If you adopt the lens, you will go vegan, protest animal testing, and refuse to visit zoos. You will live a life that aligns perfectly with your moral compass.
But the world needs both. It needs the radical who insists on utopia, because without them, the welfarist has no benchmark. And it needs the pragmatist who gets a law passed, because without them, the radical has no relief for the animal suffering right now . If you adopt the lens, you will go
As legal scholar Gary Francione puts it: "There is no such thing as humane slaughter, just as there is no such thing as humane child molestation." For the rights advocate, welfare improvements are dangerous because they give cruel industries a "humane" seal of approval, pacifying the public conscience while the killing continues. To navigate this debate, one must answer three specific questions. 1. The Question of Suffering (The Utilitarian View) Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism, wrote in 1789: "The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?" It needs the radical who insists on utopia,