Book Description
The third edition of the premier book on animal law covers a rapidly developing field that is exponentially increasing its presence in both the public eye and on the list of desired classes for law students. In the past ten years, the number of animal law classes in American law schools has gone from less than ten to more than sixty, and this casebook has been used as a model for courses internationally.
Animal law is, in its simplest (and broadest) sense, a combination of statutory and decisional law in which the nature--legal, social, or biological--of non-human animals is an important factor. This new edition contains significant reorganization and updating while continuing to present a cohesive format that touches on many areas in which animals affect legal doctrines, caselaw, and legislative direction. Because animal law is not a traditional legal field, the book is largely framed according to traditional legal headings such as tort, contract, criminal, and constitutional law. Each chapter sets out cases and commentary where animal law has begun to develop its own doctrine. In this third edition, the text has been updated and several chapters reorganized and revised to provide even greater clarity and organization than in earlier editions. An important new chapter, collecting cases and commentary on the commercial use of animals, covers diverse areas including agriculture, biomedical research, and entertainment.
As in the first two editions, animal law as presented in this book is not synonymous with "animal rights" or with any particular political, moral, or ethical agenda. Rather, it is an objective and logical specialization of a challenging area--one with a growing number of cases and statutes, increasing public and practical interest, and significantly different historical, legal, and philosophical foundations than most other areas of law.
Book Description
More than twenty years after its original publication, The Case for Animal Rights is an acknowledged classic of moral philosophy, and its author is recognized as the intellectual leader of the animal rights movement. In a new and fully considered preface, Regan responds to his critics and defends the book's revolutionary position.
Customer Reviews:
Not for the beginner.......2007-01-25
Good argument for the rights of animals, but sometimes a bit too "deep." Regan is a philosopher, afterall. Great book for those familiar with the topic and who want to deepen their arguments, but probably not the best read for someone just getting introduced to the philosophy of the rights of animals.
A Book That Will Challenge The Way You Make Moral Decisions.......2006-06-01
Of all the books I read in college, this one has nagged me the most. It offers a completely logical case for giving animals their own "right to life." Most of the book is an education in ethics philosophy - necessary background if one is to reflect on one's own moral decision-making when it comes to other living beings.
A Christian who believes that humans deserve higher moral consideration precisely because they are humans will not find the book particularly swaying. If one is to cite gospel for making moral decisions, Regan basically asks, "So ... WHICH gospel/scripture?" as there are many faiths that purport to receive the truth from a god or gods. Most Christians have a ready answer to that question - but one backed up by faith, not logic. Regan aims to show that our secular beliefs about human rights to life logically do not exclude - but rather, should include - other animals.
One woman in our class rejected Regan's thesis and conclusion when she learned that accepting his arguments logically necessitated a pro-life, anti-abortion stance. For that reason, a pro-life Christian might give Regan's book a closer, more sympathetic look.
Where Regan's case breaks down is in where to draw the line. Do we make it illegal to fish? To step on ants? To deal with this problem he creates a construct called "Subject of a Life" and establishes several criteria to decide which animals can be food and which ones can't. But it is hard not to see arbitrariness of whatever criteria we establish. In a sense, we are right back to where we started: refering to our personal biases as moral benchmarks.
Why do YOU exclude animals from deserving a right to live, to be eaten, skinned, etc? Is it because they aren't as smart as humans or don't have sophisticated language? Is it because the scripture you believe to be true says it's okay to kill them for your purposes? Is it because you can ... and just don't feel that guilty? Is it a morality of expedience that we choose to follow when we kill an animal that feels pain and enjoys its life?
Read this book and the questions will nag you, too.
Excellent work of moral philosophy.......2006-04-21
Other reviewers all seem to be Animal Rights advocates, interested in a sound justification for their preconceptions. I read this work for a different reason -- because I was interested in a non-theistic AND non-utilitarian justification for ethics. Tom Regan does an excellent job as a moral philosopher presenting an alternative way to look at ethics, and I stongly recommend this book for that reason.
As for justifying animal welfare, I found it less convincing. Regan's reason for rejecting Singer's argument for utilitarianism is because utilitarianism could sometimes justify sacrificing an animal, and he wants a moral guideline that will not allow that. Well, this is certainly assuming your conclusion, and made me wonder how much of the work was honest reasoning, and how much was a political spin document.
But the ultimate problem for me in accepting the arguments was in two areas. First, the absolutist nature of rights (either you have them, or you don't and they are non-negotiable) flies in the face of what is reasonable in the world. If a fish is not conscious, it has no rights, and if it is, its rights equal mine, even though its consiousness may be so marginal that we are extremely uncertain whether it even exists. Instead, for any consciousness-based rights system to be funcitonal, it must be based on DEGREE of consciousness, so a fish has less rights than a mouse, who has less rights than a mature human. (If mice have as many rights as humans, then almost all human activity is unacceptable -- plowing/tilling kills small rodents, as does driving, as does ANY construction work of any kind -- his mine rescue example neglects that all his options, including digging the mine in the first place, disturbs the soil fatally for some small rodents.) But Regan will not accept this, partially because any such scheme would be extremely difficult to work out, but primarily because it would allow the use/abuse of animals in some cases -- a consequence he will not accept (per his rejection of Singer) even if the reasoning for it is valid.
The second objection is that this scheme takes no account of the welfare of future beings. Extinction to him is a concern of corporatist ethics, when all that matters according to him are the individuals CURRENTLY involved. But an ethics which cannot provide a rationale to prevent future ecosystem destruction, or to prevent mass extinctions say by a comet impact 100 years in the future of individuals who are not alive today and therefore do not compute for rights calculations is deeply flawed in providing moral guidance.
These weaknesses are correctable, and this work could be improved to become a fairly compelling and general moral guideline. But to do so will result in drastically weakening the justification for animal welfare in his work, so I expect they will not be adressed, and this work will remain an interesting, but ulimately unconvincing excercise, serving solely to rally the faithful.
Overlong, out of focus and dangerous, but still recommended.......2004-11-23
What surprised me the most about this new edition of Tom Regan's 1983 classic "The Case for Animal Rights" is how little of the book bears directly on the animal issue: while chapters 1 through 3 are concerned with such questions as whether animals are conscious, have beliefs and desires, and can be considered to have a welfare; and the last chapter deals with the application of Regan's moral philosophy to the treatment of animals, the great bulk of the book (chapters 4 through 8, more than half of the volume) is devoted to what I understand modern philosophers call "meta-ethics", i.e. the kind of thinking one has to engage in before one actually gets to the point and starts fleshing out actual moral principles and rules.
This discrepancy between what the title announces and what the book actually focuses on is all the more annoying as Regan keeps avoiding what appear to be highly relevant issues by claiming they "fall outside the scope of the volume", so much so that one almost feels now and then that he is using animal rights as a selling point for a book whose main preoccupation is flogging the dead horse of utilitarianism (or as an excuse for the cute Durer rabbit on the cover.)
"The Case for Animal Rights" does have its virtues, though, if you are prepared to be patient with its inordinate length and ad hoc redefinitions of its scope. First, its "rights view" approach to the animal problem is an improvement over Peter Singer (a.k.a. Dr Death)'s utilitarian defense of animal welfare, the many flaws of which Regan convincingly points out. And second, the fine-grained conceptual distinctions Regan develops do help the reader clarify his thinking on the issues raised, though he himself misses a few distinctions he should have made (his attack on what he calls the "innocence principle" for instance ignores the principle of double effect and therefore targets a straw man.)
However, I was very dissatisfied with several points of the book. For instance, Regan claims his approach is not anti-human. But this is belied by his (Darwinian) assertion that humans are in no fundamental way different from the beasts, and that some beasts are actually superior to some humans (any belief to the contrary being "speciesist" and based on "prejudices... insulated by... religious beliefs.")
I also found Regan's attack on what he calls "perfectionist" ethics (according to which "what individuals are due, as a matter of justice, depends on the degree to which they possess a certain cluster of virtues or excellences") to be based on nothing more than a politically correct, leftist penchant for egalitarianism, and an inability to recognize that the two kinds of system are not mutually exclusive, but complementary. Classical liberalism for instance, is politically egalitarian and economically perfectionist. (Perfectionism is then redefined p325 to give it much more unsavoury connotations, perhaps because Regan himself felt he had a weak case against it.)
