Animal Rights

If Animal Sacrifice is Wrong, Then Why is It Okay to Eat Meat?

| by Gary L Francione

Many people are very unhappy with a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Ciurcuit, Merced v. Kasson, in which the court enjoined officials of the city of Euless, Texas from enforcing various ordinances to stop Santería practitioners
from performing animal sacrifices using goats, lambs, and other
animals, including ducks, chickens, and guinea hens. The Santería
practitioners offer animal blood to deities and then cook and consume
at least part of some of the animals. The federal court did not decide
the case under the federal Constitution but under a state law
guaranteeing freedom of religion (although the decision would probably
have been the same if the matter were analyzed under the federal

The moral issue involved in this case is similar to the one presented in the Michael Vick
case. To the extent that there are differences, this case is actually
stronger than the Vick case. In Euless, it is explicitly legal for
individuals to kill “domesticated fowl considered as general tablefare
such as chicken or turkey.” In response to the argument that butchering
a larger animal such as a goat might present health problems, the court
pointed out that large animals, such as deer, may be butchered and
disposed of in Euless as long as they are dead when brought into the

Popular Video

Miranda Lambert saw the sign a veteran was holding up at her concert, she immediately broke down in tears:

Popular Video

Miranda Lambert saw the sign a veteran was holding up at her concert, she immediately broke down in tears:

So if you kill “domesticated fowl” because you want to eat them,
that’s fine. If you kill them because you want to offer them to a diety
(and then eat them), then that’s not fine. If you kill a deer outside
of Euless and bring it into Euless to butcher it, that’s fine. If you
kill and butcher the goat in Euless as part of a religious ceremony,
that’s not fine.

This, of course, is nonsense.

Please do not misunderstand me. As a
vegan for 28 years and as someone who embraces the principle of Ahimsa,
or non-violence, I certainly do not approve of Santería sacrifices any
more than I approve dogfighting. (By the way, in 1983, I represented
the ASPCA in New York City when it was sued by a local group of
Santería practitioners. I believe that this was the first Santería case
ever brought in the United States. The ASPCA won in the trial court and
I successfully defended that decision before the New York Supreme
Court, Appellate Division.)

But for those people who are not vegans and who object to
Santería sacrifices or dogfighting, my question is “why”? Michael Vick
enjoyed sitting around his backyard dog pit watching dogs fight;
non-vegans enjoy sitting around their backyard barbecue pit roasting
the flesh of animals who have been tortured as much as have been Vick’s
dogs. Non-vegans in Euless, Texas, are consuming animal products from
sentient beings who have been raised and slaughtered in conditions of
torture and they are even permitted to kill their own chickens.
turkeys, and other domesticated fowl.

So what are the Santería practitioners doing that is any different from any other non-vegan in Euless, Texas, or anywhere else?

The answer is, of course, nothing.

Indeed, the best justification that non-vegans have for inflicting
suffering and death on 53 billion animals every year for food (not
including fish) is that they taste good. We do not need to eat animals
to be optimally healthy and animal agriculture is an environmental
disaster. The Santería practitioners believe that animal sacrifice is
necessary for spiritual reasons. They actually have a better reason for animal exploitation than most non-vegans do.

Again, please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that
animal sacrifices are morally justifiable or excusable; I am just
saying that the justification used by Santería practitioners is, on its
face, stronger than what non-vegans have to say when asked to justify
their consumption of animal products.

So for those of you who aren’t vegan but are upset by Merced v. Kasson,
ask yourself why you are upset. Ask yourself why you think that your
behavior is any more defensible than that of the Santería practitioners.

And if you are vegan and your friends or family tell you that
although they are not vegan, they agree with you that
Santería sacrifices (or dogfighting) are terrible, use that comment as
an opportunity to have a sincere discussion with them about why they
think that they regard these practices as terrible and what differences
they see between their own behavior and that of the
Santería practitioners.

The reality is that most people—or at least many people—do care
about animal suffering and death. They sincerely believe that dog
fighting and Santería practices are wrong. That is precisely why people
react in the way that they do these things. But that is precisely why I
believe that if we engage in creative, non-violent vegan education, we
can persuade many people to see the confusion in their own thinking about animal ethics and to move in the vegan direction.