from experts in the field:
Matt Prescott is director of corporate affairs for People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA; WWW PETA ORG).
FEBRUARY DEBATE UPDATE:
Should dating co-workers
sign a love contract?
DID YOU KNOW THAT mother hens cluck softly to their chicks that
are still in their shells, that cows not only solve problems but also enjoy
the challenge and become excited when they find a solution and that
sheep can recognize and remember as many as 50 faces for up to two
years? It seems that every week we learn more about who, rather than
what, animals are.
YES
36%
NO
64%
Of course, anyone who has ever lived with a dog or cat already knows that they are unique
individuals who feel joy and pain and can be frightened or sad. So, how is it that animals are
still often treated as nothing more than property or machines? Chickens are crammed into
tiny, filthy cages, unable to stretch their wings. Minks, raccoons and other animals spend their
lives pacing in a tight circle in a tiny wire box before finally being painfully electrocuted or
sometimes skinned alive for their fur. Even man’s best friend is often chained up like an old
bicycle in the back yard.
Percentage reflects votes
received by February 11, 2009.
Not long ago, child labor, human slavery and the oppression of women were all legal,
approved practices right here in our own “enlightened” country. Some people honestly thought
that other people’s interests didn’t matter. Though there was resistance, we amended our way
of thinking and changed how we related to those others. Today, we are horrified at what, just a
few generations ago, was considered acceptable. The time has now come for us to examine our
treatment of animals.
JANUARY DEBATE RESULTS:
Is there intelligent life
elsewhere in the universe?
YES: 86% NO: 14%
Percentage reflects votes
received by January 31, 2009.
Fortunately, no real sacrifice is required to consider animals’ interests. Making kind choices
can mean eating a tasty vegetarian dish instead of one containing part of an abused chicken,
buying shampoo that hasn’t been tested on rabbits’ eyes and keeping warm with clothing made
from natural non-animal fibers or synthetics instead of from fur, leather or wool. For every
cruel choice, there is a compassionate alternative if we just look.
Change is sometimes difficult. But in a country that values justice, we owe it to ourselves
to continue learning and expanding our sphere of respect for others who are not exactly like
us but who still deserve to be protected from exploitation. It’s not about radical change—it’s
about basic human decency. C
from experts in the field:
David Martosko is director of research at the Center for
Consumer Freedom (WWW CONSUMERFREEDOM COM).
THE ANIMAL RIGHTS PHILOSOPHY boils down to one simple
concept: Your life, and the lives of your spouse and children, have no
more moral value than an animal’s. None of us is more special than a
cow, a chicken, a goldfish or a lab rat. So why shouldn’t animals expect
the same rights that you enjoy?
There’s nothing wrong with choosing tofu over chicken. And if you
don’t hunt or fish, it’s nobody’s business but your own. Want to wear vinyl instead of leather?
That’s your choice. But others should have the freedom to make the exact opposite decision.
When we use animals for food, medical research, entertainment or clothing, we should
always treat them well. But the idea of animal rights isn’t about treating a cow with kindness
before you turn it into hamburger. It’s about taking the choice to eat hamburger away.
Groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of
the United States are in favor of animal rights. They argue against any use of animals whatsoever, for any purpose, no matter how responsible or gentle.
Extending human rights to animals would require societal changes on a massive scale. For
starters, a vegetarian diet wouldn’t just be an option. It would be the only option. Since practically every critical medical-research breakthrough in the last century depended (at least in
part) on animal studies, we would have to abandon the hope of ever curing AIDS or cancer.
With hunting and fishing a thing of the past, predatory species would quickly overrun
their ecosystems. Zoos and aquariums, of course, would no longer be around to preserve
endangered species. And seeing-eye dogs everywhere would be released from their bondage.
Visually impaired humans would just have to deal with it.
We should always treat animals according to the highest standards of welfare possible,
but that’s it. Rights, legal and otherwise, belong to humans alone.
Why? Because we’re the only species capable of understanding this debate. Show me an
animal that can comprehend what rights even mean—or the responsibilities that come along
with those rights—and maybe we’ll have something to talk about. C
Opinions expressed are those of the
individuals or organizations represented
and are presented to foster discussion.
Costco and The Costco Connection take
no position on any Debate topic.
MARCH 2009 The Costco Connection 15