Most objectionable of all is the idea that "the harm that death is, is a function of the opportunities for satisfaction it forecloses" (p324.) Though this enables Regan to reassert that humans are generally more worthy to live than beasts (since they can enjoy types of satisfactions that elude even our closest mammalian cousins) and can therefore throw the odd dog out of the lifeboat, it is a huge step back from the Christian respect for the sanctity of human life, all the more so as this position is compatible with the idea that "the death of a normal, adult animal is... a greater harm, than the death of a less aware, retarded human" (p314.)
"The Case for Animal Rights" is not the definitive treatment of the subject I expected it to be. While it presents itself as *the* "rights view" on the issue, it is only a rather idiosyncratic approach within that category, one that will not fit a Christian framework without major modifications. However, though I am very concerned with the potential consequences of some of Regan's more objectionable principles, I think it is a step in the right direction, given that the natural law tradition is utterly deficient on the issue, and modern defenses of animal welfare had so far been made from points of view utterly inimical to this tradition.
Beats the heck out of Peter Singer.......2002-01-08
As I suggested long ago in my review of Peter Singer's _Animal Liberation_, while I applaud Singer for pointing out numerous ways in which our treatment of animals could be improved, I don't find his "utilitarian" ethical arguments very persuasive.
But Tom Regan's now-classic book -- this one -- is a different story. This is a tour-de-force of ethical argumentation that makes the titular case about as well as it's ever going to be made. Regan doesn't simplify any issues and he's very much alive to fine ethical nuances. And he sets out his case with both rigor and vigor.
Probably most of us won't have any problem agreeing that at least some nonhuman animals are conscious, but there _have_ been people who have denied it (most famously, Rene Descartes). So for completeness, Regan begins with a careful discussion of the question. Avoiding simplistic answers and over-eager claims about research on e.g. animal language, he mounts a solid case that at least some nonhumans do possess consciousness.
(Some of his arguments are a bit weaker than he thinks they are, although I still agree with his conclusions. For example, he argues that possession of language skills can't be an indicator of consciousness because human infants are presumably conscious before they acquire a language; how else, indeed, would they acquire it? But this shows only that _present_ possession of linguistic ability isn't a necessary condition of consciousness; it doesn't show that the ability to _learn_ a language isn't such a condition. As I said, though, I agree with his conclusion; I'm merely criticizing the way he gets to it.)
The remainder of the book is a wide-ranging discussion, not just of animal rights, but of ethics generally. Even aside from Regan's nominal topic, the volume could serve as a fine introduction to ethical thought in general. (Among its many highlights: a short refutation of Jan Narveson's "rational egoism" that could double as a refutation of Ayn Rand's even sillier version.)
In the end, what this gets us is a careful case for regarding mammalian animals which are at least a year old as possessors of "rights." (Regan also argues that for other reasons, we could and should want to extend "rights" to other animals; he has limited his discussion to mammals in order to keep to what he takes to be a fairly clear-cut case.) These "rights" do not, he holds, trump every other ethical consideration under the sun; in particular, in emergency situations in which either (say) a human being or a dog (or a million dogs) must be killed, we should kill the dog (or dogs) every time. These "rights" are _prima facie_ moral claims -- strong, but not indefeasible.
What I think Regan has successfully shown is that living beings don't have to be moral _agents_ in order to count in our moral deliberations. And with most of what he says on this subject, I heartily agree; in particular I think he has made just the right distinction between moral agents and moral patients, and correctly argued that moral patients have _some_ sort of "right" to consideration.
I cannot, however, follow him _quite_ all the way to his conclusions -- for example, that we are morally obliged to be vegetarian and to refrain from using animals in all scientific research. Mind you, I've been a vegetarian myself and I think there _are_ good reasons for avoiding meat; I just don't think they're morally conclusive. I agree completely that many current practices are inhumane, and I also agree with a point Regan argues repeatedly: that moral limitations on what we can do with animals do _not_, as such, interfere with the operation of the free market. But I'm still not altogether sold.
(The problem -- to put it briefly and inadequately -- is that I think Regan assigns too much to moral _patients_ in the way of "rights." I'm not persuaded that in order to have a "right," it's enough that someone else could make a moral claim on your behalf. In other words, I disagree with Regan's contention that moral agents and moral patients are entitled to exactly the _same_ sorts of moral consideration.)
I don't, however, mind admitting that Regan has changed my mind on some points and may yet change my mind on others. If I ever _do_ change my mind on this last point, he will be in part responsible.
And at any rate I highly recommend this volume to any readers interested in the topic of animal rights. Moral reasoning doesn't get any better than this.
Book Description
Selected for the 2007 Amelia Bloomer Project list of recommended feminist literature for young readers
For thirty years, Lucinda Delaney Schroeder held an unusual government position: she was one of the handful of women special agents with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In August 1992, she accepted an assignment that forever changed--and endangered--her life. She posed as a big-game hunter in Alaska in order to infiltrate an international ring of poachers out to kill the biggest and best of that state's wildlife.
A Hunt for Justice recounts her dramatic story--a story she was not legally permitted to write about until her retirement in 2004.
Customer Reviews:
You Go, Girl!.......2007-08-30
In 1974, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hired its third female agent, Lucinda Delaney. And unlike the first two women in the agency, she was determined to do more than checking cargo and baggage for smuggled contraband.
And thus began a career in which Delaney, who married biologist Lonnie Schroeder soon after, spent 30 years working undercover, bagging poachers and other hunting scofflaws.
Her fascinating story has been recounted in "A Hunt for Justice."
Schroeder tells of her struggles to be taken seriously in an agency that gives "old boy's network" a really bad name. A degree in criminology and an overwhelming passion for solving mysteries led Schroeder to her chosen career, and a dogged determination--some might say stubbornness--kept her in it for 30 years, despite outright and undisguised sexual discrimination and harassment, administrative roadblocks and hostility.
Today's generation doesn't remember the struggles involved for women in the 1960s and '70 to be taken seriously in formerly "male" occupations. Employers could--and did--discriminate on the basis of sex, motherhood and pure bias; those women who persisted were subjected to verbal and physical harassment. It is a testament to Schroeder's passion and determination to do her job that she not only did it, but was instrumental in bringing down an international poaching ring operating in Alaska.
And this case is the crux of the story. Her struggles in the beginning, building a family and juggling being a wife, mother and field agent are just background for the real story, the undercover "Operation Brooks Range" in 1991.
Poachers at this time could make serious money taking hunters into Alaska for "guaranteed" trophies: moose hunts began at $6,000, sheep and grizzlies cost hunters $7,000; combination hunts were as high as $18,000.
As Schroeder begins her undercover operation, at a hunter's bar called "The Bear Den, she finds out why the costs are so high: " `Wow! Pretty hefty prices,' I said, sliding the brochure and videotape into my oversized black leather purse. `Not when you consider that everything's guaranteed,' (the bartender) replied."
One of the biggest violators was a guide named "Bob Bowman" (Schroeder changed the names to protect privacy). He had "all the elements of a violator--small airplanes, wealthy clients and lots of big game ..."
But with 64,000 licensed guides in 591,000 square miles of wilderness, catching him was almost impossible.
Until Schroeder and an informant wangled their way into a hunt with Bowman by pretending to be hunters in search of big trophies who weren't willing to take the time and hardship to hunt legally.
Operating by word-of-mouth, with clients coming in from Italy, Germany and other foreign countries, staying under the radar and having an almost supernatural ability to sniff out undercover operatives (and allegedly no compunction about "eliminating" them), Bowman's operation had been going on for years, even thought the agency knew he was dirty.
Illegal hunts included using small planes to tire out grizzlies and moose, spotting game and dropping the hunters right on top of them, despite a law forbidding flying and hunting on the same day, and conducting hunts in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Schroeder spent 11 heart-pounding days in Bowman's camp, worried that violators she'd arrested would recognize her, worried her informant might slip and give up their secret, worried the illegal hunters would leave the country with their evidence--and trying to convince herself that the time away from her daughter and husband was worth the stress and fear.
This woman has guts--and smarts. She got on Bowman's good side by translating for his Italian guests, got in with them by speaking their language, worked up a relationship with the wives of the poachers by helping in the kitchen and seeming compassionate, kept the foreign hunters' evidence in the country with a well-told lie, and brought home a terrific piece of evidence in the form of a Dall sheep trophy she shot in ANWR.
Here, Schroeder's overriding reason for taking the risk is seen:
"I hated to kill a magnificent ram like this one for a case, and I wondered for a minute if I was any better than the crooks who killed animals for their own selfish agendas."
