What harmful practices? The material scope of animal protection legislation: commentary on Birch on 'Precautionary Principle'
Jonathan Birch proposes a criterion for the subjective scope of animal protection legislation. He says nothing about its material scope: which harmful practices it should regulate. I argue, first, that most moral views would agree that the worst forms of animal exploitation should be legally forbidd...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Language: | eng |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1822/48068 |
| Country: | Portugal |
| Oai: | oai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/48068 |
| Summary: | Jonathan Birch proposes a criterion for the subjective scope of animal protection legislation. He says nothing about its material scope: which harmful practices it should regulate. I argue, first, that most moral views would agree that the worst forms of animal exploitation should be legally forbidden, even if there will inevitably be disagreement about some cases of animal experimentation. I also argue that, when feasible, there should be legal provisions to help wild animals. |
|---|