Pro-life bigots
Wesley J. Smith believes in "universal human equality" but excludes
*animals* from moral concern. This is *speciesism* or discrimination on the
basis of species. Wesley J. Smith warns: "Those with insufficient
capacities, are to be deemed human 'non-persons,' are to be viewed of lesser
moral value, and hence, potentially subject to both killing and
objectification for harvesting, medical experimentation, etc.
In Animal Liberation, Peter Singer writes about vivisection (animal
experimentation): "...their readiness to use nonhuman animals reveals an
unjustifiable form of discrimination on the basis of species... The LD50
tests, the Draize eye tests, the radiation experiments, the heatstroke
experiments, and many others that cause suffering to nonhuman animals could
have told us more about human reactions to the experimental situation if
they had been carried out on severely brain-damaged humans instead of dogs
or rabbits.
"So whenever experimenters claim that their experiments are important enough
to justify the use of animals, we should ask them whether they would be
prepared to use a brain-damaged human being at a mental level similar to
that of the animals they are planning to use... What difference is there
between the two? Only that one is a member of our species and the other is
not? But to appeal to that difference is to reveal a bias no more defensible
than racism or any other form of arbitrary discrimination."
And *Wesley J. Smith* is calling Peter Singer a bigot? Admittedly,
the case against abortion on secular human rights grounds is weakened once
species membership is no longer the deciding factor.
Since when have pro-lifers feared secular political debate or a growing
secular political movement?
Go on to: Pro-Life Hippies
Return to: Articles