Schroeder's agenda should in no way be seen as anti-hunting. As she points out in the Preface, "... I championed ethical and legal hunting. Nothing in this book should be construed as being anti-hunting. My job was to stop illegal hunting and poaching that diminished legal hunting opportunities. I fully acknowledge and respect the tremendous contribution that hunters have made to wildlife conservation worldwide."
This book reads like a thriller, with international intrigue, heart-stopping action and a gutsy heroine who's not afraid to face her adversaries head on--even in a foreign country--in order to make her case.
Schroeder writes well, infusing her prose with imagery and action, making her characters three-dimensional, even the bad guys. She doesn't hesitate to tell of the lengths she'd go to, nor does she gloss over her fears and concerns about her family and her work's effect on them. But her passion for solving crimes and putting criminals away is obvious, and her book makes for a compelling read. I sometimes forgot I was reading a true story, it was so well done.
True crime is a genre one either loves or hates, and I happen to love it. "A Hunt For Justice" goes right up at the top of the list of well-written good reads. If you're not a fan of this genre, read it for the history, for the excellent picture of the struggles women have gone through to be considered equal, or for the damage illegal hunting and poaching does to the wildlife populating.
Whatever your reason, just read the book. You won't be sorry.
Great Book!.......2007-06-20
As a female looking for a career in wildlife law enforcement this was a great book to read! Lucinda Schroeder did an excelent job writing this true story, it was hard for me to put it down at night. Because Lucinda is a female she had a great advantage over men at catching poatchers in Alaska, and this reminds us all that you don't have to be male to succeed in this line of work. The book was full of excitment, danger, humor and fun. A great read!
Great Book.......2007-04-08
This is a GREAT BOOK....there are very few books written by undercover agents that rings so true. This woman had guts....
Shady .......2007-04-01
Do wildlife officers ordinarily hire undercover informants that drink themselves into a stupor day after day in the field? Looks like from the book his early demise from "organ failure" was from drinking himself to death. No wonder he couldn't tell whether he was in one river drainage or another.
Pretty shady. The last poster is right that she does not know north from south, which is odd since they are never actually very far off the haul road and could see the oil pipeline and the road easily. In fact, Happy Valley is actually on the road itself wheras the book tries to make it sound like it is way off somewhere. The Sag runs parallel right next to the road, and the Ivishak flows right into the Sag.
A good book if you live in the city five thousand miles away and don't know up from down.
Author busted by an Alaskan who's actually been there..........2007-03-28
I've spent more than a decade in this area as a pilot and wilderness guide and have to blow the whistle here.
Despite how enraging it is for outside hunters coming here taking our fish and game illegally, it is equally appalling to see the criminality and incompetence in our federal officials
My hopes for professionalism were dispelled by numerous errors of astonishing degree. The officer, claiming to have studied maps and impressing us with "memorizing" geographical details before going - makes multiple statements demonstrating she does not even know the Brooks Range lies south of, not north of most landmarks identified in the book (e.g. Happy Valley air strip, etc.).
This basic confusion of not even knowing north from south is confirmed elsewhere. For example, fog regularly rolls in from the Beaufort Sea (in the north), not from the south as claimed in the book. But you'd only know that if you had experience here.
The author makes numerous errors throughout such as misnaming tussocks as "pingos" - confusing a 12-inch diameter grassy tuft with mounds of earth covered ice that can be more than a mile in diameter and more than a hundred feet high. People living in cities thousands of miles away can be "snowed" by a poseur like this, but anyone who actually has some experience with the geography and fauna can see this is a shocking degree of ignorance. Like confusing an elephant with a cockroach.
We are led to believe that on the one hand this operation was internationally famous for using airplanes to herd wild animals into the guns of poachers, decimating huge numbers of animals - and yet the investigator needs to commit crimes herself instead of following simple legal protocols in busting the operation - and keep her own crimes secret from the district attorney and supervisors until she has retired and the statute of limitations has expired.
The author justifies lying to the operators (understandable) - but also to her supervisors, to international officials, and to the district attorney. The hypocrisy of the whole campaign is perhaps best summed up on p 265 where she chirps to her supervisor about how she "won't be telling for a long time" how she illegally coerced statements out of foreign clients. Had that been known at the time of the trial then the evidence would not only have been dismissed, but possibly all the charges dropped due to flagrant misconduct.
This officer holds out the sacred "justice to animals" as the rationale for committing crimes herself. What gall to express how her faith in God and her departmental awards (based on her own concealed criminal conduct) justify whatever she does.
If law enforcement officials lie to everyone around them, including supervisors and the U.S. attorneys prosecuting cases, and if they commit crimes themselves - then how much faith are we to place in law enforcement? Remove the sacred "defense of animals" excuse and supplant it with the basic greed for profit in book sales, in personal promotion, in the rapture of exercising raw power over people - and you see what is wrong with the author.
Because she is an admitted criminal, and because she is so appallingly ignorant of basic geography and natural phenomenon for which she poses as an expert - I simply cannot trust the veracity of much this person says. It makes me wonder what lengths this person has gone to in order to obtain convictions of people in pursuit of her own advancement.
Too bad because there are indeed poachers and if the crimes alleged in this book were true, it was completely unnecessary for the author to commit crimes in prosecuting them. There was nothing necessary beyond simply contracting for and then participating in illegal hunts.
Lastly, the pretentiousness of all the melodramatic terms - eg a "harrowing" day of being flown around in the back seat of a plane and eating "hot turkey, gravy, buttered rolls, peach cobbler" - and the "camp hell" with heated wall tents, cots, personal servants and so forth... It was quite off-putting to those of us who have actually spent time in the same place alone and with whatever we carried on our persons to survive for weeks at a time.
You cannot paint everyone else in this camp as a pampered, out of shape slob and the author - receiving the same service - as wonder woman. The b.s. meter, especially in light of all the lying and criminal conduct on the part of the author, is registering "full on". Trying to imbue an interview with a restaurant owner about same-day airborne hunting violations as if it were a back-alley Russian Mafia gangland encounter while also enjoying five course meals at taxpayer expense is ludicrous.
Almost no readers have been to ANWR, so maybe the author can get away with lying and incompetence. Readers won't question federal officials who couldn't mount a snowmobile expedition to the Ivishak camp. But a snowmachine ride at 40 below is nothing to a regular Joe Alaskan.
What bunglers. Should have asked one of the work crews at Prudhoe Bay or Pump Station Two to run out there in place of those weanies. Those workers are outside every day in that stuff, and so am I. We don't give up whimpering like little school girls.
There's more I could go into but the upshot is you have a federal agent who has had to wait until retirement and expiration of statute of limitations to confess to criminal conduct, and who demonstrates extreme lack of competence in basic field skills in her alleged area of expertise while feigning a "toughness" that isn't credible.
Animal justice deserves better than this.
Customer Reviews:
If you love animals, you'll love this book!.......2005-01-30
What animal lover wouldn't like to hear true stories from Paul McCartney, Anita Roddick, and Maneka Gandhi? This is a must-read for anyone who appreciates the roles of animals in our lives. Or to quote Jane Goodall:
"...this collection of inspiring tales is so important. They are true tales about individuals who have dared to take positive action against cruelty to animals and won, individuals who have made a difference."
When you've read this book, you'll be inspired to make a difference yourself. Don't miss this opportunity!
Does have some good stories, but it's slow to start..........2003-08-18
On the whole, Speaking Out for Animals by Kim Stallwood is written in a hopeful and progressive style - certainly it's worth a read. But as I read the heartwarming stories, I definitely felt mixed emotions. On the one hand, it is good to hear happy endings. On the other hand, it is terrible to think that humans could be responsible for so much suffering and cruelty.
This book's greatest fault, in my opinion, is the first 24 pages. I found myself nearly in despair, thinking 209 more pages, what if it's all like this! Fortunately, it is not all that bad. After I got through the relatively short and somewhat dull interviews, I finally reached something good. The interview with Sergeant Sherry Schlueter was just the first of a series of ten interesting and varied stories. I especially enjoyed reading how animal rights are viewed abroad, in the interviews with Maneka Gandhi of India and Tatyana Pavlova in Russia.
To often, it seems, I hear terrible stories of animal suffering. All this bad news can become quite overwhelming. That's why I like section two of this book, all 31 of these stories are strictly happy endings. From Ginny, the dog who rescues cats to Butch and Sundance, two runaway meat pigs, this section will leave you feeling good.
