1. Boyd1
Julie Boyd
Factory farming: World religion and morality
Industrial livestock farming is among a large range of animal-welfare issues and concerns
that extends from trophy-hunting to whaling to product testing on animals to all aspects of more
obscure activities like the exotic-animal trade and the factory farming of bears in China for bile
which is believed to hold medical and aphrodisiac powers. Examining the various uses to which
animals are put, some are considered defensible, others abusive, and some unwarranted. A
certain moral relativism runs through the arguments of those who are hostile or indifferent to
animal welfare. In practice, this outlook leaves each individual to decide when and how animals
merit moral concern.
With the world wide $125 billion a year livestock industry, the human mind, especially
when there is money to be had, can manufacture grand excuses for the exploitation of other
human beings. Corporate farmers barely speak anymore of raising animals, with the small
amount of personal care this word implies. Animals are now grown like so many crops. Barns
have become confinements and the inhabitants are mere production units of a whole. The result
is a world in which billons of birds, cows, pigs, and other creatures are locked away, enduring
miseries they do not deserve, for the world’s convenience. Factory farming has no traditions, no
rules, no codes of honor, and no little decencies to spare for a fellow creature. The whole notion
is an abandonment of values and a betrayal of honorable animal husbandry.
Cruelty to animals is sometimes based on a Judeo-Christian outlook (also known as the
Abrahamic religions): Christians are taught that only humans have souls (i.e., only humans can
reason) and animals do not, so humans need not worry about their lives; they were made to serve
us, to be eaten, and to be used in experiments. This, however, is not a universal outlook. The

2. Boyd2
Middle Eastern Morality (Eastern religions) looks at animals as having their own consciousness
and teaches respect for all forms of life. Not one individual who does not profit from the farms
can look at the modern factories or slaughter plants or agricultural laboratories and think, “Yes,
this must be humanity at its finest.” Least of all should society look for sanction in the Judeo-
Christian morality, whose whole logic is one of sociable disdain, the higher serving the lower
and the strong protecting the weak.
If one animal’s pain – say that of one’s pet – is real and deserving of sympathy, then the
pain of essentially identical animals is also meaningful, no matter what conventional distinctions
society has made to narrow the scope of sympathy. If it is morally and legally wrong to beat a
dog, or starve a horse, or grossly abuse farm animals, it is wrong for all people everywhere.
There is only one reason for condemning cruelty that does not beg the question of exactly why
cruelty is wrong, a vice, or bad for character: that the act of cruelty is a natural evil. Animals
cruelly dealt with are not just things, not just an irrelevant detail of moral drama. They matter in
their own right, as they matter to their Creator, and the wrongs of cruelty are wrongs done to
them.
This qualitative, textual analysis study examines Aristotle’s Golden Mean in accordance
with the ethical dilemma associated with animal cruelty and factory farming. Aristotle’s theory
of the Golden Mean strikes a moral balance between two extremes, one indicating success and
the other deficiency. As Aristotle stated, “virtue, then, is a mean relative to us, defined by reason
and as the reasonable man would define it. It is a mean between two vices – one of excess, the
other of deficiency.” As such, this textual analysis will acknowledge the Middle Eastern
Morality as success and the Judeo-Christian Morality as deficient in accordance with current
factory farming issues.

3. Boyd3
Aristotle’s Golden Mean
Aristotle’s theory of the Golden Mean, a virtue-based ethics, strikes a moral balance
between two extremes, one indicating excess, the other deficiency (Pratt, 1993). The theory of
the Golden Mean is one of Aristotle's best-known pieces of ethical thinking; it can be found in
his book The Nicomachean Ethics. The Golden Mean does not reference a mathematical middle,
but the perfect intermediate point. Aristotle's ethics are strongly teleological and practical, which
means that it should be the action that leads to the realization of the good of the human being as
well as the whole.
The Golden Mean represents an accurate balance between extremes, such as vices. For
example, one extreme example relevant to the topic at hand is that of deficiency: for example,
the Judeo-Christian Morality (Abrahamic religions). Consequently, the other extreme of excess
would be the Middle Eastern Morality (Eastern religions). In accordance with the Judeo-
Christian Morality, a Christian would be an advocate for the sacrificing of animals for the greater
good of humanity, and a Middle Eastern religion would worship an animal as a blessing or gift to
them from God. This does not imply that the Golden Mean is the exact arithmetical middle
between extremes but that the middle depends on the situation. There is no universal middle that
would apply to every situation. Aristotle said, "It's easy to be angry, but to be angry at the right
time, for the right reason, at the right person, and in the right intensity must truly be brilliant."
Because of what the difficulty in certain situations can represent, constant moral improvement of
character is crucial (Barnes, 2001).
The importance of the Golden Mean is that it re-affirms the balance needed in life. Since
Aristotle was interested in the study of nature, he quickly realized the importance of balance in
nature and the tremendous effect it has on keeping up so many forms of life in nature going.
Since human beings are included in nature, which gives them life, it is reasonable to conclude

