archive-com.com » COM » A » ABOLITIONISTAPPROACH.COM

Total: 223

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • "Eat Like You Care" at Temple University - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    is Vegan If you want it Gary L Francione Board of Governors Distinguished Professor Rutgers University 2014 Gary L Francione Related posts EAT LIKE YOU CARE IN SPANISH Do you Eat Like You Care Announcement of New Series on Animal Ethics by Columbia University Press Eat Like You Care Now in Paperback A New Book Eat Like You Care Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish Dairy Imagine If There Were a Real Animal Rights Movement Challenging Peter Singer s Paternity Claim Business As Usual VegfestUK and the Animal Welfare Industry The Vegan Society Senior Officer of Advocacy

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/eat-like-care-temple-university/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Debating Eating Animals at MoMA - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    moral characterization of their efficiency efforts Industry needs to have its efforts to achieve efficiency resulting in largely minor changes to the institutions of animal exploitation declared humane by those identified as animal advocates But PETA needs industry as PETA uses these efficiency measures to proclaim progress and to fundraise For the most part the campaigns of animal welfare organizations target economically vulnerable industry practices for precisely that reason These practices are low hanging fruit so there is an easy victory for fundraising purposes As I have written in connection with this debate and elsewhere including my academic work and blog essays I regard the actions of groups like PETA to be problematic I think that it is terribly wrong under any circumstance to say that some form of better exploitation should be normatively endorsed when the resulting situation still involves a violation of fundamental rights To say that a slave owner who beats his slaves five times a week is better than one who beats his slaves six times a week does not mean that the former is practicing humane slavery or that the better slavery is morally acceptable or that the better slave owner ought to be declared a Visionary Third the question can be interpreted as asking whether design can ever make it ethical to consume animals This makes the question a purely moral one As I explained in the debate I believe that we have already answered that question as a matter of our conventional wisdom which maintains that we should not impose unnecessary suffering and death on animals Whatever necessity includes it must exclude suffering and death imposed for pleasure and convenience or else the moral norm about unnecessary suffering death is meaningless But what is our justification for imposing suffering and death on 58 billion land animals and an estimated trillion sea animals every year We do not need to eat animals or animal foods for optimal health indeed mainstream health care professionals are increasingly telling us that animal foods are detrimental to human health But animal foods are certainly not necessary in any sense Animal agriculture is without question an ecological nightmare So what s the best justification we have for inflicting suffering and death however humane on all of those sentient subjectively aware beings The answer they taste good we derive palate pleasure from consuming animals And no one would accept such a justification in any other context Think about Michael Vick the football player who conducted a dog fighting operation Everyone objects to what Michael Vick did Why Because he inflicted suffering on animals for no reason other than his pleasure But what is the difference between sitting around the ring watching dogs fight and sitting around a summer barbecue roasting the corpses of animals or drinking milk or eating cheese where under the most humane circumstances animals have suffered and died There is no difference And as any first year law student can tell you it does not matter whether

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/debating-eating-animals-museum-modern-art/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • On "Journeys" - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    not one of the large animal charities promotes veganism as a moral baseline and many explicitly support various sorts of happy exploitation But how any one person or most people went vegan is completely beside the point The point is what position a social movement for animal rights takes Then as slavery abolitionist William Wilberforce 1759 1833 said You may choose to look the other way but you can never say again that you did not know The animal rights position must be that we cannot morally justify animal exploitation and if we agree that animals have moral significance we are committed to veganism There is veganism and there is continuing to participate in exploitation that cannot be morally justified There is no third choice It s not a matter of condemning or criticizing anyone it is a matter of being clear about moral principles and educating in a clear coherent and nonviolent manner others who care about animals but who are not vegan If people who care about animals choose to do less that should be their choice and not what a social movement for nonhuman justice promotes If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan If you want it Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2014 Gary L Francione Related posts Journeys Into Speciesism But it took me 10 years to go vegan So What This Morning s I agree with you but Email The Paradigm Shift Requires Clarity About the Moral Baseline Veganism Do Abolitionists Have a Position on Human Rights You Bet We Do Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/journeys/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Animal Ethics: Abolition, Regulation, or Citizenship? - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    nonhumans in various contexts and explores the various relational duties involved the citizenship approach Speakers will include in alphabetical order Anna E Charlton Adjunct Professor of Law Rutgers School of Law Newark and former Director Rutgers Animal Rights Law Clinic Luis E Chiesa Professor of Law and Director Buffalo Criminal Law Center SUNY Buffalo Sherry F Colb Professor of Law and Charles Evans Hughes Scholar Cornell University Sue Donaldson independent researcher and author co author with Will Kymlicka of Zoopolis A Political Theory of Animal Rights Michael C Dorf Robert S Stevens Professor of Law Cornell University Gary L Francione Board of Governors Professor Distinguished Professor of Law and Nicholas deB Katzenbach Scholar of Law and Philosophy Rutgers School of Law Newark Will Kymlicka Professor and Canada Research Chair in Political Philosophy Queen s University Canada David Nibert Professor of Sociology Wittenberg University Gary Steiner John Howard Harris Professor of Philosophy Bucknell University The Conference will start at 10 am and conclude at 6 pm Admission is free and open to the public but registration is required You can register here as seating capacity will be limited A vegan lunch will be available from the Law School cafeteria The cost of the lunch is approximately 6 00 exclusive of any beverages or other items Related posts Video of Rutgers Conference Animal Ethics Abolition Regulation or Citizenship Upcoming Debate Abolition vs Regulation Commentary 22 A Discussion on Abolition vs Regulation with Robert Garner Debate on Animal Rights with Libertarian Philosopher Tibor Machan Andre Robinson King the Cat and Our Confused Thinking About Animal Ethics Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/animal-ethics-abolition-regulation-citizenship/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • New York Times Debate on Carriage Horses - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    York Times Debate on the Legal Rights of Animals The New York City Bar Association Sets a Low Bar for Balance Animal Care and Control The Sad Failure of New York City s Municipal Shelter System Debate with Professor Michael Marder on Plant Ethics Debate on Animal Rights with Libertarian Philosopher Tibor Machan Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish Dairy Imagine If There Were a Real Animal Rights Movement Challenging Peter Singer s Paternity Claim Business As Usual VegfestUK and the Animal Welfare Industry The Vegan Society Senior Officer of Advocacy and Policy Rejects Veganism as a

