because Singer takes a utilitarian standpoint in animal rights, he also believes that the needs of humans can outweigh the needs of animals and also that …show more content…
I chose not to get factory farmed animals, so when Regan says “to stand truly for peace is to stand against their ruthless exploitation” I agree with him. This is my individual view and is not a popular one, I know that saying eating meat is morally wrong, infuriates people and attacks their traditions. Eating meat is a tradition in many people’s lives, whether you have generations of people who hunted in your family or you have holidays where meat is the main dish. I come from a small village where eating meat is a tradition, an activity but it is also a necessity. A family friend Ruth, really opened my eyes to the reality many people face living in rural Alaska, she said “I had 6 children and no job, if I was not able to hunt moose which fed my children, we simply wouldn’t have had enough food.” Therefore, I believe Leopold’s view can be more powerful and helpful to our planet, for people as a whole. His views are more practical and willing to evolve. Like Ruth, I was raised in a similar family, potatoes we grew, fish we caught by net and moose we hunted were our main meals. Along with 5 gallon buckets of beans, brown rice and vegetable noodles. We based our way of life from our Athabascan ancestors; never take more than you need, use every part of the animal, and respect the land. These principles were taught to us at a very young age, we were taught to have a relationship with the
Tom Regan believes that each subject of life is an individual that cares about his or her life, therefore that life has inherent value. This inherent value is equal among all who have it, and one cannot have more inherent value than another. We should treat these subjects with respect and justice equally therefore producing animals for food is morally wrong because they have inherent value. When the point of higher inherent value between animals and humans are brought up, Regan uses children …show more content…
Singer’s views of animal rights is based on the utilitarian philosophy; maximizing the overall happiness and minimizing the overall pain. Singer believes animals can feel pain and pleasure, therefore they need to be considered when deciding the maximum happiness or right and wrong, especially because humans are directly causing this pain. Singer uses sexism and racism to defend his position. Because Singer takes a utilitarian standpoint in animal rights, he also believes that the needs of humans can outweigh the needs of animals and also that …show more content…
I chose not to get factory farmed animals, so when Regan says “to stand truly for peace is to stand against their ruthless exploitation” I agree with him. This is my individual view and is not a popular one, I know that saying eating meat is morally wrong, infuriates people and attacks their traditions. Eating meat is a tradition in many people’s lives, whether you have generations of people who hunted in your family or you have holidays where meat is the main dish. I come from a small village where eating meat is a tradition, an activity but it is also a necessity. A family friend Ruth, really opened my eyes to the reality many people face living in rural Alaska, she said “I had 6 children and no job, if I was not able to hunt moose which fed my children, we simply wouldn’t have had enough food.” Therefore, I believe Leopold’s view can be more powerful and helpful to our planet, for people as a whole. His views are more practical and willing to evolve. Like Ruth, I was raised in a similar family, potatoes we grew, fish we caught by net and moose we hunted were our main meals. Along with 5 gallon buckets of beans, brown rice and vegetable noodles. We based our way of life from our Athabascan ancestors; never take more than you need, use every part of the animal, and respect the land. These principles were taught to us at a very young age, we were taught to have a relationship with the