4. Boyd4
that humans should also uphold the balance, just like nature. The problem is that the vast
majority of people are unwilling to admit that they are not at the top of nature, just a part of it.
The reason for this is the limits of human perception, which cannot grasp the complex ways that
nature operates, so they fear it because they do not fully understand it. This explains why people
of different religious beliefs, look to the idea of God who is primarily concerned with them in
relation to animal rights (Scully, 2002).
Despite the utility of such a theoretical framework, one practical problem with this theory
is the difficulty in identifying just what the extremes are; identifying a mean is contingent on
establishing the extremes of an action (Pratt, 1993). The key is to decipher which are at the polar
extremes.
The Judeo-Christian Morality
The Judeo-Christian Morality is an altruistic tradition. It is generally accepted that
people, regardless of their cultural and religious differences, should: love their neighbors as
themselves, treat others the way they want to be treated, and help their neighbors fulfill their well
being. The Judeo-Christian Morality comprises many individual religions, but mostly
encompasses the Abrahamic Religions: Christianity, Judaism, Islam and the Baha’i Faith.
The Judeo-Christian Morality is deontological in nature because of the unconditonality of
these injunctions (Pratt, 1993). In particular, the term refers to the common Old Testament/
Tanakh as a basis of both moral traditions, including particularly the Ten Commandments. It also
implies a common set of values present in the modern western world. The values most
commonly assigned to the Judeo-Christian tradition are liberty and equality based on Genesis,
where all humans are created equal, and Exodus, where the Israelites escape tyranny to freedom
(Scully, 2002).

5. Boyd5
Supporters of the Judeo-Christian concept point to the Christian claim that Christianity is
the heir to Biblical Judaism, and that the whole logic of Christianity as a religion is that it exists
only as a religion built upon Judaism. In addition, although the order of the books in the
Christian Old Testament and the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) differ, the books are the same. The
majority of the Old Testament is, in fact, Jewish scripture, and it is used as moral and spiritual
teaching material throughout the Christian world. The prophets, patriarchs, and moral figures of
the Jewish scripture are also known in Christianity, which uses the Jewish text as the basis for its
understanding of historic Judeo-Christian figures such as Abraham, Elijah, and Moses. As a
result, a vast majority of Jewish and Christian teachings are based on a common sacred text
(Marty, 1986).
The United States is the only country in history to have defined itself as Judeo-Christian.
While the western world has consisted of many Christian countries and consists today of many
secular countries, only the United States has called itself Judeo-Christian. The United States is
also unique in that it has always combined secular government with a society based on religious
values. Consequently, this secular government of society violates the Judeo-Christian morality in
regards to factory farming.
Middle Eastern Morality
Middle Eastern Morality stands at the opposite extreme of Aristotle’s Golden Mean and
are in exact unity with the Judeo-Christian Morality in accordance with the issue at hand. Taken
from the Mahabharata, the Hindu bible quotes, “Do naught unto others that which would cause
you pain if done to you” (Mahabharata, Bk. 5, Ch. 49, v. 57). Similarly, the Buddhist faith
quotes something similar, “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful" (Udana

6. Boyd6
Varga 5:18). Or, "...a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon
another?" (Samyutta Nikkei v.353).
The Middle Eastern Morality comprises many individual religions, but mostly
encompasses Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Mormonism. The Middle Eastern
religions are often stated to be the oldest religious traditions or the oldest living major traditions.
They are formed of diverse traditions and have no single founder. Meat eating is mostly taboo,
as is the killing of animals, either for food or for a sacrifice. Most major paths of the Middle
Eastern religions hold vegetarianism as an ideal. There are three main reasons for this: the
principle of nonviolence (ahimsa) applied to animals; the intention to offer only "pure"
(vegetarian) food to a deity (divine being) and then to receive it back as Prasad, and the
conviction that non-vegetarian food is detrimental for the mind and for spiritual development.
Nonviolence is a common concern of all the vegetarian traditions (Armstrong, 1993).
In relation to animal rights, the Middle Eastern religions make the distinction between the
direct taking of life and eating meat which is already killed. Thus, these religions consider the
careers of being a butcher or a hunter unethical and ideally do not promote them by purchasing
meat. Although they are forbidden to eat specific types of meat (for reasons unrelated to killing)
and are dependent on offerings for food, these religious believers do pursue vegetarianism
(Armstrong, 1993).
Contrastingly, some of these religions do allow the consumption of meat, if the meat is
"halal" (lawful). However, the option of vegetarianism is also available. This is a personal
decision, supported by a general religious philosophy stressing kind treatment of animals.
Muslims, for example, have the freedom of choice to be vegetarians for medical reasons or if
they do not personally like the taste of meat. However, the choice to be a vegetarian can be

7. Boyd7
controversial. It is noted in the Quran that "There is not an animal on earth or a bird that flies on
its wings - but they are communities like you." (The Quran, 6:38) Many Muslims who normally
eat meat will select vegetarian options when dining in non-halal restaurants. This way they can
be certain to observe dietary restrictions (Armstrong, 1993). As with any moral judgment, it is a
matter of reflecting on the issue and reaching a conclusion about what is believed to be correct.
What one culture finds acceptable, another does not. For example, Paul Johnston begs the
question of is our horror of incest simply the product of age-long conditioning or is incest
morally wrong? Its culture specific, just as the issue of animal cruelty is (Johnston, 1999).
This textual analysis will examine the two polar opposites that are of the religious beliefs
of the Judeo-Christian Morality and the Middle Eastern Morality looking at the issue associated
with factory farming. In accordance with author Michael Scully, animal activist, and Karen
Armstrong, religious expertise, this analysis will look to explain the issue at hand using
Aristotle’s Golden Mean.
Data and Analysis: Judeo-Christian Morality
(Abrahamic Religions: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Baha’i Faith)
The term factory farming began with one pig, in one British slaughterhouse. Somewhere
along the production line it was observed that the animal had blisters in his mouth and was
salivating heavily. The worst suspicions were confirmed, and within days, borders across Europe
had been sealed and a course of action determined. Soon all of England and the world watched as
hundreds, and then hundreds of thousands, of pigs, cows, and sheep, and their newborn lambs
were taken outdoors, shot, thrown into burning pyres, and bulldozed into muddy graves. Some
were still stirring and blinking a day after being shot. The plague meanwhile had slipped into
mainland Europe, where the same ritual followed until, when it was all over, more than ten

8. Boyd8
million animals has been disposed of. Completing the story was the requisite happy ending was a
calf heard calling from underneath the body of her mother in a mound of carcasses to be set
aflame. Christened “Phoenix,” after the bird of myth that rose from the ashes, the calf was spared
(Scully, 1994).
According to journalist and animal rights activist Andrew Sullivan, he discerned in these
scenes a “horrifying nothingness;” something about it all left people sick, sad, and empty. Years
have passed since the last ditch was covered over, but the facts of the case were plain and simple:
here were innocent, living creatures, and they deserved better. Foot-and-mouth disease is a form
of flu, treatable by proper veterinary care, preventable by vaccination, lethal neither to humans
nor to animals. These animals, millions of them not even infected, were killed only because their
market value had been diminished and because trade policies required it – because, in short,
under the circumstances it was the quick and convenient thing to do. By the one measure now
applied to these creatures, their lives had all become worthless. For them, the difference between
what happened and what awaited them anyway was one of timing (Scully, 1994).
When a quarter million birds are stuffed into a single shed, unable even to flap their
wings, when more than a million pigs inhabit a single farm, never once stepping into the light of
day, when every year tens of millions of creatures go to their death without knowing the least
measure of human kindness, it is time to question. In the laboratories, strange new beings of
mankind’s own creatures are being genetically engineered, cloned, and now even patented like
any other product ready for mass production. Even with all its possibilities for good, this new
science of genetic engineering carries the darkest implications of all for animals (Marty, 1986).
According to the future look outlook, very soon factory farms like Smithfield plan to
have tens of millions of cloned animals in their factory farms. Other companies are at work

