Discourse on Animal Rights - Part II

“There is a waste and a tragedy when a living creature with an innate or basic capability for some functions that are valued as important and good never [get] the opportunity to perform these functions.”  -Martha Nussbaum

Animals have a potential and purpose apart from the categorization and designation we assign to them. They are meant to live in nature, grow into adults, and procreate. Animals are an integral part of the ecosystem, contributing to the rich global biodiversity of this planet. They have a proper function to contribute to the well being of the environment through their actions within food chains and food webs. When the species functions well, a balance is kept in the ecosystem.

Their potential is fulfilled when their natural actions are allowed to continue, to impede the potential of another living being is to deprive them of the action(s) that define what it is to be a thing of their kind. For instance, incarcerating wild tigers in small enclosures within a zoo is interfering with their natural interactions within the environment and impeding their ability to fulfill their potential, their purpose of being a tiger. In the wild, tigers prey on animals, grow, thrive and procreate to ensure the continuation of their species. When their species functions well, they help maintain the stability of their habitat and fulfill the purpose of being a tiger. However, when the animal is taken from their natural environment and put in unnatural surroundings where their natural behavior is curtailed or impeded, they are denied their natural right to life, liberty and the pursuit of their purpose, of what it is like to be a tiger. In many cases the animal develops unnatural behavior (stereotypies) like pacing, head bobbing and self mutilation which is thought to be the result of boredom, frustration or depression.

The intrinsic good in animals is in their specific function to their particular end: life, growth, and reproduction.  If the ‘good’ resides in the well functioning being, then if the being is prevented from functioning well, this would seem to be wrong.  It is true that certain life forms depend on taking the life of others for sustenance, as in the case of carnivores, but what of preventing functions of life forms on a systematically large scale like in the instances of factory farming, animal captivity and animal experiments?


Most natural animal behavior is prevented on a factory farm.  An animal in this situation is not allowed to move, being confined to a very small space. They are impeded from engaging in their natural actions like grazing, scratching in the dirt, roaming and engaging others of their kind. They are prevented from reaching their potential - to actualize what it means to be a cow, chicken or pig. Many of these beings are mutilated ‘for health reasons’ and consequently are not able to actualize their proper material form.

It is not only the act of killing these creatures in order to eat them that is unjust - it is more unjust that we prevent them from having a normal, natural life. We deprive them of the essence of life - we incarcerate them, torture them, stifle their instincts and then slaughter them on a massive scale.

Animals have natural rights by virtue of being alive, choosing self-preservation, their ability to feel pain, to suffer and their ability for complex emotions. We cannot consciously ignore these attributes that we share with animals. If we construct rights to protect the most basic human functions, these rights should be extended toward others who have these capacities as well. Animals should have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of their potential. And should not be held in slavery or servitude, or subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. To do anything less would be unconscionable, bowing to base human appetites.