Animal Liberation Theology
PETA's new "Animal Liberation Project" begins with the assertion, "We are all animals." PETA doesn't mean this statement to reflect a biological truth, but rather, to create a moral equivalency between animals and humans. Animal rights/liberation ideology is dangerous in my view, precisely because it denies human exceptionalism, a philosophical belief that not only gives humans special rights, but also unique responsibilities. I expound on this more deeply in this piece published today on National Review Online.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 9:28 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
Thank you for this important article.
Like most moral relativists, the animal liberationists appear to be selective relativists. That they attempt to persuade others that it is right to accept their outrageous analogies of fast food to the Holocaust shows that they understand that human beings are unique in their moral agency. And yet they persist with equating humans with non-human animals.
In the end, I think your diagnosis is correct: the radical animal rights movement is DEEPLY misanthropic.
Animal liberationists primarily aim their advocacy at the young. The young have been raised in a "whatever" culture of relativism. Plus, they have been taught to "feel" rather than think. Hence, the hyper-emotionalism of the liberationist advocacy. Finally, it offers a true belief system of absolutes, which can be appealing to those raised to believe in nothing much at all.
It is not propaganda to criticize an ideology that explicitly calls for human/animal equality. Nor to criticize creating moral equivalencies between the worst actions taken by humans against each other and normal animal husbandry.
I support the principle of human exceptionalism, for among many reasons, I deem it necessary to maintaining societal decency and universal human rights. Animal liberationists, unlike animal welfarists, are frontally attacking human exceptionalism. There is no doubting this fact.
It is perfectly valid, indeed, it is important, for animal welfarists to point us towards ever-improving methods of using animals more humanely. This becomes a question of case-by-case reasoning and debate, that should also include the extent of human benefit in the equation.
But animal liberation, while sometimes hiding behind animal welfare actions, seeks to erradicate all use of animals by humans, to great human detriment. And it seeks to destroy human exceptionalism, which would be even worse.
PETA is the largest animal liberationist organization in the world, with the biggest budget, and an international reach. They are hardly irrelevant.
They are not the entire world of animal liberation, it is true. I have respect for Gary Francione, for example, whom I have debated on television. But I completely disagree with his philosophy that would even prevent seeing eye dogs and would result in no domesticated animals of any kind.
It is the animal liberation philosophy, not just PETA, which seeks to destroy the belief in human exceptionalism. As such, I believe the movement must be resisted at all turns, while certainly acquiescing in animal welfare improvements on a case-by-case basis.
Thanks for your input to this blog, arkvelo.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home