Section three is titled "Unsung Heroes," and I also found it to be interesting and inspiring. Tony and Vicki Moore who fought against Spain's blood fiestas, the Buffalo Field Campaign fighting for the wild buffalo and eight-year-old Amanda Walker-Serrano, alerting others to the truth about circuses. These three stories are among 21 true tales of animal heroes. --Reviewed by Starlynn Clarke
I agree with Mr. Strumboldt.......2002-07-26
I feel that, while their intentions are good, many of the people in this book have views so extreme that they defy common sense. I found Peter Singer's views on human-animal relations disturbing and troubling to say the least. Also, while I agree that animals are treated terribly here and all over the world, these people have no scientific basis upon which to state their views. They seem to rely on the hearsay of others who share their views. While I was reading this, it seemed to me that the entire book had been written for the purposes of fund-raising. Overall, the people described in this book, all taken together, seem to have developed a very detailed philosophical approach to the cause of animal rights. It's too bad that they don't do a better job of implementing it. There were numerous factual errors I found in this book. Whoever edited it doesn't seem to have done a very thorough job of fact checking or proof reading.
'Speaking Out For Animals inspires with success stories".......2002-04-11
I think Mark S. missed the point of this book. Showing abuse cases of a wide variety with happy endings not only exposes the abuse but shows there can be a favorable outcome. Too often, we are overwhelmed with the depth of animal abuse issues. This uplifting book shows the wisdom of movement leaders along with courageous stories of ordinary people making a difference in animal lives. I bought a copy for my parents who read it cover to cover and have a better understanding of the animal issues I am fighting for. Is it just a coincidence that they now are doing volunteer work at a shelter in their area?
Not recommended.......2002-03-16
As a long-time animal rights activist, I can say that this collection of self-righteous interviews and melodramatic anecdotes adds little to the literature on the subject. A more serious discussion of animal rights advocacy would focus less on celebrity banter and mawkish rhetoric, and more on the entrenched cultural attitudes and public policies that perpetuate, and subsidize, the victimization of animals. This book is about people, self-important people, not animals. Sadly, I expected more, especially from such a reputable source.
Book Description
"The Weaning of America: The Case Against Dairy Products" is a collection of essays on health, humane education, environmental ethics, animal rights, and vegetarian philosophy/vegan philosophy. The title essay presents the health, economic, ecological and ethical reasons not to consume milk and other dairy products.
Customer Reviews:
The Weaning of America.......2001-07-20
Review for The Weaning of America, by Don Lutz From William Hammock
The Weaning of America by Don Lutz is subtitled The Case Against Dairy Products and it certainly is that, but the book is much more. Lutz includes twelve other essays in which he examines the relationship between humans and other animals. Lutz clearly shows the underlying assumptions of our culture that have led us to the irrational separation between humans and the other creatures on earth. He makes a strong case for re-examining the ways that we think about cows, deer, pets and even fish. It is well worth the price for the reading list alone, which is included.
The Weaning of America.......2000-08-30
A PROVOCATIVE BOOK ON HUMAN CULTURE
"The Weaning of America", by Don Lutz, is a collection of essays addressing what the author calls environmental ethics. He explores issues through a variety of disciplines, including religion, philosophy, social psychology, cultural anthropology, holistic health and nutrition.
Beginning with the title essay, Lutz gives a concise, yet comprehensive statement about the consumption of dairy products. He explains how the milk of mammals varies significantly from species to species: cow's milk is best for cows, human milk is best for humans. Dairy products have been linked to a long list of diseases, including osteoporosis, despite the fact that some doctors and dietitians still advise people to drink milk to prevent bone loss. There is also a connection between dairy products and the four major killers as well -- heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes.
He goes on to explain that raising animals for human consumption, be it their milk or their flesh, is a very inefficient way to feed people. Animal agriculture, we discover, wastes more resources, and causes more environmental destruction than any other human activity. And because of the misuse of resources, is the primary cause of human starvation.
Making the convincing argument that we have no need to consume dairy products (or dead animals), Lutz argues that it is then clearly illogical and immoral to confine, exploit and slaughter them by the billions, simply for profit. He details the sad life experience of farm animals, especially the sons of dairy cows, veal calves. And only humans, he reminds us, reject and refuse the natural process of weaning.
Other essays include, 'Mixed Messages', which offers a fresh perspective on issues including television, role models and organized religion. A critical look at drug abuse, our acceptance of the damage done by legal drugs, and the failure of the 'war on drugs' make provocative reading.
In 'The Ultimate Hypocrisy', Lutz examines the origins of speciesism, and illustrates its causal connection to racism and sexism. In 'An Appetite for War', he exposes a similar link between animal agriculture and organized warfare. In the last of thirteen thoughtful essays, he makes the logical and ethical argument for vegetarianism. The recurring theme of this book is that there are a number of human ideas about our relationship to nature, and especially animals, that need desperately to be weaned from human culture. The most important being the philosophy of human supremacy, an egoistic belief system that has led to great suffering for all the inhabitants of this planet, including humans. Of potential value to all readers, "The Weaning of America" may be of special benefit to health professionals, teachers and new parents.
Book Description
A scientific and legal exploration into the big question in rights law today: Where do we draw the line?
One of those rare books that can change the reader's view of our position in the world and within the animal kingdom, Drawing the Line is a landmark both in its scientific insight and in its challenge to the law. As Steven Wise continues his exploration of animal cognition along the evolutionary spectrum--from apes to dolphins, parrots, elephants, dogs, and even honeybees--he finds astonishing answers to the big question in animal rights today: Where do we draw the line? The law has firm criteria for personhood and Wise shows how certain non-human animals meet those criteria.
Readers will be enthralled as they follow Wise's firsthand investigations of the work of the world's most famous animal experts: in Kenya with Cynthia Moss and the touchingly affectionate elephant families of Amboseli, in the mountains of Uganda with Richard Wrangham and the chimpanzees of the Kibale Forest, at MIT with Irene Pepperberg and her amazing and witty gray parrot, Alex, and in the California sanctuary where Penny Paterson has spent two decades learning about the skills and vivid personality of Koko the gorilla. In many cases, Wise was even able to sustain an extended conversation with these extraordinary creatures.
Steven Wise is the world's foremost expert on the legal rights of animals and has devoted his life to litigating, writing, and working on their behalf. No one with a shred of curiosity about animals, about rights, or about justice will want to miss this book.
A Merloyd Lawrence Book
Customer Reviews:
A fascinating read on animal cognition.......2007-08-27
Even for people with no interest in animal rights or law, this book is absolutely riveting if you have any interest at all is psychology or how animals think. It highlights some of the most shocking examples of animal intelligence, but also shows how they differ from us and what kinds of abilities they lack. Being able to compare the various animals from bees to dolphins makes this a thoroughly interesting read, and Wise's writing style is compelling. Highly recommended!
Fascinating exploration of nonhuman animal cognition.......2006-06-20
Wow, this book was really fascinating. I was so glad I purchased it! I'll admit, I had my inhibitions about it. The book, I knew, was about judging animal's cognitive abilities in order to grant them 'personhood' and rights so I figured the author was a more elitist type who would look down on the more 'unintelligent' animals. I was pleasantly mistaken. I have a lot of admiration for the author. He is definitely an ardent animal rights advocate and he actually practices what he preaches. I strongly admire his goal to gain 'personhood' for nonhuman animals. You will see when you first start the book that his stance on scrutinizing the status of animals in society via their intellectual capabilities is the most appropriate way to gain rights for animals at the present time.
So onto the book: it explores the cognitive abilities honeybees, dogs, parrots, dolphins, elephants, orangutans, and gorillas. I had always wanted to read these kinds of books. I have known about Alex and Koko but books about them have been difficult to find! I found myself really drawn into it. Some of the intellectual feats of the animals just have you going 'wow'... they will boggle your mind. One thing to note is that not all of the information is cut and dry. Some of the concepts and tests of the mental abilities are complex. Wise goes through Piaget's child development stages and you have to recall the stages to grasp some of the abilities he describes in regards to the different animals.
The only gripe I had was that I pondered how the author would grant rights to different animals considering the circumstances. He makes an excellent case for why we should, the obstacles involved, but not how to do it... perhaps another book? Still all in all it was a superb, fascinating book. I really wish everyone would read it. :)
Pratical solution to animal rights.......2005-10-22
While Wise believes that all animals should be treated with compassion and kindness, he uses "pratical autonomy" in this book in order to use the legal system. Wise states that in order for courts to actually grant rights to animals there needs to be more than a philosophical reason. Because many humans lack full autonomy, including infants and the handicapped, Wise sets forth a pratical way of granting rights to nonhuman animals.
