Speciesism

A short video explaining what speciesism is, and why it's a bad thing. Many people criticise the term because it sounds like racism and sexism, but how it is disrespectful because it involves animals. Well, we should remember some people used to think it disrespectful to call black slaves the same as whites.
At the end of the day, we are all creatures, and if we can tell the difference between right or wrong, it shouldn't matter what species the recipient is.

The soundtrack is Slide by The Goo Goo Dolls.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Speciesism
• voltaire
• goo
• dolls
• animal
• rights
• abuse
• slavery
• racism
• vegan
• vegetarian
• meat
• dairy
• leather
• activism

[TheAmazingImbecile]

I think we ought to look towards the animal kingdom itself in order to properly shape our views on speciesism- animals are speciesists themselves, but they do not exploit, overuse, or torture (usually) members of other species, although carnivores still eat meat from other species. I think that eating meat, based on the way that the natural world functions, is not in and of itself wrong- but that it is wrong to treat animals poorly while they are still alive.

[xAnimalxRightsx]

@TheAmazingImbecile Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I see your point, but I think we need to be careful when taking the animal kingdom as our model - we are of course humans beings, and the only species capable of moral thought and consideration - as a result we can eliminate as much needless suffering or death as we can. We're clever enough to know we can eat vegan diets, and we and other animals can thrive because of this - as a result, I think we're obligated to do it.

[deanmullen10]

Great video, so very true, but I am confident that a brighter future will come as society is continuing to evolve so it would make sense that Speciesism, alike racism & sexism will fall too.

[pleasestopblockingme]

lets kill all the predators on earth so that those poor prey animals can't feel the pain of being eaten...

[xAnimalxRightsx]

You do make a good point about animals with no brains etc though. I'm no biologist, but I do know that science draws the distinction between animals and plants for it's own categorisations. Morally the categorisations are different-conscious life is all that is deserving of rights.

So though it may be called animal rights,as most animals are consious and so deserving of rights just like humans,I have no doubts that there are some lesser developed 'animals' which aren't consious.

[xAnimalxRightsx]

Again, you are trying to twist the argument by using two definitions. There are degrees of 'life', but not 'conscious life' (which is the important thing obv, as we don't give rights to dead humans) - you are either consiously alive, or you aren't. In this sense white consciousness is no different to black, child is no different to adult, and animal is no different to human. And this is the only relevant factor in the right to live - anything else draws upon unfair bias.

[thegillotine09]

Actually as you stated in the previous comment, there are degrees of life. You draw a line at who gets "the right to live" at animal consciousness, I draw mine at human consciousness.

What about animals with less ability to "consciously experience life"? Let's go with lobsters. They have no brain and are unable to feel pain. Their lives are a series of sensations with no memory or thought.

I added Lewis as an afterthought because I'm reading a Greif observed. Herriot is my main influence.

[xAnimalxRightsx]

PS. i didn't mean to sound so nasty about CS Lewis, I'm sure his literature has great value - I just get a bit weary of people bringing in 'authority figures' as reasons for things being right!

Personally I have never heard of any great mind in history who I didn't disagree with about at least one thing, so i don't see the value in appealing to them as justification for a position. Of course this doesn't mean he didn't have decent ideas etc.

[xAnimalxRightsx]

Secondly, I have never said children=animals, you've made that up to make me sound 'stereotypical' and so make it easier for you to reject logic.

I have said they are the same as animals in the right to live, which is a fact. Both children and animals consciously experience life (there are no degrees of this, you are alive or dead), as do adult human beings, and so in the right to life they should all be equal. Only bringing in discriminate factors (physicality. intelligence) would change this.

[xAnimalxRightsx]

I couldn't care less about CS Lewis! there is a fairly big reason why his name doesn't appear in the animal rights debate on either side - mainly that his arguments aren't logical one's. he may state random points that he believes, or that sound nice and rounded in literature - but he never approached the issues at the heart of the subject.