You don't have to love animals to recognize that it is immoral and unjust to exploit them. But if you do love animals, but you continue to participate in their exploitation, you need to rethink your idea of what love means.
Interpretation
This quote emphasizes the moral obligation to treat animals ethically, regardless of personal feelings about them.
Gary L. Francione's quote highlights the ethical responsibility in our interactions with animals. He asserts that even if one does not have a fondness for animals, the exploitation of them is inherently wrong. Moreover, he challenges those who claim to love animals yet still partake in practices that harm them, suggesting a reevaluation of their understanding of love. The essence of the quote stresses the importance of aligning our actions with ethical beliefs and emotions.
In practice
During a speech at an animal rights event, one might use this quote to provoke thought about ethical treatment.
The idea that we have the right to inflict suffering and death on other sentient beings for the trivial reasons of palate pleasure and fashion is, without doubt, one of the most arrogant and morally repugnant notions in the history of human thought.
Humans treat animals as things that exist as means to human ends. That's morally wrong. Sexism promotes the idea that women are things that exist as means to the ends of men. That's morally wrong. We need to stop treating all persons - whether human or nonhuman - as things.
They are nonhuman persons. They are not food. If animals matter morally at all, there is one and only one rational response: go vegan. Everything else is just participation in animal exploitation.
We cannot talk simultaneously about animal rights and the 'humane' slaughter of animals.
We are vegans not simply because being vegan will reduce suffering. We are vegan because every sentient being values her or his life even if no one else does. We are vegan because justice minimally requires that we not take life for trivial purposes.
We can no more justify using nonhumans as human resources than we can justify human slavery. Animal use and slavery have at least one important point in common: both institutions treat sentient beings exclusively as resources of others. That cannot be justified with respect to humans; it cannot be justified with respect to nonhumans—however “humanely” we treat them.
Reason" in language - oh, what an old deceptive female she is! I am afraid we are not rid of God because we still have faith in grammar.
Possibly it had occurred to him the colossal significance of that light had now vanished forever. [...] It had seemed as close as a star to the moon. Now it was a green light on a dock. His count of enchanted objects had diminished by one.
When I was a kid in Ireland, there were not very many black people. I was very much like the strange brown thing, intriguing and cute. I didn't experience racism there. The first time I did was in London. It was that moment that you realize you're black. A kind of lifting of the veil.
Even my desire to become free or enlightened is just another craving for fulfillment or completion in the future. So don’t seek to become free or desire or “achieve” enlightenment. Become present.
A clash of doctrine is not a disaster, it is an opportunity.
I do think the patriotic thing to do is to critique my country. How else do you make a country better but by pointing out its flaws?
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.