He goes through several species of aniamls and lists evidence for autonomy. I even thought he did not give enough credit to animals and "evidence" that I have read about it. However, this works for his case and skeptical readers. By putting animals in categories, although based on a human yardstick, Wise hopes to grant rights to certain animals.
I never looked back.......2003-07-16
This is the book which introduced me to the world of animal intelligence and emotion. In Steven Wise's book, he dedicates chapters to an African Grey parrot, a pair of dolphins, an elephant matriarch, an orangutan, Koko the gorilla, Wise's own family dog, and even spends a chapter describing the intricate communication of honeybees. Wise is a lawyer, and so his goal in the book is to analyze whether or not these "nonhuman animals" (I love that wording!) fit the criteria to deserve rights under the law. Some of them do (by his estimation), and some of them don't... but Wise's writing style draws you in and his stories about the various animals he meets are fascinating (my favorite was Alex the parrot). Animal lovers will feel vindicated, and those who are unsure on the subject of animal rights may find themselves swayed by Wise's strong arguments. The writing is a little scientific at times, but the book is well worth the effort!
Succeeds brilliantly.......2003-06-25
Steven M. Wise's "Drawing the Line" presents a compelling argument for recognizing the rights of "nonhuman" animals. As a lawyer who has taught at Harvard and has championed animal rights for over twenty years, Mr. Wise directs our attention in this book to some of the recent scientific studies pertaining to animal intelligence. The evidence strongly suggests that at least some species qualify for dignity rights and other legal protections.
Mr. Wise provides introductory chapters that succinctly defines the struggle for animal rights. The author compares the historic practice of slavery with today's plight of nonhuman animals. Deep-rooted socioeconomic practices conspired to keep slavery alive for most of human history; today, animal slavery is fueled by longstanding cultural and economic forces. Consequently Mr. Wise approaches the daunting task of animal liberation with eyes wide open. He has written this book as a strategic move to further our understanding and with the hope of advancing the struggle.
To that end, I would have to say that Mr. Wise has succeeded brilliantly. The author employs a sound methodology to persuade us of the merits of his case. Mr. Wise rank-orders the intelligence of nonhuman animals by utilizing Piaget's well-known theories pertaining to the study of early childhood development. Consequently most of the chapters in the book are devoted to the study of specific animals (such as Koko the gorilla) who might represent the innate abilities of their respective species. You will be intrigued with how Mr. Wise utilizes Piagetian measures such as mirror self-recognition tests in order to compare animal performances with human intelligence.
I think that nearly everyone who reads this book with an open mind will be persuaded that at least a few species do indeed display the characteristics of "practical autonomy" that should assure them of rights under the law. Mr. Wise visits with leading researchers to demonstrate the mental acuities of specific animals; in many cases, we come to appreciate the unique personalities of these remarkable animals. The power of Mr. Wise's writing is such that the notion of subjecting these animals to cruel scientific experiments and the like seems unthinkable, and liberation suddenly appears to be a quite reasonable and humane thing to do.
In short, I highly recommend this compassionate, original and thought-provoking book to everyone who cares about animals. While the legal system may not yet have recognized the validity of Mr. Wise' argument, this book will no doubt help the good lawyer secure a favorable ruling in the court of public opinion.
Average customer rating:
- Rank Hypocrisy, alas.....
- Compelling Collection of Information and Ideas
- A Pro-Life Book Like No Other!
|
The Liberal Case Against Abortion
Vasu Murti
Manufacturer: R.A.G.E. Media
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 General
| Medicine
| Subjects
| Books
Medical Ethics
| Physician & Patient
| Medicine
| Subjects
| Books
Animal Rights
| Nature & Ecology
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Medical Ethics
| Medicine
| Medical
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Abortion & Birth Control
| Women's Studies
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Medicine
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Physician & Patient
| Medicine
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Medical Ethics
| Medicine
| Medical
| Professional & Technical
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Nature & Ecology
| Science
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
| General
| Natural History
| Natural Resources
| Oceans & Seas
| Rocks & Minerals
All 4-for-3 Deals
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Democrats for Life: Pro-Life Politics and the Silenced Majority
-
Guerrilla Apologetics for Life Issues
-
Pro-Life 101: A Step-by-Step Guide to Making Your Case Persuasively
-
The Hand of God
ASIN: 0977223434 |
Book Description
"Murti attempts to explore, without religion, one of the most contentious issues of our day: the question of abortion. For as much as the atomic bomb forever altered questions about war and peace, so has abortion forever altered the meaning of human life and our responsibility to it. By creatively and passionately using the universal question of the rights of animals, Murti analyzes the rights of the unborn. The power of his persuasion is not based on one or more bodies of religious thought, but on sentient beings' natural tendency to protect one another." - From the Forword by Carol Crossed, President, Democrats for Life of America Activist Vasu Murti, a card-carrying member of the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), presents a formidable case against abortion, using reasoning and arguments based upon liberal philosophy.
Customer Reviews:
Rank Hypocrisy, alas............2007-07-25
Mr. Murti is articulate and smooth-talking. He calls himself a "Feminist for Life." But he favors repealing Roe v. Wade, thereby sending women back to the illegal abortionist, where he knows they'll go. He is willing to do this before his Brave New World, where everything is so fine for women that it would never occur to them to even consider abortion, is accomplished, or even on the drawing board. He does not, and cannot, address this glaring, gapingly contradictory hole in his "nonviolent" philosophy.
Compelling Collection of Information and Ideas.......2006-08-19
While Murti relies heavily on quoting from other authors, speakers, and historical figures, his organization of the material, and the sheer number of quotes that he has gathered, is both impressive and overwhelmingly compelling. I find myself appreciating that he did all of the work and research for me, compiling it into a quick read. His own assertions are honest and challenging to any reader: to pro-choice liberals, pro-life conservatives, pro-life activists who insist on using religion to essentially lose the debate, and to pro-life meat eaters like myself. Watch out--Murti makes some undeniable claims about the need to be consistent, and he has gotten me thinking! That is what any good book should do.
A Pro-Life Book Like No Other!.......2006-02-08
This is a truly unique and stunning work. Unlike a majority of pro-life material, it does not rely on any religious common ground between author and reader.
Even more amazing is the fact that the author comes from a strong "left-wing" position, yet makes common sense arguments from that position in opposition of abortion. I would go so far as to say that Vasu's arguments are even stronger than those I have heard from pro-life Republicans - perhaps there is more reason for Democrats, Progressives, and the left to be anti-abortion than the right-wing conservative movement.
I would not only reccomend this book to liberals, but to conservatives who could learn a thing or two about how to address the abortion issue with people who do not ascribe to the same "religious right" world view.
In this vein, you might also want to consider Guerrilla Apologetics for Life Issues, as that book also uses non-religious arguments to address life issues (although it is not specifically a liberal book, as this one is).
Book Description
One of the most difficult issues that confronts veterinarians and staff today concerns the professionrsquo;s obligation to the animal and the sometimes conflicting demands from clients, peers and society. The veterinarianrsquo;s role has become more complex with new ethical challenges posed by issues such as growing public awareness regarding animal welfare, increasing economic value of companion animals, growth of veterinary specialization, experimentation with alternative and complementary medicine, and concern for pain management and mental well-being of animals. Written by an acknowledged pioneer in veterinary ethics, An Introduction to Veterinary Medical Ethics addresses the ethical challenges that veterinarians face daily as they seek to balance obligations to animal, client, peers, society and self. The book offers a highly readable and approachable introduction to the nature of ethical theory, reasoning and decision-making, and its practical application to veterinary medicine. Now with over 100 real-life veterinary case histories and analysis, this edition also includes new discussions of animal pain, distress and happiness, ethics of critical care, alternative medicine, legal status and value of animals, and Aesculapian authority. An Introduction to Veterinary Medical Ethics: Theory and Cases, Second Edition is recommended as essential reading for all veterinary students and practitioners, as well as those interested in general animal welfare. bull; bull;New edition from an acknowledged pioneer in veterinary ethics bull;Addresses ethical challenges that veterinarians face daily bull;Case-based approach to ethics in veterinary medicine, with over 100 real-life cases bull;Includes new discussion of legal status and value of animals, alternative medicine, Aesculapian authority, ethics of critical care, and animal pain, distress and happiness bull;Ideal for veterinary students and practitioners
Customer Reviews:
Practitioners and college-level students will find an enlightening set of considerations, here........2007-04-11
College-level courses in veterinary medicine will find AN INTRODUCTION TO VETERINARY MEDICAL ETHICS: THEORY AND CASES, 2ND EDITION an excellent point of discussion for surveying the vet's ethical and medical issues in animal welfare issues. The author has pioneered veterinary ethics and surveys ethical theory, decision-making practices, and real-life situations, pairing some 100 veterinary case histories with solutions that lend to debate and discussion in the veterinary community. Practitioners and college-level students will find an enlightening set of considerations, here.
