Vegan Forum

"Why should we behave better towards animals than they do towards each other?"
That's a basic question often given by non vegs - that is quite related to animal rights issue.

timatyson wrote:"Why should we behave better towards animals than they do towards each other?"
That's a basic question often given by non vegs - that is quite related to animal rights issue.

Because humans can make decisions about it, but most animals can't.

Sergio wrote:

timatyson wrote:"Why should we behave better towards animals than they do towards each other?"
That's a basic question often given by non vegs - that is quite related to animal rights issue.

Because humans can make decisions about it, but most animals can't.

And how do you know this, Sergio?
Why do you think animals can't make decisions?

I'm no biologist, but I used to have a dog when I was little - he seemed to see himself as part of the family, and was very protective of me. The dog would attack animals that he saw as a threat, and would try to hunt certain animals and give them to us (rabbits). But he would not attack all animals, or other humans. Although I don't think he would have chosen to be vegetarian, he clearly made some sort of choice regarding which animals were food (and it wasn't as a result of us having trained him).

Maybe he was instinctively aware of a need to keep some sort of natural balance?

And, as an aside, dogs try to kill animals as quickly as possible, with minimal suffering - they do not hunt for pleasure, they do not use traps and they certainly don't build farms! This is true of most animals, with the exception of domestic cats (who are evil!) and ants (who farm greenfly).

We have a duty to act morally towards others regardless of how anyone else behaves. For example, the institution of slavery in the United States was not in any way justified by the fact that rival African tribes routinely conquered and enslaved one another.

Also, it should be mentioned that the way in which humans currently behave towards animals is actually far worse than the way in which animals behave towards each other.

From Animal Rights and Vegetarian Ethics by Eugene Khutoryansky

timatyson wrote:"Why should we behave better towards animals than they do towards each other?"
That's a basic question often given by non vegs - that is quite related to animal rights issue.

Different animals behave differently to each other, why should we choose the worse behavior?

Animals either can make decisions by themselves that's why they somehow take good care of themselves alone. I have respect to all animals and to their animal rights. We should behave better towards them so that they will also behave well towards us.

timatyson wrote:"Why should we behave better towards animals than they do towards each other?"
That's a basic question often given by non vegs - that is quite related to animal rights issue.

I think this would just be a give and take relationship.( but not goes to all of the animals) For example, if a dog feels that you love him and cares for him, in return he will protect you. Just like BigBecka's dog

VERY simply and quickly.

Everyone has different value choices.
There are some inherit value choices to those who aren't existentially free (most if not all non-human animals).
Suffering is necessarily a negative state of being for any being in it.
Suffering therefore ought to be avoided as it is necessarily negative.

Only moral agents can make moral decisions.
Only moral patients can be a part of moral deliberations (in looking at who is effected).
Holding a baby culpable for crawling and shitting all over the original Mona Lisa is as senseless as holding a dog responsibility for attacking a human.
They show a sense of loyalty, but not one of making moral decisions.
Therefore the only moral agents we know of are some humans.
Thus moral agents (the beings capable of making moral deliberations) ought to take animals into account and aim to avoid causing their suffering).


Also it's important to bare in mind:
There is no relevant difference between that of a human and that of an animal when deciding who should be taken into account. The only differences are applying what support should be in place.
Some humans have the same capacities as non-human animals, so if you're against all arguments that push for animals to be taken into account, you must be happy to test on animals AND the marginal cases of humans, and maybe others as well (depending on your view point) although if you are already then this part of the post holds little consequence.


Also bare in mind that there is necessarily a prescription, not just a description, in morality.

Domestic cats are not evil! Maybe mine is the only exception...he is actually half cat, half cushion.

I agree that humans treat animals mare badly than animals treat each other. Only humans abuse and cause systematic, ongoing suffering to another living being.

I also love cats Redsunflower and I do agree with you that they are not evil...

Because we shouldnt have a reason to hurt them in the first place.

"The man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unhappy but hardly fit for life"_ Albert Einstein