Letter: Pain is the clue to animal rights

Richard Mountford
Tuesday 17 December 1996 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Janet George (letter, 16 December) describes animal rights as a "spurious" philosophy. I beg to differ. We may believe that the quality of the average adult human life is such that it is more important than the life of a non-human animal. It is less self-evident that a new-born infant or even an adult with a profound mental disability has a higher quality of life than many animals.

However we would still, quite rightly, be horrified if someone suggested that we should deliberately inflict pain on these people for medical research or rear them in cramped cages and then use them as food. The reason why this would be unethical cannot simply be that they are a member of our own species. That would be arbitrary and no more logical than a racist or sexist would be in giving special treatment to their own race or gender.

The real reason that we cannot justify treating people in this way is because they would suffer pain and deprivation, through no fault of their own, and not for their own benefit. These arguments apply equally to the animals that we use for vivisection and factory farming. These practices are therefore immoral for the same reasons as if they were done to people. They should be stopped immediately.

RICHARD MOUNTFORD

Birmingham

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in