Consuming beef is without a doubt a pleasant practice among many individuals. In fact, not many people pose to think about the kind of treatment the animals were compelled to endure before their slaughter. In the article, This Is What Humane Slaughter Looks Like. Is It Good Enough? McClelland seeks to provide a rationale over the ethical principles about beef consumption. Precisely, are animals subjected to a conducive slaughter environment before their death? Is their demise made humane as many people think? He mentions that the United States enforced the Humane Slaughter Act in 1958. However, over the decades, the quality of animal slaughter practices is largely dependent on the type of organization concerned. Precisely, the maintenance of ethical principles when handling animals has not been a major concern for many farmers (Ben n.p). As such it is not enough to claim understanding the humane slaughter principles without having a live experience with the animals. Specifically, “it’s one thing to understand slaughter practices on a theoretical level, it’s another to be in the same room when a cow dies”(McClelland 4). For a fact eating beef is not unethical, the major ethical concern is based on the nature of the humane slaughter issued to the animals during the meat preparation practice.
One might wonder whether the slaughter process can be made ethical according to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) principles. It is worth acknowledging the fact that this claim can be clarified from a subjective perspective. McClelland argues, “Slaughter can be less cruel but not humane” (McClelland 11). This claim is largely justifiable when one has a firm understanding of the events that transpire in the slaughterhouse. Likewise, Wallace (n.p) presents a compelling argument about how the lobsters are treated harshly during their preparation in the Maine Lobster Festival. Regardless of the measures taken towards ensuring appropriate slaughter principles are upheld, a complete perfection in this process cannot be guaranteed due to the nature of treatment the animals endure while in the care of the farmers or the slaughterhouse personnel. In some instances, animals in the slaughterhouse might not die in the first stunning and this situation makes them endure tremendous pain (Pollan n.p). This situation happens in many slaughterhouses and therefore disputes the claim of offering perfect humane slaughter. Consequently, the emergence of ethical concerns about beef consumption is largely based on the meat preparation period.
Intentional abuse few minutes before their slaughter is unethical and it should not be used as a method of enhancing the quality of beef produce. In the article, McClelland mentions, “abusing animals in the last five minutes before their slaughter leads to lactate releases that make meat tough” (McClelland 7). This claim is largely misguided and it promotes the development of unethical treatment of animals in the slaughterhouse. According to the PETA principles, animals have the right not to suffer. A large section of the American population lack proper understandings of the environments animals are exposed to during their preparation (Greenberg n.p). As such, cattle and other animals should be subjected to a respectable slaughter environment. It is therefore unethical for the personnel at slaughterhouses to knowingly subject the cattle to a harsh treatment environment for the benefit of toughening up the meat. Singer (2) argues, “a person can do wrong only by making a perceptible harm.” In this case, hurting the animals knowingly for the benefit of meat toughening is immoral and should not be tolerated.
In conclusion, the controversies emerging from the ethical principles associated with beef consumption are alarming. The humane slaughter act has ensured the appropriate treatment of animals in the killing process but has not completely eliminated the unethical treatment of these creatures. As such, beef consumers should take an initiative to understand the nature of the environment the cattle are subjected to before their demise. It is not unethical to consume beef. However, there is a need to understand how the meat is prepared before making a decision of being a vegetarian.
Works Cited
Bramble, Ben. "Put Your Ethics Where Your Mouth Is". Nytimes.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 15 May 2016.
Greenberg, Paul. "Genetically Engineered Fish And The Strangeness Of American Salmon - The New Yorker". The New Yorker. N.p., 2015. Web. 15 May 2016.
McClelland, Mac. "This Is What Humane Slaughter Looks Like. Is It Good Enough? - Modern Farmer". Modern Farmer. 1-12. 2013. Print.
Pollan, Michael. "An Animal’S Place". Michaelpollan.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 15 May 2016.
Singer, Peter. "A Vegetarian Philosophy." Consuming Passions. Manchester: Sian Griffins & Jennifer Wallace, 1998. 66-72. Print.
Wallace, David Foster. "Consider the lobster." Gourmet magazine (2004): 50-64. Print.
