Question 6: Case Study Flashcards
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE:
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Jenna Woginrich shares her journey from being a vegetarian to ethically raising and eating her own meat. She initially gave up meat due to concerns about animal cruelty and the horrors of factory farming. However, over time, she realized that avoiding meat altogether didn’t address the root problem: the system of industrialized animal agriculture. Living on a small farm, she began to raise her own animals with care and respect, ensuring they lived good lives and died humanely. This experience changed her relationship with meat. She came to believe that eating meat isn’t inherently unethical—it’s how animals are treated that matters most. Woginrich argues that conscientious meat-eating—where the consumer knows the source and conditions of the meat—is more ethical than blind vegetarianism that still relies on industrial agriculture for dairy, eggs, or processed plant-based foods. For her, taking responsibility for both life and death is a more honest and connected way to live.
From a pacifist perspective, the news article on meat consumption would raise concerns about violence and the ethical treatment of living beings.
The concept of negative peace would be relevant as the consumption of meat often involves violence and the taking of life, directly contradicting the absence of violence towards animals.
Positive peace, which includes freedom from violence and inequality, could be argued to extend to animals as well, suggesting that a truly peaceful society would minimize harm and suffering to all sentient beings.
Conscientious objectors
Conscientious objectors refuse to participate in war due to moral objections to violence. This principle could be broadened to include moral objections to the industrial processes involved in meat production, which often involve conditions that cause suffering to animals. Passive resistance could manifest in the form of boycotting meat products as a non-violent way to protest the treatment of animals.
Anabaptists’ historical focus was on
While the Anabaptists’ historical focus was on rejecting state violence and participation in civil government, their emphasis on Christian principles of non-violence could be interpreted by some to extend to the treatment of animals.
Pacifist thinkers
Pacifist thinkers like Tolstoy, with his advocacy for vegetarianism rooted in the principle of loving one’s neighbor, would strongly condemn meat consumption as a form of violence against animals. His emphasis on non-violent persuasion might lead a pacifist to advocate for educating people about the ethical implications of meat consumption and encouraging them to adopt vegetarian or vegan diets.
Satyagraha
Satyagraha, with its emphasis on non-violence in thought, action, and speech, would likely view the entire system of industrial animal agriculture and meat consumption as fundamentally flawed due to the inherent violence and potential for cruelty involved. A follower of satyagraha might engage in non-violent action and advocacy to promote compassion and non-violence towards animals.