Veterinary Ethics.......2000-09-04
The field of veterinary medicine is expanding rapidly to include medical treatments that would have been considered impossible 20 years ago. Today, animals suffering from such things as cancer, joint diseases and severe trauma have a good chance of not only survival but of living a healthy life due to the advancements in veterinary medicine. The many changes in veterinary medicine, coupled with the evolution of new views on animal rights in our society over the last two decades, have created many ethical veterinary dilemmas and questions that have never been explored in a written context. Dr. Rollin has devoted his life to studying these issues and has been intimately involved in various laws and legislation involving animal rights and the ethics involved. This book examines a topic that has been largely debated but, for the most part, not covered in a text format. Dr. Rollin is well respected and speaks to many forums about these topics year round. He does a great job of presenting the cases in this book in an unibiased manner and encourages you to think about each of the important issues brought up by these cases. Each of these cases, by the way, are based on true cases and is beneficial to the understanding of what today's veterinarian faces. The book is not set up in a manner for leisure reading but is still very interesting and easy to follow. This is an excellent book on a fairly new topic of study and I would recommend it to any reader with any link to the veterinary profession or with any interest in animals.
Book Description
Our treatment of animals in modern America is full of contradictions. Pets are a beloved feature of most American households, many enjoying the most luxurious food and accessories, and reveling in the love and companionship from their human families. At the same time, animals raised for food or clothing, or used for medical experiments and product testing, often live painful, lonely lives in small cages from birth to death. And wild animals suffer in other ways--losing their lives as their habitats disappear, being hunted for trophies, and finding themselves removed from their homes for the exotic pet trade.
Why Animals Matter: The Case for Animal Protection offers a concise yet complete overview of the problems of animal suffering, linking them to larger issues of human and environmental exploitation. Authors Erin E. Williams and Margo DeMello examine industries that exploit animals--meat processing companies and agribusinesses; medical experimentation and cosmetic testing facilities; the entertainment industry (circuses, rodeos, zoos, racing, and film making); the pet industry; the fur and leather industry; and commercial and recreational activities centered on hunting. The authors also consider the adverse environmental effects of animal exploitation from pollution to deforestation and the depletion of biodiversity. In addition, they look at the connections between the poor treatment of animals and human exploitation of immigrants, slaughterhouse and farm workers, as well as the larger issues of globalization, hunger, and the negative consequences for Third World nations.
Highly informative yet very reader-friendly, this book not only explores the connections between animal and human suffering, but also integrates solid information with positive case studies of rescued animals and inspiring stories of individual successes.
Customer Reviews:
Give a copy to everyone you know!.......2007-09-14
Our systematic abuse of non-human animals is so shocking and extensive that it is surprising how few people are even unaware of it. That's why this book is so indispensable. With this comprehensive survey of animal exploitation, Margo DeMello (co-author of Stories Rabbits Tell: A Natural and Cultural History of a Misunderstood Creature ) and Erin Williams -- both longtime activists -- seek to lift the veil of ignorance that sustains a cruel status quo. Product testing, breeding, medical experiments, hunting, blood sports, clothing (fur, wool, leather), and entertainment are all covered in heartbreaking detail. But it's the authors' discussion of animals used in food production that truly stands out, introducing readers to practices that some other animal rights books overlook, such as fishing and aquaculture, which they call "underwater factory farming" and observe is the fastest-growing segment of agribusiness.
With prose that is both vivid and insightful, DeMello and Williams invite the reader to reconsider the attitudes many of us hold about animals and the purpose we believe they have for existing. What would our world be like, they ask, if our choices expressed our compassion for the planet and those with whom we share it? "[G]iven what we now know about the lives of animals who die in order to provide us with our food, clothing, and entertainment choices -- the playfulness of pigs, the intelligence of whales, the family values of elephants, and the personal relationships of cows -- it's difficult to see how we can continue to make these personal choices. How do we proceed knowing how much a pig enjoys grunting to her friends, napping in a soft bed, splashing in a pond, and eating apples with the reality of what many female pigs' lives are like: trapped inside warehouses, confined in small stalls on concrete floors, with not a bit of straw to cushion herself, and separated from one's kin -- for her entire life?"
Buoyed with stories of animal survivors and their rescuers, "Why Animals Matter" offers some hope in a world of despair and is a compelling resource that is certain to widen our circle of compassion. Whether you're a long-time animal activist or you're just looking for an outstanding survey of humanity's offenses against our fellow creatures, this is an extremely reader-friendly guide that every compassionate person should read. Give a copy to everyone you know!
Mark Hawthorne, author of
Striking at the Roots: A Practical Guide to Animal Activism
What an eye opener.......2007-08-31
I am not an "Animal Rights Activist" but thought I was fairly well informed on animal exploitation issues. How wrong I was. This book grabs you tells you what you probably didn't want to know or think about when it comes to animal treatment behind the scenes but it also tells you in very simple terms how to make better and well informed choices to effect change.
This book obviously envolved hundreds of hours of research and eloquently supports the Authors point of view; "That Animals Matter". I am going to recommend this book to everyone I know.
Enlightening and cogently argued.......2007-07-18
I just finished reading this wonderful book and I feel compelled to encourage others to read it as well. Though I wasn't familiar with the authors beforehand, the subject matter is very significant to me and I decided to give it a chance. I'm really very glad I did. This is a very impressive first publication, in my opinion on par with some of the most well-known works on the subject. Although I appreciate and admire the recognized philosophical works concerning our moral responsibilities to animals, the straight-forward, common sense presentation of this book renders the subject matter somehow more tangible and accessible. Though very readable, the authors don't shy away from tackling difficult issues, several of which I haven't seen elucidated elsewhere. To the book's great benefit, one of the authors works for the Humane Society (presumably, the Humane Society of the United States) and undoubtedly brings significant personal knowledge to the table. I hope others choose to read this most enjoyable and important book, and I look forward to future contributions from these authors.
I felt empowered reading it.......2007-07-06
Why Animals Matter is full of information about the routine, systematic ways that animals are abused at the hands of the meat industry, fur trade, puppy mills, and more -- with a heavy emphasis on factory farms. It delivers an excellent overview of the suffering endured by billions of farm animals each year simply to satisfy the American appetite for cheap eggs, meat, and dairy products. Thanks to the stories of rescued animals, as well as the multitude of simple ways that everyone can help reduce animal suffering, the overall effect is one of inspiration -- it's easy to see that even with easy and enjoyable changes, we can make a huge improvement in the lives of animals.
Why Animals Matter is also ideal for people who are concerned about the environment and social justice. The authors heavily outline the way that factory farms -- and other industries that exploit animals -- devastate the environment and harm people. Overall, it's a compelling and accessible treatment of a critically-important social issue. Highly recommended.
strong case for animal protection.......2007-07-05
If you love your dog or cat, this book is for you! Why Animals Matter makes a strong case for animal protection and is a wonderful primer for extending our circle of compassion to include all animals.
Book Description
In a thoughtful and thought-provoking contribution to the study of animals and the Holocaust, Karen Davis makes the case that significant parallels can—and must—be drawn between the Holocaust and the institutionalized abuse of billions of animals in factory farms.
Carefully setting forth the conditions that must be met when one instance of oppression is used metaphorically to illuminate another, Davis demonstrates the value of such comparisons in exploring the invisibility of the oppressed, historical and hidden suffering, the idea that some groups were "made" to serve others through suffering and sacrificial death, and other concepts that reveal powerful connections between animal and human experience—as well as human traditions and tendencies of which we all should be aware.
Customer Reviews:
Surpassed my expectations.......2007-08-20
When I heard that Karen Davis was writing "The Holocaust & The Henmaid's Tale: A Case for Comparing Atrocities," I had to wonder: Do we really need more evidence, however persuasive, demonstrating how the genocide of Jews and other humans in World War II is similar to the institutionalized abuse of farmed animals? Will Davis shed fresh light on a subject already illuminated by other animal advocates such as Charles Patterson, whose groundbreaking 2002 book "Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust" is a comprehensive examination of the controversial and troubling connection between factory farming and Hilter's Final Solution?
