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".
  • A Facebook Exchange About Religion and Animals - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    the problems of the world are caused by religion rather than the geopolitical and economic factors that are really at work In other words they want you to think that the problems of the Middle East for example are related to Islam rather than to oil and western imperialism These New Atheists seek to provide a scientific basis for the New World Order If you regard yourself as a politically progressive person think twice about whether you want to identify yourself with these reactionary thinkers Please note I am not saying that atheism is wrong because Dawkins Harris and Hitchens are political reactionaries I am saying only that people who are interested in critical rational and progressive thought should take care before jumping on the New Atheist bandwagon Sixth I reiterate the arguments for animal rights that I have developed over the past 30 years which are very different from the positions developed by Peter Singer and Tom Regan rest on logic and rationality Period Anyone who claims differently either does not know my work or is deliberately misrepresenting it My work speaks for itself logic and rationality are absolutely essential But logic and rationality cannot provide the entire picture In order for people to translate the logic and rationality of the abolitionist position into meaningful change in their own lives going vegan and advocating for others to effect changes in their lives it is necessary that people must regard animals as having moral value They must have a moral impulse concerning animals They must see animals or at least some animals as members of the moral community This is not necessarily a matter of liking or loving animals it is a matter of regarding them as members of the moral community It is a matter of having the motivation to act rightly where it comes to animals If people have this moral concern or moral impulse concerning at least some animals and the good news is that many people do I believe the logical approach that I have developed can lead them to see that all sentient beings are members of the moral community and that we should abolish and not regulate animal exploitation If people reject the notion that animals are members of the moral community then logic and rationality are not going to get very far Let me put it this way if you think that what Michael Vick s brutal dog fighting was a bad thing I can through logical rational argument get you to see that any non vegan is similarly situated to Michael Vick If you think that Vick s dog fighting was a terrific and wonderful thing I won t get very far with you That moral impulse that must be present to work with logic and rational argument can come from any source it can come from theistic sources e g one s belief in an all encompassing Christan love spiritual sources e g one s belief in a Buddhist view about

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/a-facebook-exchange-religion-animals/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Debate with Professor Michael Marder on Plant Ethics - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    do The World is Vegan If you want it Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Upcoming Debate Abolition vs Regulation Debate on Animal Rights with Libertarian Philosopher Tibor Machan Commentary 21 The Animal Rights Debate the Abolitionist Approach Discussion Forum and a Response to Nicolette Hahn Niman Debate The Use of Nonhuman Animals in Biomedical Research A Moral Justification My Debate 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

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/debate-with-professor-michael-marder-on-plant-ethics/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Upcoming Abolitionist Approach Podcast on Effective Animal Rights Advocacy: A Preview - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    as animal advocates is to help people to see the implications of their moral concern about animals it is irrelevant why people have that moral concern What is relevant is that they have moral concern That s what we need to identify and that s what serves as the predicate or base of our using logic and rationality to demonstrate that veganism is the only coherent response to a felt recognition that animals matter morally So when someone says I think that what Michael Vick did to those dogs was morally outrageous because it s wrong to make animals suffer for no reason the response is not to ask Why do you think that and then proceed to argue with the person because you disagree with the source of that person s moral concern For example if someone says I think that what Michael Vick did to those dogs was morally outrageous because it s wrong to make animals suffer for no reason your job is to get her to see that her moral concern requires that she stop consuming or using animals altogether and to encourage others to do otherwise You do a disservice to animals if in that situation you say And why do you think that and she replies Because I am a Buddhist and see the interconnectedness of all life and you proceed to tell her that she is an idiot or that she is irrational for believing in Buddhism because you are an atheist and scientist and don t believe in Buddhism Similarly if the basis of your moral concern for animals is your Buddhism your job is not to convince someone else whose source of moral concern may be completely different such as her reading the poetry of Byron an atheist or at least a tormented one or her having a relationship with her dog to become a Buddhist What matters is the two of you share a moral concern Why you do is irrelevant All that is relevant is that you do If a person says that the source of her moral concern for animals is that she grew up on a farm that had animals and although her family exploited animals one day the penny dropped and she recognized that she had kinship with nonhuman animals but she is unsure about what to do as a matter of practical action our job is to discuss with her how her sense of kinship should lead to veganism and support for the abolition of exploitation Our job is not to criticize her because her sense of kinship with nonhumans developed in a situation that we regard as morally objectionable I talk a great deal about nonviolence as a source of moral concern about issues involving humans and nonhumans I think it fair to say that many people share with me a belief in nonviolence as an important and foundational moral value irrespective of whether they see it as connected with a particular religious or