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/new-york-times-debate-carriage-horses/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Professor Francione is Interviewed About Abolitionist Animal Rights on "Breaking the Set" - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    30 2013 Abolitionist Animal Rights Abolitionist Veganism in a Nutshell OUR NEW BOOK Animal Rights The Abolitionist Approach The Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights in China Upcoming Abolitionist Approach Podcast on Effective Animal Rights Advocacy A Preview Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish Dairy Imagine If There Were a Real Animal Rights Movement Challenging Peter Singer s Paternity Claim Business As Usual VegfestUK and the Animal Welfare Industry The Vegan Society Senior Officer of Advocacy and Policy Rejects Veganism as a Moral Baseline Animal Kill Counter Number of animals killed in the world by the meat dairy

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/professor-francione-interviewed-abolitionist-animal-rights-breaking-set/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Professor Francione Delivers Keynote Speech at the 2013 DePaul University College of Law Event, “Animals as Food: The Legal Treatment of Animals in Contemporary Agribusiness and Factory Farming”/October 30, 2013 - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    on Factory Farming New York Times Debate on the Legal Rights of Animals IndyMediaLive Tuesday October 5 Book Event on Saturday February 5 Eat Like You Care at Temple University Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish Dairy Imagine If There Were a Real Animal Rights Movement Challenging Peter Singer s Paternity Claim Business As Usual VegfestUK and the Animal Welfare Industry The Vegan Society Senior Officer of Advocacy and Policy Rejects Veganism as a Moral Baseline Animal Kill Counter Number of animals killed in the world by the meat dairy and egg industries since you opened this

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/professor-francione-delivers-keynote-speech-2013-depaul-university-college-law-event-animals-food-legal-treatment-animals-contemporary-agribusiness-factory-farmin/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Abolitionist Animal Rights/Abolitionist Veganism: in a Nutshell - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    campaigns for animal welfare reform that supposedly improve the treatment of animals who are exploited As a theoretical matter if animal exploitation cannot be justified morally then we should not be promoting campaigns to supposedly make such exploitation more humane As a practical matter animal welfare reform does not work largely as a consequence of the status of animals as chattel property It costs money to protect animal interests and we generally only protect animal interests when there is a resulting benefit which is almost always economic The property status of animals has the effect of limiting in a structural way the benefits that may be provided to animals and most reforms do little more than modify practices in ways that may for example increase housing costs but lower veterinary costs and have the overall effect of improving production efficiency for institutional users Even in situations in which production costs are increased this increase rarely exceeds the elasticities of demand so the market for animal products is not adversely affected Welfare reform therefore does nothing to eradicate the property status of animals Moreover animal welfare measures make the public feel better about animal exploitation and this encourages continued animal use The abolitionist approach to animal rights in addition to rejecting animal welfare reform campaigns rejects single issue campaigns that seek to prohibit particular animal uses rather than to reform treatment standards For example abolitionists do not promote campaigns against fur or foie gras Such campaigns convey the idea that certain forms of exploitation are worse than other forms and in a culture in which animal use is morally acceptable as a general matter that which is not targeted is necessarily seen as morally more acceptable So fur is seen as bad leather and wool are seen as the more morally acceptable alternatives Foie gras is seen as bad other animal foods are seen as morally better and acceptable Moreover as long as people think that eating animal foods is morally acceptable they will generally fail to reject particular animal uses There have been single issue campaigns against fur and various foods foie gras veal etc for decades now and these items are still in high demand III Third the abolitionist approach regards veganism as the moral baseline and maintains that we cannot draw a morally coherent distinction between flesh and other animal products such as dairy or eggs or between animal foods and the use of animals for clothing or other products If animals matter morally at all we cannot justify eating wearing or using them If individuals regard themselves as abolitionists they cannot consume any animal products anymore than an abolitionist with respect to human chattel slavery could own slaves The abolitionist approach sees veganism as the only rational response to the idea that animals have moral value That is if animals have moral value and are not things that exist exclusively as resources for humans as means to human ends then we cannot justify eating wearing or using

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/abolitionist-animal-rights-abolitionist-veganism-in-a-nutshell/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive