Planet Debate 2011 September/October l-d release Animal Rights
Should Reject Property Status of Animals
Download 1.43 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Respect for Animal Rights Challenges Biopower
Should Reject Property Status of AnimalsINCREMENTAL EXTENSION OF ANIMAL RIGHTS MOST FEASIBLE AND PRACTICAL Gary Francione, Professor of Law, Rutgers University, 1996, Animal Rights: the changing debate, ed. Robert Garner, p. 52-3 There are two ways (at least) of looking at all of this. First, Regan’s theory may, indeed, be viewed as entailing an all or nothing proposition in that it requires that we relinquish completely all property rights in animals, and that we cease immediately all forms of exploitation that are based on the instrumental status of animals as property. Regan unequivocally endorses this “abolitionist” position, which, of course, makes perfect sense in light of his view that our treatment of animals and our treatment, say, of slaves, are based on the same underlying notion that it is morally permissible to treat certain sentient beings in a completely instrumental manner that regards any interest of the being as subject to sacrifice upon a finding that the aggregation of consequences favors that sacrifice. If this is the only possible interpretation of the rights view, then, although it may present a sound moral theory that ought to be adopted immediately, the realistic possibilities for such a situation occurring, especially in light of the increasingly reactionary political and legal systems, are slight to none. But that does not mean that there is no alternative other than animal welfare, which does not work anyway and is no real alternative. The concept of animal rights, I will argue, allows for a third choice: the incremental achievement of animals rights through the use of deontological norms that prohibit rather than regulate certain conduct, that recognize that animals have certain interests that are not subject to being sacrificed, and that do not prescribe alternative, supposedly more “humane” forms of exploitations as substitutes for the original conduct.
Gary Francione, Professor of Law, Rutgers University, 1996, Animal Rights: the changing debate, ed. Robert Garner, p. 59 I have also argued that the theory of animal rights does, indeed, provide a viable theoretical and political alternative to animal welfare. Although the complete abolition of all animal exploitation is – at least in my view—morally required, that state of affairs is not realistic at the present time. Incremental abolition is realistic and achievable through prohibitions that recognize that animals have non-tradable interests and where those prohibitions do not substitute alternative forms of exploitation.
David Nibert, Professor of sociology, Wittenburg University, 2002, Animal Rights/Human Rights: entanglement of oppression and liberation, p. 251-2 It is more likely that the social structural transformation necessary to bring an end to the oppression of humans and other animals will occur—if it comes at all—more gradually. Efforts for the end of oppression of other animals therefore should be what Gary Francione calls “incremental abolitionist”—which he defines as measures of ‘change achievable through prohibitions that recognize that animals have non-tradable interest and where those prohibitions do not substitute alternative forms of exploitation.” Francione’s strategy for liberation is very similar to that of French sociologist Andre Gorz, who called for the necessity of “nonreformist reforms” in order to bring about significant structural changes in capitalist society.
Steven M. Wise, Animal rights attorney and professor Vermont Law School, 2002, Drawing the Line: science and the case for animal rights, p. 22 Shifts occur only after people come to believe that something is possible. This book argues that at least some nonhuman animals should have basic legal rights. At its core is the supporting scientific evidence, much of which is currently known only to a cadre of experts in scientific subdisciplines. Making the argument is the first step toward informing policymakers, judges, and the public about what is known, and, therefore, attaining the goal. Respect for Animal Rights Challenges BiopowerBELIEFS AND VALUES REQUIRED TO LEGITIMIZE SYSTEMIC ABUSE OF ANIMALS SHAPES INDIVIDUAL ACTIONS TOWARD ANIMALS—GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZATION EXERTS HEGEMONY OVER SOCIETY David Nibert, Professor of sociology, Wittenburg University, 2002, Animal Rights/Human Rights: entanglement of oppression and liberation, p. 204-5 Such circumstances underlie the attack by the boys on bicycles on Willow Grear, the woman with a vision disability, and Cassidy, the dog. A dog, a woman, a human with a disability, and a human with limited monetary resources, all combined in the forms of Cassidy and Willow Grear, can be an irresistible target for a group of adolescent boys in the United States. Most would not commit or condone their cruelty. But the prevailing beliefs and values required to legitimize widespread institutionalized oppression, such as that practiced by agribusiness and the pharmaceutical and chemical industries, shape the reality and cultivate the general personality types of human members of society. In an often predatory system, in which the prevailing ideology glorifies wealth and power, more humans will be inclined to accept or tolerate, if not practice, violence against those “others” who are perceived as poor, weak, or powerless. The widespread acceptance of the general concept of the hierarchy of worth of living beings both rationalizes oppressive acts and arrangements and thoroughly entangles the various beliefs that arise from a hierarchical worldview. Only the rejection of the entire notion of such hierarchy can remove the ideological support for oppression of any group and begin to make all groups secure. The indoctrination of the masses of humans is achieved mainly through their daily experiences in a stratified and hegemonically controlled society. (Hegemony, as used here, refers to the process in which a relatively small number of powerful humans and corporations exert an enormous influence over cultural beliefs, values, practices, and institutionalized arrangements.) As the early twentieth-century critical theorist Antonio Gramsci observed, humans develop what seems to be ‘common sense” through their daily experiences. After one is taught successfully that a “natural hierarchy” exists in the world, one’s worldly task is perhaps not so much to make it to the top of the social order as it is to distance one’s self from the bottom—for those at the bottom suffer derision, deprivation and violence. This socially created hierarchy is deeply rooted in the social fabric and is embedded in individual consciousness, so much so that, for many, challenges to the existence of oppression appear “stupid.” RIGHTS DISCOURSE PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE EXISTING POWER RELATIONS Helena Silverstein, Professor, Lafayette College of Government and law, 1996, Unleashing Rights: law, meaning and the animal rights movement, p. 224 In sum, scholars pointing to indeterminacy persuasively suggest that rights language and judicial decisions provide no determinate outcome. They also provide insight in their observation that the ability to manipulate legal languages generally benefits the powerful. However, the animal rights movement indicates that we must also recognize the second face of indeterminacy. Rights talk provides the opportunity to reconstruct legal meaning and, in so doing, to challenge the existing relations of power and the traditional foundations and uses of rights.
Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.43 Mb. Share with your friends:
|