Exploring Animal Rights as an Imperative for Human Welfare

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

West Virginia Law Review

Abstract

This Article explores why these two seemingly persuasive arguments in support of animal rights have not produced dramatic changes in the legal rules regarding exploitation of animals as a source of food, clothing, research, entertainment, and income, among other things. It shows that these claims reflect a highbrow approach that is detached from the realities of societal ordering, and cultural reality in the United States and around the world. In Part II of this Article, I describe the historical and continuing subjugation of animals by humans and the evolution of legal protection to curb or end such abuse. This Part notes that animal rights activists vary both in philosophy and strategy, and describes the theories and practices intended to effect legal change.

Part III looks at the abolition of black slavery as a legal anchor for animal rights. Specifically, it explores the claim that the assignment of property status to animals is the ultimate barrier to proper treatment and an end to human exploitation. This Part notes the strong similarities between black slavery and ongoing animal exploitation and the many similarities between animal-rights and civil-rights activism. This Part also shows that despite the strong similarities, consensus to change the property classification does not seem imminent. It concludes by suggesting that the emphasis on the property label is misplaced. And using the evolution of the law of employment discrimination as an example, it shows that animal exploitation will likely continue even with the elimination of the property label.

Part TV evaluates the claim that animal abuse and human abuse are linked. This Part looks at the sources of this claim and their many limitations and contradictions. Specifically, the predictive value of studies and anecdotal evidence linking animal cruelty to interpersonal violence is considered. Further, it considers the indictment that animal rights advocates are themselves cruel
because of their indifference to human suffering, demonstrated for example, by their support for abortion rights. It also looks at other examples of insensitivity to human suffering by individuals who exhibit strong affection for animals and shows the obstacle this presents for animal activism.

The last Part of this Article addresses animal exploitation as a universal cultural norm that academic theories are incapable of greatly influencing.This Article explores why these two seemingly persuasive arguments in support of animal rights have not produced dramatic changes in the legal rules regarding exploitation of animals as a source of food, clothing, research, entertainment, and income, among other things. It shows that these claims reflect a highbrow approach that is detached from the realities of societal ordering, and cultural reality in the United States and around the world. In Part II of this Article, I describe the historical and continuing subjugation of animals by humans and the evolution of legal protection to curb or end such abuse. This Part notes that animal rights activists vary both in philosophy and strategy, and describes the theories and practices intended to effect legal change.

Part III looks at the abolition of black slavery as a legal anchor for animal rights. Specifically, it explores the claim that the assignment of property status to animals is the ultimate barrier to proper treatment and an end to human exploitation. This Part notes the strong similarities between black slavery and ongoing animal exploitation and the many similarities between animal-rights and civil-rights activism. This Part also shows that despite the strong similarities, consensus to change the property classification does not seem imminent. It concludes by suggesting that the emphasis on the property label is misplaced. And using the evolution of the law of employment discrimination as an example, it shows that animal exploitation will likely continue even with the elimination of the property label.

Part TV evaluates the claim that animal abuse and human abuse are linked. This Part looks at the sources of this claim and their many limitations and contradictions. Specifically, the predictive value of studies and anecdotal evidence linking animal cruelty to interpersonal violence is considered. Further, it considers the indictment that animal rights advocates are themselves cruel
because of their indifference to human suffering, demonstrated for example, by their support for abortion rights. It also looks at other examples of insensitivity to human suffering by individuals who exhibit strong affection for animals and shows the obstacle this presents for animal activism.

The last Part of this Article addresses animal exploitation as a universal cultural norm that academic theories are incapable of greatly influencing.

First Page

403

Last Page

430

Publication Date

2010

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS