DebateLabKIT/deepa2-corpus · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 1.71k
The prodigious waste of grain that is fed to intensively
farmed animals has already been mentioned in Chapters 3 and
8. That, howe~er, is only part of the damage done by the animals
we deliberately breed. The energy-intensive factory farming
methods of the industrialised nations are responsible for the
consumption of huge amounts of fossil fuels. Chemical fertilisers,
used to grow the feed crops for cattle in feedlots and pigs
and chickens kept indoors in sheds, produce nitrous oxide, another
greenhouse gas. Then there is the loss of forests. Everywhere,
forest dwellers, both human and non-human, are being
pushed out. Since 1960, 25 per cent of the forests of Central
America have been cleared for cattle. Once cleared, the poor
soils will support grazing for a few years; then the graziers must
move on. Scrub takes over the abandoned pasture, but the forest
does not return. When the forests are cleared so that cattle can
graze, billions of tons of carbon dioxide are released into the
287
Pradical Ethics
atmosphere. Finally, the world's cattle are thought to produce
about 20 per cent of the methane released into the atmosphere,
and methane traps twenty-five times as much heat from the
sun as carbon dioxide. Factory farm manure also produces
methane because, unlike manured dropped naturally in the
fields, it does not decompose in the presence of oxygen. All of
this amounts to a compelling reason, additional to that developed
in Chapter 3, for a largely plant-based diet.
The emphasis on frugality and a simple life does not mean
that an environmental ethic frowns upon pleasure, but that the
pleasures it values do not come from conspicuous consumption.
They come, instead, from warm personal and sexual relationships,
from being close to children and friends, from conversation,
from sports and recreations that are in harmony with
our environment instead of being harmful to it; from food that
is not based on the exploitation of sentient creatures and does
not cost the earth; from creative activity and work of all kinds;
and (with due care so as not to ruin precisely what is valued)
from appreciating the unspoiled places in the world in which
we live.
288
II
ENDS AND MEANS
WE have examined a number of ethical issues. We have
seen that many accepted practices are open to serious
objections. What ought we to do about it? This, too, is an ethical
issue. Here are four actual cases to consider.
Oskar Schindler was a German industrialist. During the war
he ran a factory near Cracow, in Poland. At a time when Polish
Jews were being sent to death camps, he assembled a labour
force of Jewish inmates from concentration camps and the
ghetto, considerably larger than his factory needed, and used
several illegal strategems, including bribing members of the SS
and other offi~ials, to protect them. He spent his own money
to buy food on the black market to supplement the inadequate
official rations he obtained for his workers. By these methods
he was able to save the lives of about 1,200 people.
In 1984 Dr Thomas Gennarelli directed a Head Injury
Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.
Members of an underground organisation called the Animal
Liberation Front knew that Gennarelli inflicted head injuries
on monkeys there and had been told that the monkeys underwent
the experiments without being properly anaesthetised.
They also knew that Gennarelli and his collaborators videotaped
their experiments, to provide a record of what happened
during and after the injuries they inflicted. They tried to obtain
further information through official channels but were unsuccessful.
In May 1984, they broke into the laboratory at
289
Practical Ethics
night and found thirty-four videotapes. They then systematically
destroyed laboratory equipment before leaving with the
tapes. The tapes clearly showed conscious monkeys struggling
as they were being strapped to an operating table where head
injuries were inflicted; they also showed experimenters mocking
and laughing at frightened animals about to be used in
experiments. When an edited version of the tapes was released
to the public, it produced widespread revulsion. Nevertheless,
it took a further year of protests, culminating in a sitin
at the headquarters of the government organisation that
was funding Gennarelli's experiments, before the u.s. Secretary
of Health and Human Services ordered the experiments
stopped.
In 1986 Joan Andrews entered an abortion clinic in Pensacola,
Florida, and damaged a suction abortion apparatus. She refused
to be represented in court, on the grounds that 'the true
defendants, the pre-born children, received none, and were
killed without due process'. Andrews was a supporter of Operation
Rescue, an American organisation that takes its name,
and its authority to act, from the biblical injunction to 'rescue
those who are drawn toward death and hold back those stumbling
to the slaughter'. Operation Rescue uses civil disobedience
to shut down abortion clinics, thus, in its view, 'sparing
the lives of unborn babies whom the Rescuers are morally
pledged to defend'. Participants block the doors of the clinics
to prevent physicians and pregnant women seeking abortion
from entering. They attempt to dissuade pregnant women from
approaching the clinic by 'sidewalk counselling' on the nature
of abortion. Gary Leber, an Operation Rescue director, has
said that, between 1987 and 1989 alone, as a direct result of
such 'rescue missions', at least 421 women changed their
minds about having abortions, and the children of these

