Do You Agree With Peter Singer

I agree with Peter Singer about our consumption of meat because it’s basically for our interests and needs and how we like it. I agree with the principle of equal consideration because it’s not fair to animals living miserable lives to satisfy one interest in our life. Their whole life is only for one part of our life, which is food, where we can find different ways to live and eat healthy. Keeping animals in a factory farm is not a healthy way of producing food because the animals have been fattened from grains and other foods that we could from them. There are different ways to eat meat than the cows that are being mistreated in factory farms such as eating meat that is organic. Animal products that are organic are allowed to graze outside.

Competition in the marketplace causes animals to live miserable lives for the price of their meat. The lower the price goes, the more miserable their lives get. Animals are eaten more for the flavor than the health or increase of food supply. This causes them to be treated unhealthy just for people’s taste buds. I agree how it’s different for other people who hunt to eat animals in order to survive, but it’s different for the people in the industrialized cities. Singer states that people shouldn’t eat meat that is produced by factory farms. I think that most people choose to eat meat that is produced by factory farms because the prices in stores are cheaper than the meat from organic places. Of course more people would eat the cheaper meat, which causes animals to still be mistreated. Benjamin Franklin objected Peter Singer’s argument by saying, “Animals eat each other, so why shouldn’t we eat them?” I disagree with this because animals are different than humans who follow a natural law called survival of the fittest. Singer stated that Franklin’s objection wouldn’t really be successful because if we had to hunt for our food, we would be eating the right animals that have access to nature instead of the factory