Animal Liberation Movement

It would take far more than the space allotted here to comprehensively describe the philosophical and ethical debates that have contributed to the foundation of animal law. Suffice to say that although in the law animals are regarded as the property of human animals, yet in being accorded some protection against mistreatment and cruelty, it could be said that animal law has an ethical, or moral, cornerstone that other property law does not have. If there is such a cornerstone, it would be due at least in part to a recognition that animals are sentient beings, just as human animals are. In fact, the Australian government has as its blueprint for the development of animal law in Australia a statement that it is concerned with humane treatment of 'sentient animals', and a recognition that '[a]ll animals have intrinsic value' (at the time of writing this article, it is unknown whether we are referring here to the present or past government).

That's all well and good, one might think. As a result, a range of animals are being protected against cruelty and increasingly harsh penalties are being imposed on those that break that law. Our domestic animals are given today the protection that humans like slaves, women and children have been deprived of at various times in history (as they too were considered 'property' and denied legal personhood). However, there are far, far more sentient animals being denied protection against cruelty than those that are protected; in fact, the extent of suffering deliberately imposed on some animals by humans, and their sheer numbers, makes that moral cornerstone appear very shaky indeed.

Animals continue to suffer acutely in puppy or kitten mills, in battery cages, pig pens and other factory farming situations, on live transportation ships, on the recreational hunting grounds, and in research laboratories.

Grab The Bookmarketer For Your Site