The prodigious waste of grain that is fed to intensively

farmed animals has already been mentioned in Chapters 3 and

8. That, howe~er, is only part of the damage done by the animals

we deliberately breed. The energy-intensive factory farming

methods of the industrialised nations are responsible for the

consumption of huge amounts of fossil fuels. Chemical fertilisers,

used to grow the feed crops for cattle in feedlots and pigs

and chickens kept indoors in sheds, produce nitrous oxide, another

greenhouse gas. Then there is the loss of forests. Everywhere,

forest dwellers, both human and non-human, are being

pushed out. Since 1960, 25 per cent of the forests of Central

America have been cleared for cattle. Once cleared, the poor

soils will support grazing for a few years; then the graziers must

move on. Scrub takes over the abandoned pasture, but the forest

does not return. When the forests are cleared so that cattle can

graze, billions of tons of carbon dioxide are released into the

287

Pradical Ethics

atmosphere. Finally, the world's cattle are thought to produce

about 20 per cent of the methane released into the atmosphere,

and methane traps twenty-five times as much heat from the

sun as carbon dioxide. Factory farm manure also produces

methane because, unlike manured dropped naturally in the

fields, it does not decompose in the presence of oxygen. All of

this amounts to a compelling reason, additional to that developed

in Chapter 3, for a largely plant-based diet.

The emphasis on frugality and a simple life does not mean

that an environmental ethic frowns upon pleasure, but that the

pleasures it values do not come from conspicuous consumption.

They come, instead, from warm personal and sexual relationships,

from being close to children and friends, from conversation,

from sports and recreations that are in harmony with

our environment instead of being harmful to it; from food that

is not based on the exploitation of sentient creatures and does

not cost the earth; from creative activity and work of all kinds;

and (with due care so as not to ruin precisely what is valued)

from appreciating the unspoiled places in the world in which

we live.

288

II

ENDS AND MEANS

WE have examined a number of ethical issues. We have

seen that many accepted practices are open to serious

objections. What ought we to do about it? This, too, is an ethical

issue. Here are four actual cases to consider.

Oskar Schindler was a German industrialist. During the war

he ran a factory near Cracow, in Poland. At a time when Polish

Jews were being sent to death camps, he assembled a labour

force of Jewish inmates from concentration camps and the

ghetto, considerably larger than his factory needed, and used

several illegal strategems, including bribing members of the SS

and other offi~ials, to protect them. He spent his own money

to buy food on the black market to supplement the inadequate

official rations he obtained for his workers. By these methods

he was able to save the lives of about 1,200 people.

In 1984 Dr Thomas Gennarelli directed a Head Injury

Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.

Members of an underground organisation called the Animal

Liberation Front knew that Gennarelli inflicted head injuries

on monkeys there and had been told that the monkeys underwent

the experiments without being properly anaesthetised.

They also knew that Gennarelli and his collaborators videotaped

their experiments, to provide a record of what happened

during and after the injuries they inflicted. They tried to obtain

further information through official channels but were unsuccessful.

In May 1984, they broke into the laboratory at

289

Practical Ethics

night and found thirty-four videotapes. They then systematically

destroyed laboratory equipment before leaving with the

tapes. The tapes clearly showed conscious monkeys struggling

as they were being strapped to an operating table where head

injuries were inflicted; they also showed experimenters mocking

and laughing at frightened animals about to be used in

experiments. When an edited version of the tapes was released

to the public, it produced widespread revulsion. Nevertheless,

it took a further year of protests, culminating in a sitin

at the headquarters of the government organisation that

was funding Gennarelli's experiments, before the u.s. Secretary

of Health and Human Services ordered the experiments

stopped.

In 1986 Joan Andrews entered an abortion clinic in Pensacola,

Florida, and damaged a suction abortion apparatus. She refused

to be represented in court, on the grounds that 'the true

defendants, the pre-born children, received none, and were

killed without due process'. Andrews was a supporter of Operation

Rescue, an American organisation that takes its name,

and its authority to act, from the biblical injunction to 'rescue

those who are drawn toward death and hold back those stumbling

to the slaughter'. Operation Rescue uses civil disobedience

to shut down abortion clinics, thus, in its view, 'sparing

the lives of unborn babies whom the Rescuers are morally

pledged to defend'. Participants block the doors of the clinics

to prevent physicians and pregnant women seeking abortion

from entering. They attempt to dissuade pregnant women from

approaching the clinic by 'sidewalk counselling' on the nature

of abortion. Gary Leber, an Operation Rescue director, has

said that, between 1987 and 1989 alone, as a direct result of

such 'rescue missions', at least 421 women changed their

minds about having abortions, and the children of these