Loving animals

A new article by Marc Berkoff is available here.
It gives good reasons as to why we should give animals consideration as individuals, beyond the concept of animal welfare, which posits that animals do not have rights beyond a minimum of care for some species. It includes examples of animal’s capacities to feel both physically and emotionally (which new research is revealing as more profound than we ever imagined). It concludes with an interesting ‘Animals manifesto - 10 reasons why animals are asking us to treat them better or leave them alone.’ This is a good enough start point.
One sentence struck me was:
‘When people tell me they’re doing the best they can do and that they love animals and then harm or kill them I always tell them I’m glad they don’t love me.’

A wonderful example of this attitude that I have personally seen is in the ridiculous spectacle of Australian RSPCA branches which raise money for companion animals through selling other animals bodies in sausage sizzles (Australian term for street hot dog sales). All of the volunteers selling meat would I am sure have labelled themselves as animal lovers.

The argument for animals is a strong philosophic, scientific and moral one. Animals have moral rights to life, as well as freedom from human captivity and infliction of pain, simply by existing – but if that is not enough then because of their sentience, because we share this earth, and because we have no need to harm them. Any emotional argument beyond that is irrelevant. Opposing cruelty to animals cannot be based logically on love, and should be irrespective of emotional entanglements with particular animals or a particular species
If you love animals or an animal, then that would also imply that one could also fall out of love with them or become disengaged with them. This is not a sound footing for any sustaining argument.
I do not and have not loved any individual animal, nor do I have any love for any other non-human species (and I’m pretty choosy about humans too). I can see aesthetic beauty in some non-human species and can admire qualities in others, but there is no real emotional engagement.
In May this year a large white egret came to the large pond in my back garden, in which there were 50 or so goldfish (from an originally saved 5). This egret killed and ate them all. Although I felt regret that the fish had died, I was not greatly emotionally disturbed, and if I had loved the fish would I be expected then to hate egrets, even though they were acting within their nature. Conversely, though if someone said they were going to catch the fish and kill them I would have been enormously emotionally perturbed.
Not being an ‘animal lover’ has never impinged on my attitude that it is immoral to kill, eat, experiment or otherwise interfere with them. And not loving animals does not mean I am not emotionally passionate about defending their rights, it only means I do so in a clear-sighted fashion. There is love at work, but I suppose it is a wider concept, I am in love with the idea of life, and consequently believe that no individual animal should suffer or die needlessly (understanding of course that meat for humans is not necessary).