Does God Support Factory Farms?
Why You Should Care about the Faith-Based
Arguments for (and against) Animal Liberation
by Bruce Friedrich
I’ve been a vegan for 15 years and a full-time animal advocate for
more than 6 years. During this time, I’ve noticed that many animal
activists are not as well-versed as they might be in discussing
vegetarianism and animal issues with people of faith. I can understand
this. Although a practicing Roman Catholic with a degree in Religion and
a continuing interest in Biblical exegesis, I’ll admit that even I
tire of the common faith-based arguments against animal rights and
vegetarianism. You know them: “God put animals here for our use,”
“What about animal sacrifice in the Bible?,” “But Jesus ate
meat,” and so on.
It’s understandable (and easy enough) to simply throw up one’s
hands and go about the business of talking to all the people who don’t
subscribe to the monotheistic faiths. But I would like to suggest that
the level of animal suffering requires that we make pragmatic
decisions, and that a dismissive or disdainful attitude toward religion
does our constituents, the animals, a grave disservice.
According to polls, forty percent of Americans believe in strict
creationism, the Bible-based view that humans were created in final form
by God, and are not the product of evolution. Surely, I figured, this
must be the more liberal notion that, although humans evolved over time,
God was involved in setting the process in motion. But no; according to
polls, forty percent of Americans believe that evolution is wrong.
Heck, even my own Catholic Church, no bastion of liberal thought,
accepts evolution.
Consider, please, that even a cursory review of history indicates
that every social justice movement has required religious support. As
just a few from among many examples: the movements for both abolition of
slavery and civil rights was led by people of faith, many of them in the
black churches, but white support was also, largely, among church
leaders; the movement for independence for India was led by Hindu and
Moslem clerics, as well as by Gandhi, who argued the case for
independence on the basis of Hindu, Moslem, and Christian moral
theory—appealing both to Indians to liberate themselves, and the
British to adhere to Christian dictates by allowing India to be free; in
the 1980’s oppressive Latin American regimes were opposed almost
exclusively by people of faith including, again, both those in these
countries like Archbishop Oscar Romera and the Priests at the University
of Central America, and those in the U.S. that led the modern
underground railroad—the “Sanctuary Movement” that used churches
and synagogues to house political refugees fleeing oppression in El
Salvador, Guatemala, and other countries; the anti-Apartheid movement
was successful as, especially, progressive Jewish and Christian groups
led the movement to divest funds from business that operated in South
Africa; and even more recently, East Timor was granted independence
because of the internal work of faith communities, and the external work
of both the progressive and conservative elements of the Catholic
Church.
I tried to think of some example to counteract these, and although I
thought of others to add to the list of church leaders being essential
to reform, I could think of none to counteract these examples. Even the
turn of the century reforms that began to protect domesticated animals
and to set up SPCAs were spearheaded by church leaders, and the Humane
Slaughter Act, whatever its liabilities, was granted organizational
support, touted by Senator Hubert Humphrey year after year as he
introduced the legislation throughout the mid-1950’s, from Catholic,
Methodist, Presbyterian, and other religious organizations and leaders.
Things haven’t changed that much. Our society remains dogmatically
religious, as anyone who spends much time leafleting will confirm. When
asked in one of the presidential debates what philosopher, current or
past, has most influenced his thinking and life, President Bush said
Jesus Christ; Al and Tipper Gore, the couple from Tennessee who hit
radar screens in a big way by opposing anti-religious content in popular
music, also relied heavily on religious themes and religious support.
One would be hard pressed to find a political race or cause in the U.S.,
other than the animal movement, that does not get significant
support from, especially, progressive Jewish and Christian organizations
and people. Even our number one progressive in Congress, Rep. Dennis
Kucinich, is devoutly religious.
Considering the level of religious interest in the United States, it
seems unlikely that we’ll achieve animal liberation without
mobilizing, especially, Jewish and Christian progressives, and perhaps
also many of the conservatives. Consider that Sen. Bob Smith, perhaps
the most conservative person to serve in the Senate over the past 10
years, was also the best on animal issues and garnered unequivocal
support from Humane USA, the PAC set up by Linda Nealon, Wayne Pacelle,
and others; that Bob Dole, despite being from Kansas, was much better on
animal issues than Bill Clinton, the man from Tyson-town; and consider
the case of Matthew Scully, senior speechwriter for President Bush, who
left the Bush administration to promote his new book, Dominion,
which eloquently argues the case for veganism and animal rights on
conservative and even religious grounds.
