Animals

Maintaining a clean conscience means "that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn."

Splitting hairs? Why shouldn't both practices elicit the same moral response?

Some justifications for carnivorous behavior offer very little meat.

Speciesism and racism have much less in common than we typically assume.

Do "invaders," like the green iguana, deserve to be destroyed?

What happens when we discover that even mosquitos have interests?

'Beast' or 'being'? How do we justify the bright line we draw determining legal protection?

Can we justify the deliberate slaughter of animal subjects when available alternatives exist?

How entities get categorized is invariably a loaded determination filled with additional ethical baggage.

What responses are justified in attempting to insulate ourselves from the risk of zoonotic diseases?

Should humans intervene to prevent even the "useless pain" of animals in the wild?

Are the duties we have to the natural world and its inhabitants best fulfilled through programs of modification or restoration?

Might humans be responsible for protecting wildlife from the torment of parasites and disease?

Human-guided breeding is responsible for life-threatening deformity.

The jury is still out on the ethics surrounding this modern miracle.

Is it time we mount an intervention to keep our feline friends away from the night life?

Are there any moral considerations separating different kinds of meat? Cultural attitudes tell us one thing, but what might consistency demand?

On what grounds might we justifiably distinguish between those with interests and those without them?

Is an animal's experience of pain the best (only?) metric by which to justify our treatment of them?

We need to interrogate the realities that demand we sacrifice our moral ideals and live with second-best solutions.