9. Boyd9
genetically engineering chickens without feathers so that one day all poultry farmers might be
spared the toil and cost of de-feathering the birds. For years, the livestock industry employed in
animal science departments have been tampering with the genes of pigs and other animals to
locate and expunge that part of their genetic makeup that makes them stressed in factory farm
conditions – taking away the desire to protect themselves and to live. Instead of redesigning the
factory farm to suit the animals, the animals are being redesigned to suit the factory farm (Marty,
1986).
Christianity -
In the Judeo-Christian Morality, individuals are called to treat animals with kindness, not
because they have rights or power or some claim to equality, but in a sense because they do not -
because they all stand unequal and powerless before us (Armstrong, 1993). Animals are so easily
overlooked, their interests so easily brushed aside. Whenever humans enter their world, from the
farms to the local animal shelter, to the African savanna, humans enter as lords of the earth
bearing powers of terror and mercy alike. This domination that humans possess requires
concentrated moral consideration and this domination is beginning to shed new light on the
subject (Scully, 1994).
According to religious expertise, Karen Armstrong, and for Catholics in particular, no
less an authority than Pope Benedict XVI has explained the spiritual stakes in relation to this
issue; asked recently to weigh in on the very question of factory farming, Cardinal Ratzinger told
German journalist Peter Seewald that “animals must be respected as our companions in creation.
While it is acceptable to use them for food, we cannot just do whatever we want with them.
Certainly, a sort of industrial use of creatures, so that geese are fed in such a way as to produce
as large a liver as possible, or hens live so packed together that they become just caricatures of

10. Boyd10
birds, this degrading of living creatures to a commodity seems to me in fact to contradict the
relationship of mutuality that comes across in the Bible” (Armstrong, 1993).
Those religious conservatives who, in every debate over animal welfare, rush to state that
the animals themselves are secondary and man must come first are exactly right – only they do
not follow their own thought to its moral conclusion. Somehow, in their pious notions of
stewardship and dominion, humans always seem to end up with the singular moral dignity, but
no singular moral accountability to go with it. Humanity’s special status among creatures only
invites such questions as: what would the Good Sheppard make of our factory farms? Where
does the creature of conscience get off lording it over those poor creatures so mercilessly? “How
is it possible,” as Malcolm Muggeridge asked in the years when factory farming began to spread,
“to look for God and sing his praises while insulting and degrading his creatures? If all lambs are
the Agnus Dei (a Latin term meaning Lamb of God, and was originally used to refer to Jesus
Christ in his role of the perfect sacrificial offering that atones for the sins of humanity in
Christian theology), then to deprive them of light and the field and their joyous frisking and the
sky is the worst kind of blasphemy” (Marty, 1986).
This is a cynical but serious indictment. If reason and morality are what set human beings
apart from animals, then reason and morality must always guide individuals in how one treats
them, or else it is all just caprice, unbridled appetite with the pretense of piety. When people say
that they like their pork chops or veal just too much ever to give them up, reason hears in that the
voice of gluttony, willfulness, or at best moral complaisance. What makes a human being human
is precisely the ability to understand that the suffering of an animal is more important than the
taste of a treat.

11. Boyd11
When looking for fitting targets of inquiry and scorn, groups like Smithfield Foods and
the National Pork Producers Council, come to mind. After the election of 2004, the National
Pork Producers Council rejoiced, “President Bush’s victory ensures that the U.S. pork industry
will be very well positioned for the next four years politically, and pork producers will benefit
from the long-term results of a livestock agriculture-friendly agenda. But this is no tribute.
Bush’s agriculture secretary, former Nebraska Governor Mike Johannas, has shown sympathy
for animal welfare. Additionally, there are a number and variety of supporters found in Congress,
from Republicans like Chris Smith and Elton Gallegly in the House to John Ensign and Rick
Santorum in the Senate, along with Democrats such as Robert Byrd and Barbara Boxer. If such
matters were every brought to President Bush’s attention in a serious way, he would find in the
details of factory farming many things abhorrent to the Christian faith and to his own kindly
instincts (Scully, 1993).
In short, Christianity, based on Judaism, prohibits cruelty to animals. Jesus’ central
teachings involve love, compassion, and mercy, and it is hard to imagine Jesus looking upon
contemporary factory farms and slaughterhouses and then happily consuming flesh. Jesus often
challenged people by including everyone within his circle of compassion. He embraced all
people, regardless of their ethnicity, gender, profession, social status, or medical status. Although
the Bible does not describe Jesus addressing the question of eating meat, many Christians
throughout history have believed that Christian love ultimately calls for a vegetarian diet.
Examples include Jesus’ first followers (the Jewish Christians), the Desert Fathers, Tertullian,
Origen, St. Benedict, John Wesley, Albert Schweitzer, Leo Tolstoy, and many others. Jesus was
much more concerned about the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. He embraced
Theocentrism, which holds that everything comes from and belongs to God. Like Jesus,