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/upcoming-abolitionist-approach-podcast-on-effective-animal-rights-advocacy-a-preview/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Violent Imagery in Animal Advocacy - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    that depict factory farms or the abuses of factory farms Many people who see such films come away with a very clear welfarist message that the solution is happy labels family farms CCTV and just about everything except veganism We all know such people And that s the risk Indeed when we first started this website there were gory pictures on the banner One of the reasons that I removed those pictures was that some people commented that animal advocates needed to focus on welfare reforms to improve animal treatment That missed the whole point of the site In addition I think that there is a significant difference between visiting a slaughterhouse and seeing a movie of one The latter will be gory but part of the horror of a slaughterhouse is the eye contact you make with particular animals whom you will never forget If that sort of experience does not awaken any predisposition you have to experience moral concern for or kinship with nonhuman animals I am not sure what would So I think that we must be careful in using these materials in advocacy I am not absolutely opposed to them they may facilitate someone who is struggling with these issues to develop the moral concern that makes her receptive to the rational arguments in favor of veganism and abolition And they may be useful in persuading someone who is already concerned and already has a moral impulse to go in the abolitionist direction But in the latter case they may also push that person in favor of focusing on treatment and not use and then we shift to happy meat and welfare reform I stated in the essay on moral concern As a general matter I am not saying that we should use the source of our moral concern to argue for animal rights That would make no sense If the source of someone s moral concern for animals is that she read Black Beauty as a child I am not saying that we should promote reading Black Beauty as a means of advocating animal rights Indeed there are plenty of people who read Black Beauty as children and who did not become vegans But that book or any number of countless other books experiences etc may have triggered the moral impulse in someone that makes her receptive to rational arguments we can make as abolitionists to get her to see all sentient beings as members of the moral community and veganism as the only coherent response given her moral concern But if she has no moral concern in the first place she will not be receptive to those arguments Someone may have developed her sense of moral concern working on a farm intensive or not but we would not advocate that people work in such places to persuade them to become vegans That would not only be impractical but it is not clear that it would be nearly as effective as logical arguments made to