Most of us want to be as effective as we can possibly be. Many of us
agonize over the perfect answers for every situation. Nevertheless, many
in the animal and environmental movements seem to have neglected
religious outreach, to the detriment of our effectiveness. Think about
it: In the United States, approximately 91 percent of people identify
themselves as members of some Western, monotheistic, faith—86 percent
are Christians, 3 percent are Muslims, and 3 percent are Jewish. Many
others identify with some Eastern or other non-Monotheistic faith.
Religion constitutes a crucial aspect (often the most crucial aspect)
of many people’s lives, and even a basic grasp of a few major points
may cause someone to pause and reconsider their diet (which may thereby
decrease animal suffering). If well in excess of 90 percent of Americans
are motivated by faith and our efforts as advocates for animal rights
are purely secular in nature, we’re not talking as effectively as we
might to more than nine tenths of our audience. The arguments for
faith-based vegetarianism are overwhelming; to avoid addressing people
of faith is to miss a wonderful and vital opportunity.
With all this in mind, I would like to offer a few helpful hints (and
key points) for having discussions with people of faith. In all cases
that the arguments are similar to the secular arguments with which we
are all familiar, but that they are presented in a religious context.
· Don’t argue over side
issues. People of faith may want to convert you to their way of
thinking, or may be more comfortable discussing abortion, the death
penalty, or the nature of evil. All of these can be interesting
discussions, but you can and should lead the discussion: Keep it
focused on the animals.
· Find Common Ground:
Engage people by using statements and concepts with which they already
agree (e.g., “animal abuse is wrong,” “God created animals,”
and so on). Try not to rewrite the person’s scriptures for them
(don’t argue that the animal sacrifice passages were inserted by
meat-eating scribes or that the Gospels proving Jesus’ vegetarianism
are in a vault under the Vatican); it’s not necessary, and you’ll
be written off.
· Avoid Bible Thumping:
There is such a thing as too much information. As with statistics, you
can find Biblical justification for just about anything (Biblical
support for slavery, murder, and polygamy are actually much stronger
than for meat-eating). No matter how well you know the texts, people
can argue from other perspectives. People of faith can be engaged on
animal issues by anyone, including those with no knowledge of the
texts. General arguments that don’t resort to Biblical citation are
often more effective and less convoluted, as long as the animal
advocate remembers that everyone wants to be viewed as a “good
person,” as compassionate and thoughtful.
Three tried and true suggestions: Three quick arguments that
seem to resonate with people of faith (and you only have to change them
a little for them to work with others as well), because they begin with
something most people already believe, follow. Please note that there
will be many rationalizations that will follow your making these points
(like the comments that began this article); none of them even begin to
answer these crucial points. Try to keep coming back to them; try to
say, “well, that’s an interesting point, but I still don’t see how
you can justify…”.
· God created animals
with needs, wants, desires, and species-specific behaviors. God
designed pigs to root around in the soil for food and play with one
another, desires that pigs engage in on farmed animal sanctuaries. God
designed chickens to make nests, lay eggs, and raise their children
(no less a Christian authority than Jesus compared his love for
humanity to a hen’s love for her brood) when they hatch. God
designed all animals with a desire for sunlight, fresh air, fresh
water, and so on, and design all animals to grow at a certain rate
that won’t tax their appendages and organs. Yet, all of these things
are denied the animals who are turned into food by the farmed-animal
industries—Scientists play “God” by manipulating animals to grow
so quickly that their hearts, lungs, and limbs can’t keep up .
Everything natural to them is denied them as they’re packed into
ammonia-laden sheds. Basically, God’s will is denied completely by
the industries that have decided that they know better than God how
God’s creatures should be treated. The Bible’s covenant is
never just with people—it’s with all flesh, humans and other
animals.
