PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) people typically oppose the idea of human exceptionalism: that humans are qualitatively different from, and qualitatively superior to animals. Such thinking explains their ad campaigns like “Holocaust on a Plate,” in which they compare eating chicken to the extermination of Jews by Hitler. While PETA people may deny human exceptionalism with their lips—and often with their deeds—I would venture to say that most of them do not truly believe humans and animals are morally equivalent.
I came up with a question you can ask a PETA person that will either help them see that they don’t really believe humans and animals are moral equals, or help you expose their moral confusion for what it is. Ask him/her, “Do you believe it is ok to sell a dog?” If they say no, then they really do believe in the moral equivalence of humans and animals. My guess, however, is that most will say yes. If they do, proceed to ask them, “Do you believe it is ok to sell people?” If they say no, then they haven’t completely abandoned the idea of human exclusivism. In some sense they understand that humans are more valuable than animals. Of course, they might respond with a second yes, in which case their moral sense is in worse shape than we thought!
The tactic underlying this approach is to appeal to an individual’s moral sense, particularly their understanding of the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. That which possesses intrinsic value is to be valued for what it is in itself; that which possesses instrumental (extrinsic) value is valued for what it can provide us (and the value it provides us often leads to something of intrinsic worth). Humans possess intrinsic value, while animals possess instrumental value. Humans are to be valued for what they are, not what they can do for us. They are not a means to an end, but an end in themselves. That is why they are not to be bought and sold. Animals, however, are not valued for what they are, but for what they do for us. That’s why even the strongest of animal rights supporters typically don’t have a problem with the buying and selling of animals, but they do have a problem with the buying and selling of people.
August 18, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Quick thought: What’s the difference between humans and animals? The scripture that comes to mind is Genesis 1:26-27 “26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Animals were not created in God’s image, but mankind was. Does that justify the abuse of animals, certainly not. But it does prove that man is definately of more value than animals. However it does segway into the issue of abortion/infanticide. How can you (as a government) pass laws which forbids the abuse of animals, yet permit the killing of innocent babies?….Something to think about.
LikeLike
August 18, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Agreed. Animals are of value, and should not be mistreated. But humans are of much more value, being made in the image of God Himself.
As for how a government can prohibit the abuse of animals and yet allow the killing of babies in the womb, it is the height of cognitive dissonance.
Jason
LikeLike
August 19, 2009 at 6:23 am
Jason,
Another question for the folks at PETA–what should we do about animals that kill other animals? Should this be considered a crime? This happens in the wild every day but no one would consider tracking down and killing (or maybe jailing) a larger animal for killing a smaller animal for food. Do the folks a PETA think these animals need to be rehabilatated? Or do they think???
LikeLike
August 19, 2009 at 11:01 am
Lynne,
Great question! It points out the fact that we recognize humans are distinct from the animal world. We have moral obligations, while they do not. After all, I have never seen lions fight for human rights, or advance a “non-cruelty to humans” campaign.
Jason
LikeLike
August 20, 2009 at 7:00 pm
[…] And if you are one those who happen to believe that humans and animals are NOT distinct and that humans are just another animal species, you need to answers some questions raised by my good friend Jason Dulle. […]
LikeLike
March 13, 2013 at 11:50 am
While I understand your problem with various positions and antics of PETA and their supporters, I can’t help but find PETA-bashing as often a red herring, to avoid talking about the difficult and controversial issues of animal (mis)treatment in many aspects of our lives, or to indirectly justify our cherished and traditional practises. PETA presents a big, organized, vocal and sometimes wacky target. I get that. But I think some of their core views are things we should all take seriously. Terrible abuse and needless slaughter does occur widely in the food industry, animal entertainment industry, pet industry, clothing industry, and medical industry. I know this from years of research and subjecting myself to media and studies detailing the various uses of animals. I remember being literally sick to my stomach on many occasions learning about the realities of it all. It’s what led me to become vegetarian and give up materials such as leather. Sure, I believe God permits (or perhaps “tolerates”) the use of animals by us, but when I see just what much of that use entails today… I see nothing Godly about it. Quite the opposite. It’s a despicable abuse of His creation. It really opened my eyes and changed my world view regarding animals and our use of them.
I am not equating human and animal life. Just recognizing them as a beautiful part of God’s creation, and a part that can and does feel pain, fear, stress and depression as well, and thus represent something we can empathize with.
So, feel free to poke fun at PETA from time to time, just as long as it doesn’t cloud over or detract from the plight of the voiceless animal victims that do suffer and die needlessly every day.
(Note: I don’t condemn meat consumption or many other uses of animals; I just promote a far more ethical and regulated approach than many support or think about in today’s culture. For example, supporting ethical livestock rearing and slaughter, acquiring pets from animal shelters, using faux leather/fur, minimizing use of animal-tested products, etc).
LikeLike
March 13, 2013 at 1:21 pm
David,
I hear you. And I agree that we need to support animal welfare. PETA, however, is not about animal welfare. They are for animal equality, or what other groups will call animal rights. Animal rights/equality goes too far. We don’t need to elevate animal worth to that of humans in order to promote animal welfare. That’s why I thihk PETA is fair game. They are extremists, and their extremist views need to be exposed for what they are.
BTW, I’ve been reading all of your comments on the various posts, but haven’t responded because all I could say to them was “amen.” 🙂
Jason
LikeLike
June 27, 2015 at 11:53 am
Hi there, this weekend is pleasant designed for me,
because this occasion i am reading this wonderful
informative piece of writing here at my house.
LikeLike