12. Boyd12
Christians hold the Hebrew Scriptures as sacred, and Christians can affirm, as the Psalmist said,
“The Lord is good to all, and his compassion is over all that he has made.” In the face of massive
suffering of animals on factory farms, dwindling natural resources, and environmental
degradation, Christian principles all point towards vegetarianism. Leading evangelical author
Tony Campolo has noted, “Being a vegetarian does have benefits for a hurting planet with
limited resources” (Novak, 1995).
Christians have always striven to minister to poor and hungry people. However, today the
inefficiency of meat eating works against that ministry. In the United States, 66% of the grains
are fed to animals being raised for slaughter, wasting most grains’ calories and proteins. Ron
Sider of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary has observed, “It is because of the high level of
meat consumption that the rich minority of the world devours such an unfair share of the world’s
available food” (Scully, 1994). Ironically, Sider has added, by greedily devouring so much grain-
fed animal products, we are damaging our own health. The New Testament obligates Christians
to protect their health. For example, 1 Cor. 6:19 declares that our bodies are temples of the Holy
Spirit, and Christians regularly interpret this as a call to healthful living. Knowing the deleterious
effects of animal-based foods on human health, Christian principles favor a plant-based diet
(Smith, 1991).
Judaism –
The Torah (Hebrew Scriptures) describes vegetarianism as an ideal. In the Garden of
Eden, Adam, Eve, and all creatures were instructed to eat plant foods (Genesis 1:29-30). The
prophet Isaiah had a utopian vision in which everyone will once again be vegetarian: “The wolf
shall dwell with the lamb… the lion shall eat straw like the ox … They shall not hurt or destroy

13. Boyd13
in all My holy mountain” (Isaiah 11:6-9). The Torah relates God giving humans “dominion”
over every living thing that moves upon the earth” (Genesis 1:28).
However, Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, first Chief Rabbi of pre-state Israel, pointed out
that such "dominion" does not give humans license to treat animals according to every human
whim and desire. The Torah and the rabbinic oral tradition preserved in the Talmud and Midrash
contain many instructions on how people should treat animals and the rest of creation. Because
Judaism focuses on honoring God as the all-powerful, all-knowing Creator of the universe,
Judaism teaches that we should love and protect all of creation, which belongs to God. Although
the Torah states that, after the Flood, God gave humans permission to eat meat (Genesis 9:3).
God also restricted humankind’s exploitation of animals. The Jewish people are especially
obligated to keep kosher dietary laws and detailed laws requiring humane treatment of animals.
Most (but not all) kosher laws deal with meat. For example, Jews may only eat certain animals;
they may not consume blood; and they may not consume meat and dairy products together.
These laws are divine decrees, given without explicit reasons. However, one of the explanations
found in the rabbinic tradition is that the permitted species are in general more peaceful and less
violent than others. This serves as an example to humans to refrain from cruelty and other base
behavior (Felder, 2004).
Judaism forbids tsa’ar ba’alei chayim, which means inflicting unnecessary pain on
animals. For example, Exodus 23:5 requires that one relieve the burden of an overloaded animal,
and the Fourth Commandment includes the instruction that Jews must allow livestock to rest on
the Sabbath. The revered medieval philosopher Moses Maimonides wrote that we should show
mercy to all living creatures. The 16th Century mystic Rabbi Moses Cordovero and 19th Century
thinker Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch expressed similar sentiments. By contrast, factory farms