· Everyone agrees that
dogs and cats should be protected, legally, from some of the worst
abuses, and that animal cruelty is not just unethical, but
unchristian. To their great credit, people of faith fill the boxes of
the judges in cruelty to animals cases—when the animals are dogs or
cats. But animals who are raised for food have no protection at all;
anything goes. So the disconnect must be pointed out: If castrating a
dog without painkillers is not okay, then it’s not suddenly okay
because we like the taste of pig or cow flesh. If drugging a cat so
that she grows so fast she can’t walk is not okay, if chopping of
the toes of a dog or a cat is not okay, if slitting a dog or cats
throat open and hacking of their limbs while they’re still
conscious—if any of this is not okay when done to dogs or cats, it
is equally repugnant before God to do these things to any animal.
God even cares for sparrows, according to Jesus. These cruelties are
not acceptable.
· People of faith are
trying to lead moral lives. They can be challenged on the issue of
paying others to do things they couldn’t even watch. All the
Biblical justifications for animal slaughter or eating meat fall to
the side when the challenge is issued: “Would you want to work on a
factory farm, searing the beaks off of chickens or castrating pigs and
cows without painkillers,” and so on? “Well, are other areas of
your life where you participate in practices that not only can you not
do them, but it would repulse you if you had to watch them
happening.” You know, most of us could watch grains being tilled or
even spend an afternoon shucking corn or picking beans, fruits, or
vegetables. Seriously though, how many of us would want to spend an
afternoon slitting open animals’ throats?
Additional questions and answers are available on the www.JesusVeg.com
(FAQ section), www.JewishVeg.com,
and www.ChristianVeg.com
Web sites.
What you can do:
· The most important
thing to do, I think, is to have a basic conversational understanding
of the faith-based arguments. This will not take much time; it will
just require a willingness to accept that people of faith are
basically like you, and to talk to them on their level. The three key
points, above, work particularly well with people of faith, but I use
them in my discussions with everyone, to very good effect.
· If you have a faith
background, contact your local clergy about animal issues. Give them
literature. Write letters to faith-based periodicals. Consider joining
a group such as the Christian Vegetarian Association (www.christianveg.com),
the Society of Religious and Ethical Vegetarians (www.serv-online.org
), or the Jewish Vegetarians of North America (www.JewishVeg.com).
These groups need our support.
· Even if you don’t
have a faith background, one simple action you can take is placing
vegan literature in the literature section of churches, synagogues,
and other places of worship. I have been placing our new
“Christianity and Vegetarianism” pamphlet, by Fr. John Dear, S.J.
(www.JesusVeg.com),
and the Christian Vegetarian Association’s “What would Jesus
eat” pamphlet in the literature area of Catholic churches, and they
are being picked up and read. When I do this just before Mass, I set
them beside the programs, and people pick them up and read them
(sometimes during the Homily, I’ve noticed!) PETA can send you as
many of this pamphlet as you can use this way (order them by sending
an email to [email protected]).
We’re in the process of producing one for Judaism and vegetarianism,
which will be ready in a few months.
People of faith, even in the mainstream religions, are looking for
something beyond themselves. They are looking for meaning in life, and
they want to be good people; they want to be kind. I have not yet heard
a homily that focused on making more money, watching more television, or
eating more food. I have heard more than my fair share of homilies about
kindness, compassion, and justice. I know that similar sermons are
delivered in Mosques, Temples, and Protestant Churches as well.
I have personally stood outside multiple Christian conventions
(including fundamentalist ones like the Southern Baptist Convention) for
entire weekends talking with attendees about vegetarianism, and I can
assure you that this is a valuable expenditure of time. I’ve shown
PETA’s vegetarian video, “Meet Your Meat” (available at www.GoVeg.com),
and passed out literature and even brought along a PETA intern, dressed
as Jesus, holding a sign, “For Christ’s Sake: Go Vegetarian.” Even
at these conventions, by focusing on a few things about which we agree
(see above), I was able reach attendees, and often at a deep and very
effective level.
The level of animal abuse in society is beyond anything we can
imagine. We must maintain a clear-headed focus on how we can change the
world. This must include engaging people of faith, and engaging them
effectively.
Bruce Friedrich is director of vegan outreach for People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals.
|
|