Journal #12
Page 2 Paragraph One-
The morals of a vegetarian or a pescatarian is tough since a pescatarian is still eating fish which is meat and comes from a living thing. The point that the author is trying to prove by this passage is the fact that it is hard to stay moral and the slightest thing can change how moral you are when it comes to food. A woman had gone from being almost strictly vegetarian for years yet when her husband made her a dish of poultry with raspberries which she loves very much, she lost her morals and ate it. She was a vegetarian for 15 years but since her husband made the dish and used her favorite thing which is raspberries it was over in just one taste and she did not go back to being vegetarian. She had gone to full blown carnivore eating all kinds of meat without care.
Page 2 Paragraph 2-
A college student who oversaw disposing and killing the baby chickens at the end of experiments had no problem doing it at all and he had zero thought behind it. He had to do it for a class, so he had no moral worries and was not shaken up at all. But one day his mother had sent him a magazine about animal rights. He immediately changed his point of view and stopped eating meat and thought about if what he did was moral. He had stopped wearing leather and gone vegetarian very quickly and pressured his girlfriend into it too. He questioned having pets and let his pet bird go into the wild. This is proving the authors points that there is a connection between humans and animals and our moral compass is constantly being challenged or changed with ease. This could be for the good where there is less animal murder for no reason and giving them a chance. In other cases, though it could be the change to lack of care for an animal’s life unlike this passage.
Page 2 Paragraph 4-
This passage proves what I believe is the authors point by talking about the fact that humans have always had connections with animals. One of the examples that he uses is the fact that there was a woman whose husband accused her of loving a manatee over him. She spent every single day with this animal playing with it and feeding it. If she had left the animal got moody like a child would by getting sad and not eating any of its food, it was given. She shares a twenty-year bond with this animal and I have no idea if she is still with her husband. Her morals were affected in a different way as the animal she cared for wasn’t really a pet and kind of was at the same time. She treated it like her child and cared more about the animal then other people. Other morals shown is the caring of animal lives but not the extreme attachment or the lack of care at all out of nowhere. This woman brought it to a whole new level with animal love and care over that of a human.
Page 4 Full Paragraph 1-
The debate of Moral or unmoral with animals doesn’t just include what we do to animals, but we allow to happen in order to benefit other animals. It extends to what kind of pet we can have as a cat or a snake. This passage is asking the moral implications behind pets such as these. On one hand the snake only eats meat, but some are pests or pre-killed animals. Sometimes there are live animals though. Then there are cats though which if allowed to roam outside will several different animals from rodent and birds to even frogs or toads. The idea that is being challenged is if it is alright to allow predatory animals to be pets or if it is alright to allow them to kill living animals in the wild or in a tank instead of giving them processed food. There is also the discussion of which pet is more moral to have that is continued on. This is between the snake and cat and I believe the snake would be more moral. It eats less and is also less of a danger to animals outside its cage as it won’t get let out like a cat would.
