by Douglas Black

Created on: January 28, 2009   Last Updated: February 06, 2009

Over the centuries animals have played a very important role in human evolution, providing sustenance, companionship, and even transportation to name just a few. Many cultures relied on animals in order to survive, while others chose to worship them, believing that they somehow possessed spiritual powers from beyond. Even now with the advent of machines, animals still have a place in our hearts and homes, which is why there is a need for ethics in regards to the treatment of animals. What now has to be considered is; where to the draw the line, and who determines what is ethical behavior? Sure, we have several laws that protect the welfare of animals, preventing them from being subjected to practices that are deemed cruel and inhumane. There are even organizations that have dedicated themselves to ensuring animals are given fair and ethical treatment.

Unfortunately this is not always as simple as one would think. The problem is; there is always a debate over who is right, and what is considered ethical or not. On one hand we have the extremists who believe animals deserve to be treated equally, purporting that they shouldn't be considered possessions, meaning they are equals among humans. On the other side; animals are viewed as objects that were left here to serve man in just about anyway they seen fit. Animal fighting, mass production, and unethical mass slaughter is pretty much acceptable behavior.

Personally I think all life serves a purpose, and regardless of how basic our role is; we still deserve the right to serve it without being subjected to suffering or cruelty. This is where the government steps in and says it's
alright to use animals for food, clothing entertainment or in the name of science; so long as it doesn't breach ethical and fair treatment. Meaning animals still have a function in our society, but are at least given the respect for the sacrifice they endure. Now this brings us back to the "E"-word, which employs the foundation of principle and morality, adhering to the conduct that an individual displays. Welfare implies that we need to be fair, and that our concern is for the well being of all non-humans alike. Does that mean the act of eating an animal is unfair to the animal's welfare. According to our current structure it is OK, so long as the animal is not subjected to unfair or cruel treatment during the process.

I would like to consider myself an advocate that has strong ethics towards the welfare of all animals, and I can't think of

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>