We are entering a technological era that may render this debate obsolete. The rise of cell-cultivated meat (grown in a bioreactor without slaughter) and plant-based proteins (Impossible, Beyond) offers a third path.
If you can eat a burger that tastes like beef, looks like beef, but never required a throat to be cut, the welfare debate becomes moot. The "suffering" is removed. However, the rights debate continues: is it the killing or the using that is the sin?
Furthermore, AI and sentient algorithms will soon challenge us. If an AI model can suffer, do we give it "rights" before we give them to the pig? torrent bestiality
We have to address the dog in the room. Do we apply animal rights to our pets? If animals have a right to autonomy, we are all jailers. We neuter them without consent; we confine them to houses; we breed them for aesthetics (bulldogs who cannot give birth naturally).
Most "rights" philosophers accept a "guardianship" model, but the tension remains. We love individual animals while eating others. This is known in psychology as the meat paradox. We are entering a technological era that may
To understand the urgency of this topic, look at the scale. According to the FAO, approximately 80 billion land animals are slaughtered for food annually. Add to that trillions of fish. The vast majority of these animals live under the umbrella of industrial agriculture.
In a welfare paradigm, the "battery cage" for hens or the "gestation crate" for pigs is a failure. In a rights paradigm, the very existence of the farm is a failure. The "suffering" is removed
The Welfare Success Story (The Veal Crate) Twenty years ago, veal calves were kept in crates so small they could not turn around. The justification was muscular atrophy (keeping the meat pale). The animal welfare movement lobbied relentlessly. Today, the veal crate is banned in the EU and several US states. Calves now live in group pens. This is welfare working. The system (veal production) still exists, but the suffering was reduced.
The Rights Failure (The Lab Monkey) In 2015, the Nonhuman Rights Project filed lawsuits for chimpanzees being used in medical research. They argued for habeas corpus (the right not to be imprisoned). The courts largely rejected these claims, stating that while chimps are sentient, they are not legal "persons." This is rights struggling. The law views animals as things, not someone.