I do not support extremist groups like PETA, but, actually, I have to confess that they do have some points. All species evolved in their natural habitats and should be left IN their natural habitats to play their natural roles in the natural scheme of things. Let's say I buy an animal as a pet. No matter how well I look after this animal, and no matter how lucky this animal is to have the opportunity to live a comfy and pampered life under my ownership, the underlying fact remains that I bought this animal for MY reasons. The decision-making process was all mine, mine and mine. One point of view is that, in fact, we have no ethical right to unilaterally impose the outcomes of OUR decision-making processes onto creatures who had no say DURING the processes. One point of view is that, even if I am not BUYING an animal for a pet, but just rescuing one, eg, a wild bird which was hit by a car and is lying on the side of the road IN PAIN, suffering from a broken wing, that I have gone too far and have overstepped the limits of where my rights end, and intruded beyond the limits of where another's rights begin. One point of view is that, even if there are clear benefits to the individual animal being rescued, the extent of the benefits to this one individual do not outweigh the extent of the infringements upon the right of the whole species to exist in its own natural habitat. Considered in this light, our ethical responsibility to other species would be to let them continue to play their own roles in their own habitats, and if we, as humans, need to do anything to help, it would be to prevent these habitats from being affected by human activities. It is when the rights of the entire species are being considered, rather than the rights of individual specimens of that species, that the PETA slogan of "Better dead than bred!" has some validity. When humans make animals their pets, this activity is un-natural. A case can be made that the entire human species is no longer natural. Our relationship with the rest of the universe is that of a parasite. We consider all the plants, animals, minerals, petrochemicals, fossil fuels, even solar, wind and tidal energy, all to be for OUR, OUR, OUR and OUR benefit. If we take the position that we are cancer cells on Mother Nature, then we SHOULD work very hard to come up with a medicine that will wipe out these cancer cells from Mother Nature's body. I used the word, "SHOULD", because I don't. I am one of the cancer cells with a huge voracious appetite for consuming and devouring the universe. This is quite sad, I know. It can be even called the tragedy that is the human condition.
