Speciesism is the pillar that holds the argument of the animal rights’ groups. Speciesism is an act of discriminating a living form based on its species. The representative used racism and sexism as a parallel example to help the audience better grasp this concept of speciesism. From the perspective of the animal rights’ activist, just like racism and sexism, discrimination against an organism based on its species is wrong. They argued, who rendered humans the rights to view animals as inferior beings that can be USED for research in ways which humans wouldn’t be used? Apparently, this is speciesism, discriminating against animals as they are viewed as the inferior organism. At first glance, it seemed almost noble. I mean, wow, here is a group that has picked up the discriminatory act of humans against animals. They proposed that the act of speciesism has become so naturalised (ingrained in the society over centuries, that it has become a natural habit), as was racism and sexism at some point in time, that people have yet to see why it’s wrong.

When I first heard this, I thought to myself, “Oh my, could this be true? Have I been practising an unjust discrimination all these years but just never saw it?” But the more thought I gave it, the more I realised how intangible this concept was. If speciesism was a concept rooted in truth, it will first and foremost, be applicable (i.e you can actually practise not being a speciest) and secondly, you should be able to apply it without conditions. For example, you can’t stand against racism but say that it cannot be applied to all races, that to some races, racism would still have to apply. That would be absurd, wouldn’t it? It’s like saying, ‘Hey, racism is discriminatory! It is wrong! We should not do it….. Except if it is against (let’s just say for argument’s sake) Indians, then you can practise racism’. You see that is the problem with speciesism. To truly stand against speciesism, means to not discriminate any living thing based on its species. After all, the argument WAS who are we to determine humans are the superior being. But to truly practise non-speciesism, one would have to stop eating, because we wouldn’t eat human meat, now would we? So, what gave humans the rights to feed on animal and plants? Who decided that these organisms are the ‘inferior’ being that we can feed on? Isn’t it discriminatory to not eat human meat, and value human life and yet to not value animals’ and plants’ life with equal consideration?

I am sure, many are going, ‘But that’s a different thing!’. How so? For speciesism to be a truly tangible argument, one should be able to apply non-speciesism effectively but as you can see, practising non-speciesism DIRECTLY means non-survival. I guess one can, out of his ‘nobility’ of being ‘non-discriminatory’ choose to die than to feed on plants and animals. Hmm, yeah right?

You see the confusion we end up with. Our sense of justice and righteousness must lead humanity to its fullest potential and purpose. If our sense of justice and righteousness leads to death instead of elevating humanity, then there is something very distorted about that sense of justice and righteousness.

When you put God into the picture, it’s almost like how a person with short-sightedness found his/her pair of spectacles. Everything becomes clearer. With God in the picture, we know that humans were created in the likeness and image of God himself. We were given His nature. Our inquisitiveness, intelligence, desire for Love and Truth, our fulfilment as a community, our Reason, our able to execute Will, all these goods things point to the likeness of God, imparted to us by His grace. Humans were given dominion over the creatures of the earth. Do you realise how even this points our being created in the likeness of God? Humans were given dominion over the creatures of the earth as God has dominion over all things on heaven and earth. We were entrusted to lead and treat the creatures of earth with utmost care, compassion and justice while enabling them to achieve their fullest potential and use but these cannot mean that the creatures of the earth will attain equality with humanity which rules over them. The very same way, God is God, who leads and treats us humans with utmost care, compassion and justice while always guiding us to achieve our fullest potential as His ultimate creation but these cannot mean that we will attain equality with God, that we shall become God ourselves. This cannot mean, that now, we shall decide what the order of creatures shall be, we shall decide (devoid of God’s Truth) what wrong and right is, that we shall be the ‘Lords’ and no God shall govern us, that no God shall impose His Truth or Justice on us. That is what idolatry really is.

I see how messed up we become when we take God out of the equation. I see how human wisdom without divine guidance leads to a dead end, to death ultimately. But despite all this, I cannot make you believe in God. I cannot convince you how incomplete, misguided and lost we become when we kick God out of the picture. I can only pray that you will be open to see these things, and that when you do, I pray that you will find the courage and humility to admit that there is indeed a God. And not a God, who Lord it over us, taking us against our will, against our happiness but a Lord who fulfils us, a Lord who gives of Himself so completely, so that we may one day find ourselves. A Lord who lives, a Lord who is patient in waiting for His child to return to Him, a Lord who will never give up us, even when all around us do.