Cruelty to animals

[Jax Agnesson]

I am wondering whether there are any consistent differences between theist and non-theist attitudes to hurting animals for human advantage.
Debate: Do our feelings about hurting animals have any basis other than personal preference?

[Jax Agnesson]

Just for the record; the prevention of cruelty to animals is another innovation which MAY be credited to the Jews. The principle is called, in Hebrew, tza'ar ba'alei chayim (literally, "the suffering of living creatures."

It is indirectly legislated in the Ten Commandments: "The seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; you shall not do any work -- you, your son or your daughter ... you ox or your ass, or any of your cattle..." (Deuteronomy 5:14). If that doesn't seem like a big deal, remember that this was mandated in Jewish tradition in the Bronze Age -- and 3,000 years later, in 1892, the great philanthropist Andrew Carnegie still compelled his human employees at the Homestead Steel Mine in Pennsylvania to work seven days a week.

The legislation about animals doesn't end there. It is forbidden to muzzle an animal while working it in the field (Deuteronomy 25:4), so it could eat all it wanted. "You shall not plow with an ox and a mule harnessed together" (Deuteronomy 22:10) -- being of unequal size and strength, both animals would suffer. A cow and its calf may not be slaughtered on the same day (Leviticus 22:28). If a man finds a bird's nest, he may not kill the mother with the young; he must send her away first (Deuteronomy 22:6); according to Maimonides, this is because "the pain of the animals under such circumstances is very great" (Guide to the Perplexed, 3:48). Maimonides wrote that in the twelfth century.

And it did not end with the Hebrew Bible. In the Talmud, there is a dictum that a man is forbidden to eat until he has fed his animals; and of course kosher slaughter is designed to be painless. One of the Laws of Noah, which in Jewish tradition apply to ALL people, not just Jews, is that one may not eat meat from a living animal; this was, and still is, a practice among some herding people, who will cut meat from an animal, bind up the wound, and cook it over a fire while in the field. (The only common violations of that law for most of us today would be the eating of "mountain oysters," or bull testicles, and stone crab claws.)

Notice that I do not attribute these laws to God. They were present in Jewish tradition by the 5th century BCE at the latest. Whether or not one believes that they come from God is irrelevant.

A lot of this is new to me, and fascinating. Thanks for the info.
Particuarly interesting is the care shown to the wild bird. This is clearly not simply a matter of looking after your animals the way a modern farmer has to look after his machinery. This looks like an early recognition that creatures have feelings, and that we have moral obligations to them on that basis.

[cnorman18]

Just for the record; the prevention of cruelty to animals is another innovation which MAY be credited to the Jews. The principle is called, in Hebrew, tza'ar ba'alei chayim (literally, "the suffering of living creatures."

It is indirectly legislated in the Ten Commandments: "The seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; you shall not do any work -- you, your son or your daughter ... you ox or your ass, or any of your cattle..." (Deuteronomy 5:14). If that doesn't seem like a big deal, remember that this was mandated in Jewish tradition in the Bronze Age -- and 3,000 years later, in 1892, the great philanthropist Andrew Carnegie still compelled his human employees at the Homestead Steel Mine in Pennsylvania to work seven days a week.

The legislation about animals doesn't end there. It is forbidden to muzzle an animal while working it in the field (Deuteronomy 25:4), so it could eat all it wanted. "You shall not plow with an ox and a mule harnessed together" (Deuteronomy 22:10) -- being of unequal size and strength, both animals would suffer. A cow and its calf may not be slaughtered on the same day (Leviticus 22:28). If a man finds a bird's nest, he may not kill the mother with the young; he must send her away first (Deuteronomy 22:6); according to Maimonides, this is because "the pain of the animals under such circumstances is very great" (Guide to the Perplexed, 3:48). Maimonides wrote that in the twelfth century.

And it did not end with the Hebrew Bible. In the Talmud, there is a dictum that a man is forbidden to eat until he has fed his animals; and of course kosher slaughter is designed to be painless. One of the Laws of Noah, which in Jewish tradition apply to ALL people, not just Jews, is that one may not eat meat from a living animal; this was, and still is, a practice among some herding people, who will cut meat from an animal, bind up the wound, and cook it over a fire while in the field. (The only common violations of that law for most of us today would be the eating of "mountain oysters," or bull testicles, and stone crab claws.)

Notice that I do not attribute these laws to God. They were present in Jewish tradition by the 5th century BCE at the latest. Whether or not one believes that they come from God is irrelevant.

A lot of this is new to me, and fascinating. Thanks for the info.
Particuarly interesting is the care shown to the wild bird. This is clearly not simply a matter of looking after your animals the way a modern farmer has to look after his machinery. This looks like an early recognition that creatures have feelings, and that we have moral obligations to them on that basis.

That's the way I read it too, and I can't think of another way to do so.

I make no claims here, but I don't know of any other society, culture or religion that developed this particular perception -- that animals have feelings, so to speak, and those feelings ought to be recognized and taken into account, even when slaughtering them -- before it appeared among the Hebrews. I don't know enough of Hinduism, the more ancient religion, to speak to that issue. That some iterations of Hinduism revere life is beyond question, but that's not quite the same thing.

[Jax Agnesson]

This being a Christian forum, it would be interesting to read some Christian views on the relationship between humans and the other animals.
Any offers?

[connermt]

I've always felt strongly about preventing animal cruelity. But I've noticed, after I stepped away from christianity, my feelings on preventing animal cruelity has increased ten fold. Maybe it's about not hearing how wonderful humanity is, how much god cares for humanity, etc.
I've noticed that I have more empathy for animals than people, as a general rule. Likey it's because I feel humans can take care of themselves a lot better/easier than animals.

If it were up to me, anyone who purposefully abuses an animal (or person) should be put to death immediately. But that's just me.

[Logomachist]

I'm a Christian, and humane treatment of animals has become an important issue for me such that I now limit my meat and fish intake to animals that were sustainably and humanely raised. I haven't seen this pushed by any Christian relgious leaders though.

Here in Lancaster county the Amish are notorious for their puppy mills.