Animal Cruelty

Animal Cruelty

There is a question with which this research started: "What is a difference between animal cruelty and being carnivore? This issue has been discussed, analyzed, and interpreted from two different points of views: the people who blindly defend the animal rights, versus those who affirm there is difference between the animals intended for human consumption and the animals they pamper in their homes, and they do not consider that being a carnivore makes them animal abusers. Nevertheless, the controversy over this matter goes beyond than a juicy steak and deeper than a bowl of vegetables.

Indisputably, there is an innate feeling in the human beings that, on having observed an animal make us, instinctively, have compassion feelings towards them, and frequently these sentiments engender a feeling to protect them instead of killing the animals to eat them. Because of this perception many people have decided to become vegetarians; however, for many others this is a misconception, or an unreal idea, because although humans do not have the instinct to kill, like the carnivorous animals have, we have inherited from our ancestors the habit of eat animal meat, by hunting them to be consumed as an important part of their nourishing.

In their seminal 1985 hit song, "Meat is Murder" the British band the Smiths elucidated their vegetarian anthem with the following lyrics:

Heifer whines could be human cries

Closer comes the screaming knife

This beautiful creature must die

This beautiful creature must die

A death for no reason

And death for no reason is MURDER

And the flesh you so fancifully fry

Is not succulent, tasty or kind

It's death for no reason

And death for no reason is MURDER

And the calf that you carve with a smile

Is MURDER

And the turkey you festively slice

Is MURDER

Do you know how animals die?

Kitchen aromas aren't very homely

It's not "comforting", cheery or kind

Its sizzling blood and the unholy stench

Of MURDER

The song, "Meat is Murder" was written by Steven Patrick Morrissey (stage name: Morrissey), who is the ex-lead singer for the band, The Smiths. He is famously known as an unabashed, card-carrying member of PETA, and on several occasions he has made controversial statements regarding animal rights. The most recent of which has been when Stephen Colbert interviewed Morrissey on his late night show, "The Colbert Report."

Morrissey made an amazing condition for his appearance on The Colbert Report; he requested all the staff to go vegan for the day. After stating the demand, Colbert's interview was typical; Morrissey, who is not known for being comfortable speaking publicly, squirmed in response to Colbert's repeated shenanigans and prodding. Morrissey ended the interview by responding, "If you stick your grandmother in an oven, she will probably be tasty, but is that any reason to eat your grandmother?"

There are not elements of comparison in this argument, although for the animal rights activists could be easily accepted as valid, with the sole purpose of establishing the idea that eating animal meat may be compared with cannibalism. However, nothing can be further from the truth; humanity has found its nourishment in the meat from animals since its beginnings, and never, with the exception of cannibals' tribes, human beings have been considered a food source.

I am using this song as an example because the sentiments reflected in its lyrics are highly consistent with the animal rights activist groups' beliefs, clearly indicating the points on which their demands and concerns are based, being also consciously focused to touch deeply the listener's feelings, trying to earn his/her empathy towards the animal sufferings. However, from the point of view of those who enjoy a good piece of meat these demands may be erroneous, or at best, mostly exaggerated.

The arguments exposed by vegetarians versus the omnivores arguments, can be seen from many different platforms, from the ethical question of whether we should satisfy our feeding needs through the sacrifice of other animals lives, against the argument that humans need vitamins that are only found in animal flesh. Moreover, there are studies that say humans evolved to what we are now, due to their change to an omnivore diet. (Doctissimo, 2010) However, certainly, the only argument for or against either diet should only be made upon each individual biochemistry and on the preferences and values of each person. (Disabled World News 2009)

Nonetheless, and above all the irreconcilable principles these two groups could have, there is a situation in which both groups have agreed, and it is exactly where I am centering my thesis, and without taking any party, I am concentrating in the unnecessary animal abuse, because is there where the real problem lies. Animals are being mistreated; this is a fact, becoming an undeniable right the imposition of a fair code of ethics and respect, which advocates for better life conditions for them. Is my understanding, that this point, on which both groups have converged, what can make a difference and turn into the solution to most of the problems by which the animal's rights activists are so concerned.

In analyzing PETA's name, formed through the words: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, it called my attention that it does not mention anything related to the consumption of animal meat for human nourishing, its intention focuses in four primary areas in which its members believe animals are mistreated: industrial production in farms, laboratories, the manufacture of clothes and the use of animals as entertainment.

These are the same concerns that meat consumers are having nowadays; certainly some of them just check the labels on the meat they buy to verify the price or the packaging date. However, there are many consumers today who want to know if the animals they consume have been treated with antibiotics and hormones, and they undoubtedly would be interested and will question, not only on the quality and origin of the meat, but the conditions