14. Boyd14
routinely confine animals in cramped spaces; often drug and mutilate animals; and deny animals
fresh air, sunlight, exercise, and any opportunity to satisfy their natural instincts. In response to
this, former Chief Rabbi of Ireland Rabbi David Rosen wrote, “The current treatment of animals
in the livestock trade definitely renders the consumption of meat as halachically (not kosher)
unacceptable.” Other rabbis, while agreeing that animals should be raised and slaughtered in
humane ways, do not agree that such meat is forbidden (Smith, 1991).
Other Jewish values favor vegetarianism. Judaism advocates treating the environment
respectfully, while animal agriculture squanders water, energy, land, and other resources.
Judaism holds that human life is sacred, and we should diligently care for our health. Since
animal-based foods can increase the risk of heart disease, diabetes, and certain cancers, we
should move towards a plant-based diet. Judaism encourages us to share our bread with hungry
people. Yet, the inefficiencies of animal agriculture waste grains and lands that could be used for
crops, thereby depriving hungry people of food. In summary, although Judaism does not mandate
vegetarianism, many Jewish teachings support the diet (Smith, 1991).
Islam -
The most holy Islamic writings are the Quran and the Hadith (sayings) of Prophet
Mohammad, and the latter includes, “Whoever is kind to the creatures of God is kind to
himself.” All but one of the 114 chapters of the Quran begins with the phrase “Allah is merciful
and compassionate.” Both the Quran and the Hadith of Prophet Mohammed provide dietary laws
that are similar to those of Judaism (Quran 2:172). It appears impossible for a faithful Muslim to
consume meat produced by the cruel methods of factory farming. Biographies of Mohammed
have described the prophet’s love of animals and his opposition to cruelty. The Quran states,
“There is not an animal on earth, nor a flying creature flying on two wings, but they are peoples

15. Boyd15
like unto you.” (Surah 6, verse 38). Mohammed taught, “A good deed done to a beast is as good
as doing good to a human being; while an act of cruelty to a beast is as bad as an act of cruelty to
a human being.” Muslim theologian Al-Hafiz B. A. Masri, noting the cruelties of Western food
production, has called the flesh “sacrilegious meat” (Novak, 1995). Islam also teaches that
people should only eat healthy foods. Numerous studies have shown that the products of modern
factory farms, high in fat and laden with hormones and antibiotics, harm one’s health (Felder,
2004).
A distinctive element of Islam’s mystic branch called Sufism has been its call for
compassion. The great Sufi M. R. Bawa Mahaiyaddeen appealed to Muslims to reflect on the
meaning of slaughter. When describing Islamic slaughter (qurban) in his Ninety Nine Beautiful
Names of Allah, he said that the knife bearer should “… look into the animal’s eyes, he has to
watch the tears of the animal, and he has to watch the animal’s eyes until it dies – hopefully, his
heart will change” (Novak, 1995).
The Baha’i Faith -
The Baha’i Faith was founded by Baha’u’llah in 19th Century Persia. Baha’u’llah
encouraged compassion for animals, and he wrote, “Burden not an animal with more than it can
bear.” Similarly, Abdu’l-Baha, Baha’u’llah’s son, wrote, “It is not only their fellow human
beings that the beloved of God must treat with mercy and compassion; rather must they show
forth the utmost loving-kindness to every living creature. For in all the physical respects, and
where the animal spirit is concerned, the self same feelings are shared by animal and man.”
Abdu’l-Baha also wrote, “Ye must not only have kind and merciful feelings for mankind, but ye
should also exercise the utmost kindness towards every living creature. The physical sensibilities
and instincts are common to animal and man … Sensibility is the same whether you harm man or

16. Boyd16
animal: there is no difference … Therefore one must be very considerate towards animals and
show greater kindness to them than to man. Educate the children in their infancy in such a way
that they may become exceedingly kind and merciful to the animals." Regarding meat-eating,
Abdu’l’Baha said, “Truly, the killing of animals and the eating of their meat is somewhat
contrary to pity and compassion, and if one can content oneself with cereals, fruit, oil and nuts …
it would undoubtedly be better and more pleasing.” Reverence for and protection of nature is a
central Baha’i tenet, which a plant-based diet generally supports. Baha’u’llah said, “Every time I
turn my gaze to the earth, I am made to recognize the evidence of the power and the tokens of
the bounty” (Novak, 1995).
Data and Analysis of the Middle-Eastern Morality
(Eastern Religions: Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Mormonism)
Hinduism -
Hinduism’s teachers and scriptures often expressly encourage a vegetarian diet, though
not all Hindus are vegetarian. Hindus almost universally avoid beef since they consider the cow
(Krishna’s favorite animal) sacred. Mahatma Gandhi, however, took Hindu vegetarian
observance one step further by declaring, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can
be measured by the way in which its animals are treated.” Hinduism’s vast scriptures contain
thousands of passages recommending vegetarianism based on the profound link between ahimsa
(nonviolence) and spirituality. For example, the Yajur Veda says, “You must not use your God-
given body for killing God’s creatures, whether they be human, animals, or whatever.” Similarly,
Hindu law books base many directives on the principle of the sacredness of all life. Manusmriti
asserts, “Having well considered the origin of flesh-foods, and the cruelty of … slaying corporeal
beings, let man entirely abstain from eating flesh.” While the violence of slaughter wrongs

17. Boyd17
animals, it also harms those who consume animals. Causing unnecessary pain and death
produces bad karma (ill-effects on oneself as a consequence of ill-treatment of others). Belief in
the sacredness of life, reincarnation, nonviolence, and the law of karma are central, inter-related
features of the Hinduism’s “spiritual ecology” (Novak, 1995). While Hinduism’s basis for
vegetarianism is deeply spiritual, its practical merit has also been confirmed by science. For
example, the prohibition against harming or killing cows frequently benefits nutrition in India.
Zebu cattle, prevalent in India, require no special grain feed or pastures and thrive on organic
material of no practical use to humans, such as stubble from harvested crops, roadside grasses,
and organic garbage from the village. From cattle, Indians obtain milk and dairy foods, labor,
transportation, and dung fuel (Felder, 2004).
Jainism -
Vegetarianism is expected practice among Jains, who hold that it is wrong to kill or harm
any living being. Jain traditions respect ahimsa (nonviolence), aparigraha (non-acquisition),
asteya (respect for other’s rights) and satya (truth). While Jains comprise less than 1% of India’s
population, they contribute more than half of all the money donated in India to provide medical
and other social assistance to India’s poor people (Felder, 2004).
Buddhism -
Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, was a Hindu who accepted many of Hinduism’s core
doctrines, such as karma. His life and teachings offered special insights into how to address
problems of human existence, and he explicitly taught vegetarianism as a component of his
general instruction to be mindful and compassionate. The Buddha’s first sermon, called the
“Four Noble Truths,” focused on the nature of suffering and how to relieve suffering. Bhante
Henepola Gunaratna, founder of the Bhavana Society interprets the Buddha’s first sermon as

18. Boyd18
calling for a meatless diet: “Cultivating the thoughts of non-harm and non-injury and abstinence
from killing any living being are so crucial for an individual’s peace, harmony, serenity,
contentment and attaining liberation from suffering that the Buddha included these principles in
the Noble Eightfold Path which is the Fourth Noble Truth of Buddhism.” Similarly, the
Surangama Sutra states, “…in seeking to escape from suffering ourselves, why should we inflict
it upon others? How can a bhikshu (monk) who hopes to become a deliverer of others, himself be
living on the flesh of other sentient beings?” It is not surprising, then, that the term “sentient
beings” is used repeatedly in Buddhist writings and refers to humans and animals (Novak, 1995).
Buddhists aim to relieve the suffering of all sentient beings. The Buddha encouraged
mindfulness as necessary for leading a compassionate life, and he forbade Buddhists from
engaging in occupations that involve killing animals, such as butcher, fisher, or animal farmer
(Smith, 1991).
Taoism -
The Chinese religion of Taoism holds nature as sacred, and this view also favors
vegetarianism. Taoism teaches that yin and yang are the two fundamental energies in the world,
and Taoists have always “taken the accomplishments of yin (the non-violent, non-aggressive
approach) and rescue of creatures as their priority.” For example, the famous Taoist Master Li
Han-Kung explicitly prohibited “those who consume meat” from his holy mountain. Taoism is
distinctive in stressing simplicity. As early as the 6th century BCE, the Taoist scripture called
Tao Te Ching warned against waste. The Tao Te Ching teaches that simplicity allows the
individual to live a peaceful life and it protects nature from overuse and pollution. Modern
studies of ecology and factory farming have demonstrated that meat production today is
extremely complicated and inefficient. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that meat

19. Boyd19
consumption is far less efficient in producing protein than consumption of beans and grains.
Because it requires far more grain, modern meat production requires more pesticides, more
water, and more fossil fuel to run tractors to farm the extra fields of grain. Burning more fossil
fuel wastes natural resources and pollutes the planet. Taoist simplicity encourages eating
vegetables, grains, and fruits instead of meat. According to the Tao, the process of meat
production tends to be too yang – too aggressive; it involves extreme and unnecessary impact on
the environment (Smith, 1991).
Mormonism -
Mormons believe that God offered new revelations to Joseph Smith in the 19th Century,
and subsequent true prophets have presided over Christ’s church on earth. Doctrine and
Covenants notes that people should be righteous in all things and “do good,” including activities
not commanded by scriptures. Therefore, Mormonism encourages righteous behavior, which
presumably would include kindness to animals. Mormonism condemns killing animals
unnecessarily: “And wo be unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need.”
Mormonism does not require vegetarianism, but it does discourage eating animals unless
necessary: “Yea, flesh also of beasts and of fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the
use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly. And it is pleasing unto
me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.” In other words,
Mormons should only eat animals when non-animal foods are unavailable, and even then they
are to consume animals sparingly (Novak, 1995).
To conclude, vegetarianism has been a common thread among the major world religions,
even if only a minority has adopted the diet as an expression of their faith. For many people of
faith, vegetarianism reflects the Golden Rule: Christianity – “So, whatever you wish that men

20. Boyd20
would do to you, do so to them” (Matthew 7:12); Judaism – “Do not do unto others what you
would not wish to be done to yourself – that is the entire Torah, the rest is commentary”; Islam –
“No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself”;
Baha’i Faith – “Blessed is he that preferreth his brother to himself”; Taoism – “Regard your
neighbor’s gain as your own gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss”; Hinduism – “This
is the sum of duty: do naught to others that which if done to thee would cause pain”; Jainism –
“A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated”; Buddhism –
“Hurt not others with that which pains yourself” (Novak, 1995).
With factory farming torturing animals on a scale unprecedented in human history and
with the growing environmental crisis threatening human civilization, the wisdom of the world’s
religions to respect nature and all its inhabitants has become much more than an expression of
ideal behavior. It has become a global imperative (Scully, 1994). This textual analysis argues
that factory farming violates the Judeo-Christian Morality (Abrahamic religions) and the Middle
Eastern Morality (Eastern religions) on, at the very least, five individual principles.
1.) The Divine Life Principle: life is sacred and individuals should strive to preserve its
dignity and integrity; the taking of life prematurely or unnaturally is wrong except in
cases where there is a substantial moral justification for doing so.
2.) The Compassion Principle: God condemns the unnecessary suffering of innocents
and calls on humans to protect the interests of the “least of these” against the
indifference and domination of the powerful; in cases where suffering is unavoidable,
humans are called to moderate it as much as possible.

21. Boyd21
3.) The Stewardship Principle: The world belongs to God; God created it, cares about it,
and God calls us to be good stewards of the world and everything in it, including the
financial resources.
4.) The Individual Responsibility Principle: God calls us to seek what is right and good
for our physical, intellectual, and spiritual wellbeing as individuals.
5.) The Social Responsibility Principle: God calls individuals to love their neighbors as
ourselves and to seek a just and sustainable social order.

22. Boyd22
References
Armstrong, K. (1993). A history of God. The Random House Publishing Group: New York.
Barnes, Jonathan. (2001). Roman Aristotle. Greek Literature, 8, 176 – 182.
Felder, Leonard. (2004). The ten challenges: spiritual lessons from the ten commandments for
creating meaning, growth, and richness everyday of your life. Sheffield Publishing
Company: Salem Wisconsin.
Johnston, P. (1999). Modesty, doubt, and relativism. The Contradictions of Modern Moral
Philosophy: Ethics after Wittgenstein. 85-95.
Marty, M.E. (1986). A Judeo-Christian looks at the Judeo-Christian tradition. Modern American
Religion (2), 858-860.
Novak, Phillip. (1995). The world’s wisdom: sacred texts of the world’s religions. Harper
Collins Publishers: New York.
Pratt, C. B. (1993). Critique of the classical theory of situational ethics in U.S. public relations.
Publish Relations Review 19(3), 219-234.
Scully, M. (1994). Dominion: the power of man, the suffering of animals, and the call to mercy.
St. Martin’s Griffin: New York.
Smith, Huston (1991). The world’s religions: our great wisdom traditions. Harper Collins
Publishers: New York.