But in reading her take on the subject, it is clear that Davis can indeed contribute something meaningful on this matter and furthermore offers an intriguing perspective on issues ancillary to the main argument. Davis, the president and founder of United Poultry Concerns, explains that her book grew in part from PETA's 2003 "Holocaust on Your Plate" campaign (which was, in turn, inspired by "Eternal Treblinka"). PETA toured the country with this exhibit, displaying graphic photos of chickens in crowded cages and stacks of dead pigs alongside disturbing images of concentration-camp inmates in their tightly packed wooden bunks and the piled bodies of Jewish Holocaust victims. The juxtaposition of these comparable scenes was meant to stimulate contemplation, but it also raised the ire of groups like the Anti-Defamation League and even Jews for Animal Rights.
No doubt hoping to avoid much of the criticism PETA (and Patterson) faced, Davis is sensitive to readers who may regard the Holocaust as such a sacrosanct point in human history that any parallel with the slaughter of animals for food is, for them, profane. "For many people," she writes, "the idea that it is as morally wrong to harm animals intentionally as it is to harm humans intentionally borders on heresy." Notwithstanding this sensitivity, she invites the reader to consider how the forced labor of the concentration camp is akin to the internalized forced labor of chickens on factory farms. (The "henmaid" in her title is an inspired allusion to Margaret Atwood's popular 1986 novel "The Handmaid's Tale," which describes a near-future dystopia in which a large segment of women have no control over their reproductive systems and are routinely inseminated, only to have their offspring taken away. Such an existence is no mere fiction for farmed animals, who have been deprived of their dignity and freedom.)
Although a slim book (it weighs in at only 133 pages, including the notes, references and index), this is a dense volume and not exactly what I was expecting from the author of More than a Meal: The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual, and Reality. With its references to existentialists Kierkegaard and Sartre, "The Holocaust & The Henmaid's Tale" reads more like an academic text than your typical book on animal rights and seems intended more for scholars than those already well versed in the atrocities of animal agriculture. The writing, however, is lucid and compelling; indeed, chapter three stands out as one of the most poignant and thought-provoking descriptions I have ever read on the brief, tragic life of a battery hen. Davis takes pains to clearly contextualize our use of the very word "holocaust" and demonstrates that taking what the Nazis did to the Jews and comparing it with society's enslavement and slaughter of non-human animals is meant to raise the status of animals rather than demean humans.
Still, the author is well aware that many people remain indignant about this issue, and consequently she has an extra hurdle to overcome. It's difficult enough to convince the average meat-eater that animals have as much right to live in peace as humans do. Add to that a topic as emotionally provocative as the systematic murder of millions of Jews and you're likely to incite anger. (To wit, a typical anti-animal-rights site posts this sentiment on the topic: "I cannot wrap my mind around the fact that there exists a group of people who put the Holocaust on the same level as meat packing.") Davis manages to diffuse the controversy, I believe, by focusing much of her attention on the link between language and attitudes. She discusses, for example, how Holocaust victims have described being "treated like animals," but that for many people such a comparison does not work in reverse. She writes: "To be `treated like animals' is an insult because the experience of animals is assumed to be vastly inferior to that of any human being, most of all one's particular group.... Presuming an immeasurable gulf between humans and animals allows one to appropriate animal abuse as a metaphor for one's own mistreatment while simultaneously dismissing the metaphor, and hence the `animals,' as `just an expression.'"
Not surprisingly, Davis has found much inspiration in "Eternal Treblinka," which contends that the Nazis applied the efficiency of animal agriculture and science to their own fascist agenda. But she takes Patterson's premise a step further. She asserts that the controversy that surrounds comparing the confinement and mass murder of "undesirables" with the abusive system of factory farming - comparing the suffering of human animals with that of non-human animals - emphasizes the very speciesism that allows animals to be exploited. More to the point, turning a blind eye to abuse gives us both "They were only chickens" and "They were only Jews."
I believe we need "The Holocaust & The Henmaid's Tale," if for no other reason than to remind us that the oppression of animals serves as the model for all other forms of oppression and therefore must not be ignored. There is, after all, a correlation between the activity of scholars and activists and how much the consciousness of the general public is raised. As Peter Singer observes in his introduction to the 2006 edition of "In Defense of Animals," in 1970, when the modern animal movement was just gaining currency, the number of writings on the ethical status of animals was tiny; yet today, he estimates, it must be in the thousands. Consider how far the movement has come in the last three and a half decades, and how much the writing of advocates has inspired us. Let's hope Karen Davis' new book will raise more awareness than it does anger.
Mark Hawthorne, author of Striking at the Roots: A Practical Guide to Animal Activism
A most important book.......2006-10-11
[...].
Karen Davis' short, intellectually rigorous, historical, sociocultural, and imminently readable book is a **must** read. Davis is an excellent writer with years of personal experience working for all sorts of animals who find themselves in factory farms and feedlots, and her message is clear and convincing - there are striking parallels between the interminable and inexcusable suffering we bring to billions of food animal beings each year and the treatment of human beings during the holocaust. While it may move some - perhaps most - readers outside of their comfort zones, this is good and necessary for stimulating us all to act more strongly on behalf of all animals who suffer innumerable disturbing and unspeakable atrocities at out hands. And, nowhere are these atrocities more apparent and "in our face" than in slaughterhouses and factory farms which are truly prisons of torture where animals interminably suffer and die and also see, hear, and smell the senseless and ruthless pain, suffering, and death of others, often family members and other friends. One doesn't have to be sentimental to "feel" for food animals, for there are plenty of scientific data that support that claim that they are sentient beings who have preferences and a point of view on what is happening to them and to their friends. Their emotional lives aren't secret, private, or hidden, they're public. Animals tell us clearly what they're feeling and we must not deny what is so very obvious.
Let me emphasize that Karen Davis' book isn't just another Holocaust book. There are many new ideas and some of the major themes that distinguish this book from others include Davis' account of the life of a battery hen from the hen's point of view, her characterizations of internalized forced labor, chapter 5 on "Procrustean Solutions," a rich discussion of ritual sacrifice and genocide as identify destruction, not just physical extinction, Davis' distinctions between pain and suffering, and her chapter on her 9/11 controversy with Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation.
I'm sure that this book will make you shake your head from side to side in disbelief, wondering how things ever got to be so horribly messy and how any human being can ignore what we do to innocent nonconsenting animals every second of everyday. How do we live with the moral boundaries we draw almost solely for our convenience? How did this mentality arise?
Our relationship with nonhuman animals is a complex, ambiguous and challenging affair, and we must continually reassess how we should interact with animal kin. This book will make you do just that. Let's not forget that animal emotions are the gifts of our ancestors. We have them, and so do they. We aren't alone in the emotional arena. It's "bad biology" to argue against the existence of animal emotions. Scientific research in evolutionary biology, cognitive ethology and social neuroscience, along with our own personal observations, support the view that many animals have rich and deep emotional lives and that they are sentient beings.
I strongly suggest that you read this book, think deeply about the numerous issues that Karen Davis raises, share it with your friends and family, and thank Karen for writing such a moving and bold book. I continually go back to it because it is so rich, deep, clear, disturbing, and novel.
Speaking of the Unspeakable.......2006-10-02
Speaking of the Unspeakable
Founder and president of United Poultry Concerns, Karen Davis has played the major role in taking domestic fowl - the most abused and violated animals in America - from the neglected margins of the animal protection movement to their present status as a central focus of campaigns against factory farming. Her books, Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs and More than a Meal: The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual, and Reality are the standard animal rights works on domestic fowl.
Her newest book, The Holocaust and the Henmaid's Tale, is an invaluable contribution to one of the most contentious debates plaguing the animal rights community. But to understand why, we have to make a quick trip back in time.
A Holocaust: It's What's for Dinner
Isaac Bashevis Singer was a Jewish refugee from Hitler's Europe whose haunting novels and stories form an extended meditation on the Holocaust. In one of those stories, "The Letter Writer," the protagonist observes that "In relation to [animals], all people are Nazis; for the animals it is an eternal Treblinka."
In 2002, holocaust historian Charles Patterson picked up on Singer's theme. Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust argued that morally, psychologically, and logistically our imprisonment and murder of animals is equivalent to the Nazis' treatment of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and other victims of their blandly efficient murder machine.
