Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Currently, the law treats animals almost exclusively under a welfare model. Animals are still classified as property (chattel). You cannot sue a dog for biting you; you sue the owner. You cannot have a will that leaves money to your cat; you leave it to a human trustee to care for the cat. A few countries (France, Switzerland, Germany) have reclassified animals as "beings" rather than "things," but they have not granted them legal standing or the right to sue. Strengths:
It is important to note a nuanced figure: Peter Singer. Often called the father of the modern animal movement, Singer is technically a utilitarian (welfarist), not a rights theorist. He argues that we must give equal consideration to the interests of all sentient beings. However, because a pig’s interest in avoiding pain is identical to a human’s, and because the pleasure humans get from eating bacon is trivial compared to the pig’s suffering, Singer concludes we should go vegan. But he would theoretically allow an animal to be used if the total pleasure outweighed the pain (e.g., a painless death to feed a starving person). Regan and Francione would reject this. Despite their differences, the two movements are not enemies
Despite their differences, the two movements are not enemies. In the political arena, they often find themselves on the same side of the voting booth. The rise of Effective Altruism and legislative victories (such as California’s Proposition 12, which bans the sale of pork from confined pigs) often result from a "big tent" coalition. Despite their differences
Where do you fit?