Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
He campaigned for the welfare of animals and the ethical necessity of a vegetarian diet. [3] Ritson spent years collecting information for the book. [4] He argued that animal food is cruel, unnecessary and the result of provocative cannibalism. Ritson believed that man's only chance of happiness is to develop higher moral virtues of benevolence ...
For example, some laws govern methods of killing animals for food, clothing, or other products, and other laws concern the keeping of animals for entertainment, education, research, or pets. There are several conceptual approaches to the issue of cruelty to animals.
An Essay on Humanity to Animals is a 1798 book by English theologian Thomas Young. It advocates for the ethical treatment and welfare of animals. It argues for recognising animals' natural rights and condemns the various forms of cruelty inflicted upon them in human activities. Drawing on moral, scriptural, and philosophical reasoning, Young ...
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an ordinance passed in Hialeah, Florida, forbidding the unnecessary killing of "an animal in a public or private ritual or ceremony not for the primary purpose of food consumption", was unconstitutional.
Animal sacrifice was general among the ancient Near Eastern civilizations of Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt and Persia, as well as the Hebrews (covered below).Unlike the Greeks, who had worked out a justification for keeping the best edible parts of the sacrifice for the assembled humans to eat, in these cultures the whole animal was normally placed on the fire by the altar and burned, or ...
Title page of An Essay on Humanity to Animals (1798). Young presented a theological argument against animal cruelty in his 1798 work, An Essay on Humanity to Animals.In the essay, he analyses nine key scriptural references, using them to condemn approximately 15 common forms of cruelty towards animals [4] and to argue that God values animals and expects humans to show similar care. [5]
No-kill shelters still keep licensed euthanasia technicians on-site, but they only euthanize an animal out of medical necessity, end-of-life care or genuine danger posed by the animal’s behavior ...
The animal must be killed by a shochet – religious slaughterer also known in Hebrew as shochet ubodek (slaughterer and inspector). An inspection is mandatory and the animal is rejected for Jewish consumption if certain imperfections are discovered. A shochet must be a Jew in good standing in the community. The training period for a shochet ...