To learn more about the upcoming Special Edition of Satya and Call for Submissions, click here.

May 1997 Animal Rights and the Law By Bryan Kortis

It will take more than laws to stop human cruelty to animals. Bryan Kortis explains.

The law is often thought of as a way to secure greater protection for animals. But, in general, the law is a clumsy instrument when it comes to large scale social change. As an institution, the law reflects society's values much more than it shapes them. It is a mirror, not a catalyst. This is especially true when it comes to animal rights.

For example, our culture has divided up animals into categories of worthiness. The law mirrors these divisions by giving more protection to animals deemed worthier. The current effort to save dolphins demonstrates this principle. Although in truth all beings are equal, society now considers dolphins to be valuable near-humans, while tuna are still considered good meat for a sandwich. As a result, while many dolphins have been spared by changing legislation on tuna fishing, the untold millions of tuna still being slaughtered do not have the slightest legal protection.

The law's treatment of domestic animals also reflects the distinctions which people have made in measuring particular animals' importance. In the West, dogs and cats have been popularly chosen by humans to be part of their personal and emotional lives. As a result, dogs and cats receive some small protection from anti-cruelty statutes. Farm animals, on the other hand, have been chosen by people to be eaten and so have virtually no rights at all. It's legal to run a factory where chickens have their beaks cut off, are stuffed together in battery cages so they can't turn around, and are killed by machines which hang them upside down, slit their throats and dip them in boiling water, when some of them are still alive.

Choices and Distinctions

Even among our favored species, the law draws distinctions. Dogs and cats who are "owned" and part of people's home lives receive more legal protection than those who are not. If your neighbor sawed his cat's head open and stuck wires in her brain, there's a good chance you could have him prosecuted for cruelty. But if the same thing was done to a cat who lived in a lab as part of an experiment, it would be legal. Likewise, dogs and cats who are strays and excluded from human ownership are treated much more harshly by the law. Humane organizations are sometimes the same agencies which prosecute people for injuring companion animals, and yet put unwanted animals or strays to death. Similarly, as certain animals come to be seen as more useful to people, their level of legal rights rises. So-called "service" animals, such as seeing-eye dogs, animals used as therapeutic tools, or companion animals for the disabled are allowed more and more to remain in public housing. These very same animals, if their perceived usefulness to humans ended, would be stripped of these rights.

The law then reflects the choices and distinctions people have already made when it comes to animals. Theoretically, laws could be passed which would impose values instead of reflecting them, but that is unlikely to happen. Until people realize tuna and cows are just as entitled to their lives as dolphins and cats, there isn't going to be a law banning fishing for tuna or killing cattle. Likewise, until society recognizes that the dog in a lab or at a shelter deserves love and attention as much as their own dog, equal treatment is not going to be legislated.

Understanding the Genesis

As far as the animal rights movement is concerned, the law will not be our savior. Change in people's values must come first before the law will be of much help. But, before society's values can be changed, we must understand why the vast majority of people continue to condone the exploitation and suffering of animals.

At a conference in 1996 at the City Bar Association, Gary Francione, a professor of law at Rutgers University, placed the problem of animal exploitation in the broader context of a capitalist society geared towards "commoditization." Such a society, he argued, views powerless beings as commodities and property for the profitable use of those who have power. In the past, slaves and women were commodities in this country. Animals continue to be. In addition to blame being placed on our capitalist economic system, I have also heard that it is Judeo-Christian ethics or the continuation of patriarchy that are the soource of the problem. Still, they are only symptoms of our social illness and not the cause.

We are the basic underlying problem. We are society. Just as the law reflects society's values, society's values reflect each one of us. As the Indian philosopher J. Krishnamurti once said, "You are the world and the world is you." There is no amount of violence, no exploitation or lack of love which we cannot find the essence of in ourselves if we look hard and honestly enough. We need to ask ourselves: do we draw arbitrary distinctions among forms of life, considering only some worthy of appreciation? Do we seek change from a place of anger, or from love and caring? When a person is speaking, do we really know how to listen? Do we kill with our thoughts?

If we do this -- if we see that the seeds of our difficulties, including the mistreatment of animals, can be found and understood within each of us as individuals -- then perhaps we will be better able to control our behavior and compassion will begin to grow. It is not the legal system, nor the manipulation of public opinion, nor any type of social engineering (although all these things have their place), that will solve the mess we are in. Real -- as in total -- change is going to have to come from within, one person at a time. Only then will there be a revolution of the mind, which can save us and all other animals on this planet.

Bryan Kortis is an animal activist who lives in New York City.

Back

Next