The aquarium is not a jail.
Both of these animals are slaughtered young so they aren't locked up for years and years.
Putting an dolphin in a small pond and put to work all day doing tricks is horrible. Whales and dolphins belong in the open ocean where they can swim for miles and miles. They are not domesticated animals.
My view is that if you have to put the animal in a cage to keep it, you shouldn't have them. The exception would be a fish tank with nothing exotic.
The only way it will change is everyone buys organic or true free range. The costs are too expensive for me to buy all the time. I think Americans should rethink eating meat at most meals. I've not been able to do it regularly.
Both of those terms are pretty meaningless, and their ineffectual enforcement makes them even less so. The solution isn't to humane-wash, it's to stop eating things that come out of chickens' anuses.
That way you are not only doing something healthy for yourself and the animals, it's also supporting the local economy in a meaningful way.
There is nothing healthy about consuming animals. Not for humans, not for animals, not for this planet, not for anyone. And a similar "supporting the economy" justification was used in defense of slavery, which you're still supporting in another form.
Seriously... I advocate people being more aware of where they get their food and cutting down on their meat intake and your first reflex is to compare it to advocating slavery? Sorry but behavior like that is exactly the reason why barely anybody likes vegans or takes them seriously.
Change doesn't happen in massive paradigm shifts, it happens slowly. You won't convince 7 billion people to stop consuming animal products from one day to another. So let's be a little bit realistic and start with small steps which people are actually willing to take, wouldn't that be an actual start?
Except in many parts of the world where they are placed into barns for six months of the year. Or if they're used for veal.
This is a complete fabrication and utter logical fallacy.
* intelligence and potential for suffering
* Duration of suffering
* Endangered status
* Usefulness as a human product
* Ability of average human to empathize with species
Keeping an animal "jailed" purely for entertainment -- "worse." Nobody needs to see dolphins doing tricks in order to survive.
In fact, there's some good arguments (potentially debatable) that eating animal products actually shortens lifespan! The exact opposite of needing meat to survive...
>Meat is eaten purely for pleasure.
So are plants. Do you know how delicious this apple is I'm eating right now?
Additionally, the plants we do eat often evolved to produce food for us. Apple trees and other fruiting plants all evolved to be eaten, so the consumer distributes the seeds in stool. That apple is delicious because the tree had an evolutionary bias to make it delicious so you would eat it. We eat plenty of plants like herbs and cabbages not for that purpose (albeit we did breed cabbages to be mutant and tasty) but an apple is a terrible example of a plant we hurt by eating it.
We don't actually know that for certain. We only know that it does not communicate that pain in a method discernable to us.
You argue the semantics in problem domains we don't fully understand. Feelings and sensations only get wishy-washy when you have a developed nervous system, because we cannot accurately predict how said system behaves due to its complexity. But we do know what is actually ascribed to that system, what behaviors it propagates as, and that things without it don't experience it.
We have vernacular in place to express how plants react to stimuli. Sensation, pain, and feeling are not in that vocabulary, because they describe an essential aspect of the animal kingdom, not the plant one.
Completely wrong, and frankly a pretty stupid thing to say. Plants provide the basis for all life on this planet. Without plants, there would be no complete proteins, there would be no essential fatty acids, there would be no sustainable nutrition for humans nor any other being on this planet. What you're saying is straight up silly. Stop.
This is not a scientifically tenable statement. It's just based on hearsay and various nonsense.
"In the global food web, we discover that humans are similar to anchovy or pigs and cannot be considered apex predators"
-Locking a dolphin up in "jail" or killing a cow/pig?
-Locking the few dolphins up in "jails" or the billions of cows/pigs killed each year?
I think the ethical inconsistencies with regards to animal treatment are huge, but also understandable. I don't know the answers, but the questions do bother me.