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/violent-imagery-in-animal-advocacy/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Moral Concern, Moral Impulse, and Logical Argument in Animal Rights Advocacy - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    But if we do not accept that animals belong in the moral community in the first place or if we don t care about acting morally the notion of animals having equal inherent value is not going to be of much use We all reject human slavery because we recognize that it places those who are enslaved outside the moral community entirely it reduces them to things Given that we accept as a matter of moral intuition that all humans should be included in the moral community that they should be regarded as moral persons and not things then whatever else this requires it requires that we abolish slavery Similarly if we see animals as having moral value then whatever else that requires it requires that we abolish their status as property as things and that we treat them as moral persons And this requires that we stop consuming them Period But if we do not see any animals as having moral value and that is a matter that cannot be proved in some objective or scientific way then logical arguments about what animals should be regarded as moral persons and what moral personhood requires will be meaningless What is the Source of Moral Concern What if someone does not accept the first premise What if someone simply does not see any animals as members of the moral community Can we prove that they are wrong Of course not Changing moral behavior requires some affective component In order to be open to logical analysis of the animal issue you have to see animals as members of the moral community and have to want to act on that insight That is not a matter of logic and rationality You have to feel that what Simon the Sadist is doing to the dogs is bad that what Michael Vick did to his dogs was bad A similar way of thinking about moral concern is offered by Professor Gary Steiner who discusses the concept of kinship with nonhumans in his book Animals and the Moral Community Mental Life Moral Status and Kinship Steiner argues that we need some concept of kinship or felt connection between human and nonhumans as a prelude to serious thinking about animal ethics I agree with Steiner in that I think that most of us have a predisposition to a sense of kinship with animals It needs merely to be awakened we need to become aware of it This awareness enables us to see the truth of the first premise This awareness can be triggered by many things alone or in combination with others It can come from our relationship with a companion animal It can come from a perception about the interconnectedness of life or of some norm such as the golden rule This may have a spiritual or non spiritual dimension It can come from embracing the principle of nonviolence as a fundamental moral truth Again this may have a spiritual or non spiritual dimension It can come from a religious perspective such as the one that Francis of Assisi had It can come from visiting a slaughterhouse It can come from reading literature or poetry It can come from some aesthetic experience In short there are many occasions for becoming aware of our moral concern But whether we call it moral concern or a sense of kinship it is imperative to understand that this must include a moral impulse to want to follow through and to act in ways that recognize and respect the moral value of animals or that actualizes our kinship with them Once we have moral concern or sense of kinship that includes the moral impulse and want to do the right thing by animals then it makes sense to talk about using logic and rationality to argue to particular conclusions about the scope of the class of nonhuman persons in my view all sentient beings and what their status as moral beings requires of us in my view the abolition of all animal use Until we have this moral concern and the impulse to want to act in a way that recognizes the moral status of animals logic and rationality will fall on deaf ears Abolitionist Advocacy If someone accepts the first premise and please remember that in this essay I am only talking about one of the many arguments I make in my work then we can argue logically and rationally that they should stop eating wearing or otherwise consuming all animal products and should go vegan They should support the abolition and not the regulation of animal exploitation But when we engage in this sort of educational activity we are generally not using logic and rational argument to try to convince someone of the truth of the first premise we are using logic and rational argument to get the person to see that her moral concern about animals properly understood requires that she come to certain conclusions veganism and abolition rather than to other conclusions compassionate consumption happy animal products welfare regulation drawing lines between meat and dairy or between fish and cows etc Is it possible for someone to say I care about animals and I agree with your logical analysis but I like animal products so much that I am not going to stop eating them Sure it is But that sort of situation is generally not one that involves a failure of logic or rational analysis Rather the person making such a statement most likely does not really regard animals as having moral significance irrespective of what she says There is a lack of moral concern For example there are people who fetishize dogs or cats They do not really think of these animals as members of the moral community Rather they have some aesthetic or other possibly obsessional reaction to them that is really no different from the sort of reactions that people may have to cars or clothing or other things We have all encountered

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/moral-concern-moral-impulse-and-logical-argument-in-animal-rights-advocacy/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Garbage as Property - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    to do The World is Vegan If you want it Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Animals as Property and the Rape Analogy A Postscript Short Videos on Animal Rights Rights vs Welfare Animals as Property Animals Today on Sunday July 8 Debate with Professor Michael Marder on Plant Ethics Got Practical Vegan Information You Do Now 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

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

  • Some Thoughts for Mother's Day 2012 - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    advertise with pictures of happy cows In reality organic only means that the cows are fed organic food and are not given antibiotics and growth hormones but they are still under the very best of circumstances tortured And all of those mothers whether on a conventional or organic farm end up in the same hideous slaughterhouse There is no such thing as happy milk or happy animal products of any type Today think about the suffering and death you support just because you like the taste of dairy cheese butter yogurt ice cream etc Think of what that means for cows the gentle mothers whom we exploit Ask yourself if it s worth it If your heart says no go vegan Being vegan is a matter of nonviolence Being vegan is your statement that you reject violence to other sentient beings to yourself and to the environment on which all sentient beings depend The World is Vegan If you want it Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Some Thoughts on the Meaning of Vegan Nicholas Kristof Please Wince Please Some Further Thoughts on Michael Vick Some Thoughts on the Abolitionist Approach Veganism PETA Farm Sanctuary Peter Singer Personal Purity and Principles of Justice 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

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/some-thoughts-for-mothers-day-2012/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Truthout.org: Thinking About Mitt Romney and Seamus, Michael Vick and Dog Fighting, and Eating Animals - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    want it Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Commentary 3 On Michael Vick More on Michael Vick Andre Robinson and Animal Abusers A Note About Michael Vick The Santería Case Michael Vick Part 2 Some Further Thoughts on Michael Vick 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

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/truthout-org-thinking-about-mitt-romney-and-seamus-michael-vick-and-dog-fighting-and-eating-animals/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive



  •