Tom Regan
Regan is professor of philosophy at North Carolina State University. He is a deontologist and an abolitionist. He argues that at least some animals are “subjects-of-a-life”. This means they have beliefs, desires, memories, and sense of their own future, and because of this they must be treated as an end, not a means to an end.
This argument stems from his idea that human’s moral rights. These rights stem from our possession of cognitive abilities. The fact that some nonhuman animals are also in possession of these abilities means they have the same moral rights.
Regan places the role of moral-agent with humans, and so he argues that: marginal-case humans, such as infants, and some nonhumans must have the status of “moral patients”.
The position of moral patients is that they are unable to formulate moral principles. For this reason they are unable to be judged as being in the right
…show more content…
(2) A person is taken to engage in conduct for a purpose mentioned in subsection (1) if the person engages in the conduct for purposes that include that purpose.
Rural Export & Trading (WA) Pty Ltd v Hahnheuser [2008]
Facts
The Defendants, Ralph Hahnheuser and Animal Liberation SA (ALSA), put ham in the feed pens of a group of sheep that were being held to be exported to the Middle East. He did this in an attempt to halt the live transport of the sheep. By placing the ham in the feedpens, and the sheep then consuming the food, meant the sheep were unacceptable under halal slaughter for Muslim to consumer.
The company holding the sheep before there export, Rural Export & Trading WA Pty Ltd, brought proceedings stating Mr Hanheuser and ALSA were in breach of section 45DB of the Trade Practices Act 1974(Cth). Rural Export brought this action, claiming Mr Hahnheuser had “substantially hindered” the company, which specialised in live trade, to participate in trade or