In 2003, PETA launched a traveling display inspired by Patterson's book. Juxtaposing photographs of human prisoners in Nazi concentration camps with eerily similar pictures of animal prisoners in factory farm concentration camps, The Holocaust on Your Plate was a vivid and moving indictment of animal enslavement and murder.
A firestorm of criticism quickly ensued, summarized in an Anti-Defamation League press release calling the display "abhorrent," and asserting that "Abusive treatment of animals should be opposed, but cannot and must not be compared to the Holocaust. The uniqueness of human life is the moral underpinning for those who resisted the hatred of Nazis and others ready to commit genocide even today." The issue split the animal rights community. Some activists defended the PETA display; others worried that the animals' cause would suffer from the backlash.
Into these whitewater rapids, Roberta Kalechofsky, founder and president of Jews for Animal Rights, launched Animal Suffering and the Holocaust: The Problem with Comparisons, a small book (59 pages) in which she argued that while our enslavement and murder of animals is a horrific crime that must be stopped, comparisons to the Jewish holocaust are illegitimate. (Kalechofsky's bona fides as an animal rights advocate are unassailable. For more than two decades, she has been a powerful and pioneering voice for animals.)
First, Kalechofsky argues that the Jewish holocaust was the end product of centuries of historical and cultural evolution that make it a unique event that cannot be meaningfully compared to anything else. And second, if the Jewish holocaust is allowed to become a "generalized metaphor" (pg. 34) for every kind of atrocity, it becomes devalued and loses its meaning.
From Treblinka to Tyson's
The Holocaust and the Henmaid's Tale is Karen Davis' rebuttal. Her "henmaid" is a battery chicken on a factory farm, whose life of deprivation, devaluation, depersonalization, and early uncomforted death reminds Davis of the eponymous "Handmaid" in Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel - and of the victims of fascism in Hitler's camps. When she is talking about her beloved chickens, Davis' compassion for the plight of our animal victims makes any merely intellectual argument against comparing their suffering to ours seem facile and self-serving.
It is on this foundation of bone deep compassion that Davis constructs her defense of comparing atrocities. First, she argues that while every atrocity is a unique event in terms of the historical, social, economic, and cultural conditions that led to it, they are all alike in the suffering that they cause, and from a moral standpoint, it is the suffering that matters. Thus, Davis argues that "An atrocity can be both unique and general." And since one sentient individual can never truly feel the pain of another, comparisons of pain - metaphors of pain, if you will - are the only way that we can feel empathy and compassion for others, and the only way that we can learn to become moral beings. Thus, comparisons of atrocities are an essential part of the process by which we become ethical individuals who create an ethical society.
It is not the Jewish holocaust that is unique - from ancient times, genocide has been a commonplace of human history - it is our sensitivity to it that is unique, and if this unique sensitivity can be used to awaken a heightened moral awareness of other atrocities, including the atrocities we commit against animals, that is a valid and valuable use of the holocaust metaphor.
The Holocaust and the Henmaid's Tale is not a diatibe. It is, in fact, solidly within the tradition of the best kind of academic writing, judicious, carefully reasoned, free of jargon, and accessible to the general reader.
Quoting Isaac Bashevis Singer, Davis reminds us that, "[T]here is no evidence that people are more important than chickens." Then she adds, "There is no evidence, either, that human suffering, or Jewish suffering, is separate from all other suffering, or that it needs to be kept separate in order to maintain its identity. But where, it may be asked, is the evidence that we humans have had enough of inflicting massive, preventable suffering on one another and on the individuals of other species, given that we know suffering so well and claim to abhor it?"
Norm Phelps is the author of The Dominion of Love: Animal Rights According to the Bible and The Great Compassion: Buddhism and Animal Rights.
An Animal Rights Masterwork.......2005-12-04
I first discovered Dr. Davis' organization, United Poultry Concerns, while doing an internet search for animal rights superstar Pamelyn Ferdin (and she would HATE to be called that!). I have been a fan of UPC and Davis' pioneering work ever since.
I was already a Vegetarian, but Davis' book "Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs" helped me make the decision to go Vegan, which has been an amazing force for personal change.
Earlier this year, I finally got around to Davis' "More Than a Meal: The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual and Reality", and found its compelling arguments to be all the more reason to celebrate UN-Turkey Day as an antidote to the wholly noxious Xtian holiday "Thanksgiving".
With "The Holocaust & the Henmaid's Tale", Davis has emerged as a leader in articulating the philosophy of the animal rights movement. Davis delves deeply into man's history of cruelty to animals under the guise of scapegoating and ritual sacrifice, and the reader may conclude that today's meat industry is little more than an ongoing mass slaughter-ritual updated to the age of the machine.
As for relative sufferings and their hierarchy of importance, Davis tackles the penultimate emblem of mass suffering, the Holocaust, and compares it successfully with the daily slaughter of millions of sentient beings in the name of human gluttony and imperialistic perfidy. Just as the claim that the 9/11 attacks in the US were more "tragic" than the slaughters in Columbia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq, etc. is laughable, so too is the notion that non-human suffering cannot be compared to human suffering. Suffering is suffering, and seeking an end to same should be the goal of all reasoning beings.
Health and political motivations notwithstanding, the only really good reason to become a Vegetarian and/or Vegan is if you believe that kindness is a virtue worth practicing. As Davis herself concludes, "Who but the Nazi in us disagrees?"
An intensely engaging, disturbing and ultimately uplifting experience, Davis' "The Holocaust & the Henmaid's Tale" takes its place alongside classics such as Pete Singer's "Animal Liberation" and John Robbin's "Diet for a New America" as essential animal rights texts.
bold and important.......2005-09-17
In her bold and insightful book, which she dedicated to "all the soft and innocent lives who are at our mercy," Karen Davis, a longtime animal activist and president of United Poultry Concerns, examines the parallels between the Holocaust and the current abuse of billions of animals on factory farms that culminates in their cruel murder in slaughterhouses.
She passionately makes a strong case for comparing the two atrocities--different with respect to the identity of the victims and the purpose of the killings but chillingly similar in so many other ways--the designation of the victims as expendable, inferior, and unworthy of life; the herding and confinement; the industrialized slaughter; the complicity of the bystanders; and the pervasive arrogance and indifference that allows it to happen.
This compelling book argues convincingly that we have a mandate to think about, protest against, and learn from these twin atrocities--one completed in the middle of the last century, the other continuing every day. Not to do so is to condone and support the fascist mentality that produced them.
Davis is also the author of "Prisoned Chickens, Poisoned Eggs: An Inside Look at the Modern Poultry Industry" and "More Than a Meal: The Turkey in History, Myth, Ritual, and Reality."
Her years of hands-on experience rescuing and providing shelter to the feathered "soft and innocent lives" victimized by the poultry industry gives her latest book its special urgency and poignancy. Highly recommended.
--Charles Patterson, author of "Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust"
Books:
- Animals in African Art: From the Familiar to the Marvelous
- Animals Observed: A Look at Animals in Art
- Antler, Bear, Canoe: A Northwoods Alphabet Year
- Archipelago: Portraits of Life in the World's Most Remote Island Sanctuary
- Awake in the Wild: Mindfulness in Nature as a Path of Self-Discovery
- Beyond Innocence: An Autobiography in Letters: The Later Years
- Big Cat Diary: Leopard (Big Cat Diary)
- Biological Psychology (with CD-ROM and InfoTrac)
- Biological Science, Volume 3: How Plants and Animals Work (2nd Edition) (Biological Science)
- Bugling Elk and Sleeping Grizzlies: The Who, What, and When of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Handbook of Simulation: Principles, Methodology, Advances, Applications, and Practice
- Flower Confidential: The Good, the Bad, and the Beautiful in the Business of Flowers
- AIA in favor of no-fault auto ins. in R.I.
- Adventures of a Mountain Man: The Narrative of Zenas Leonard
- Castlevania: Symphony of the Night: Unauthorized Secrets & Solutions
- Dark Possession
- CatCalendar 2007: 365 Days of Cats
- MOUS Essentials: Access 2000
- A Business Recordkeeping Set: Sound City, Practice Set
- New Jersey Labor Unions - 2000
It's the Law: Pets, Animals and the Law
Animals, Property, and the Law (Ethics and Action)
When Your Pet Outlives You: Protecting Animal Companions After You Die
Animal Rights & Human Morality
Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals
