An opposing view to climate change as proposed in the intro:
The website I studied that offered an opposing view to climate change was ProCon.org. What was interesting about this site is that it laid the arguments for and against climate change side by side and offered references for each argument. While the introduction in our text argues that humans are heating up the world, ProCon.org offers resources for several studies that show the majority of scientists involved disagree. The site lists the pros and cons for 14 arguments around climate change in total.
Is our commercial exploitation of animals immoral?
In cases where animals are raised in inhumane and cruel conditions, yes. Animals have the ability to think and fear, and I cannot imagine a life lived in a pen too small to move in, where animals live in pain (broken legs and ‘debeaked’) for as long as they can produce what we want. I do believe that there are operations who raise their animals morally, and while I live off of subsistence meat and fish, I make an effort to buy ‘free-range’ eggs and milk.
What obligations do we have to future generations?
I believe we have an obligation to minimize the damage we cause the environment, and to continue research towards more effective, efficient, and moral ways to produce goods and services. While I don’t feel current generations should restrict anything necessary to be comfortable in life, perhaps more regulation could be put in place for luxuries. For example, stricter emissions regulations for vehicles, or required recycling and the implementation of fines when households exceed garbage thresholds or water usage.
Who should pay the cost for protecting the environment?
The majority of the cost should be paid by those who pollute the environment. It would only make sense to place the cost on those who benefit if the environment was in a net-better position because of the protection efforts. Those responsible for causing pollution are, theoretically, making a profit while doing so. Passing the cost on to others while reaping the benefit would be unethical.
Resource for opposing view to climate change:
https://climatechange.procon.org/