A philosophy that claims that
humans are inherently "moral" animals and have an "ethical" duty to consider the "rights" of animals. Naive at best, they ignore that the concepts of "morality," "ethics," and "rights" are merely inventions of the
human mind and do not exist beyond the
man-made implications of actions of human beings that only other
humans "perceive."
"Right" and "wrong" are psychological fabrications of the
human brain and are in no way bound in the world of natural law. "Morality" only exists as far as there is a will of human beings to act upon it. The idea that
humans "must" abide by a moral principle that ensures the "rights" of animals is as much a falsehood as the idea that whites are superior to blacks.
A "morality" that says that animal experimentation and consumption is "justifiable" is no more or less a creation of the
human mind than any "morality" that says that such activities and "wrong." As sure as the concept of "language" itself, these are ideas that we create in our animal brains whose only "inherent" properties are that fact that they are absolutely meaningless outside of
human perception.
"Ethics" and "morality" only exist because the past ten thousand years of evolution have given
humanity the ability to invent psychological concepts and apply them to the world around them. If the
human physiology lead to a brain that was less "intelligent" than it currently is, then no such arguments of "right" or "wrong" would even exist.
Just so as "morality" and "ethics" and mere
human inventions, so are the notions of "freedom," "prejudice," "bias," "racism," "sexism," and "equality."
Animals do not have inherent natural "rights" because nothing does - the idea of "rights" is a
human psychological device that exists solely inside of the realm of
human perception and action, nothing else.
Again, take a few thousand years of evolution away from the human anatomy, and none of these notions would ever have come to exist - and yes, we'd still be eating animals and wearing their furs and
nobody would complain.
Animal rights..."Rights" and "justice" are
human creations that are absolutely meaningless beyond the
human mind's ability to perceive and analyze action.
The same is true about the notion of "worth" - "worth" is a
human fabricated psychological device used to describe in our minds alone what we measure and evaluate the things we perceive.
Animals do not have inherent or natural "worth" or "rights to considerations" because nothing does - even humans - because they are not
real. These ideas are not real things beyond the
human mind's ability to create words and definitions for their
use of measurement.
The notion that animals having measurable "rights" is a natural and inherently occurring state of being is as false as the notion of humans having "rights" is a natural and inherent occurrence and state of being. "Righteousness" and "justice" are
human modes of psychological perception, nothing else.
