A Resolution to Support Better Conditions In Livestock Farms
F1
2
Be It Enacted by the Student Congress assembled that:
Whereas:
3
4
Thousands of livestock, factory farms hold animals who live in extremely poor
conditions; and
Whereas:
These animals grow up suffering from cruelty, such as living in compact,
5
dirty, cages and given medication which makes their muscles grow at a rapid rate;
6
and
7
Whereas:
8
9
life expectancy (lifespan) and experience their natural behaviors; and
Whereas:
Steps need to be taken to protect the rights of the animals who are forced
to live dreadful lives for human’s benefits; and
10
11
They do not get to live the lives they should be given, such as their normal
Whereas:
Protect the way the animals are kept at the farms: protected from
12
experiencing unnecessary muscle growth, beak breaking, and no freedom to
13
move as they please.
14
Whereas:
15
16
There is currently not an effective plan to prevent the decrease in Livestock
farms while increasing animal rights
Therefore:
Be it resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that all Livestock
17
Farms should provide humane living conditions for the animals and treated as if
18
they were our own, adored pets.
Respectfully Submitted to the
committee on Environmental Protection,
Jessica R. Nelson
Barrington High School
Arguments and Evidence-Pro
Pro Argument #1: All the animals do not get to experience their natural behaviors.
Evidence: “1) Chickens are prevented from carrying out many of their complex social and
natural behaviors such as roosting, perching and foraging.
2) Cage dimensions for all pigs are only slightly larger than the pig's body. In a space this size,
this highly intelligent and social creature cannot even turn around, let alone express their natural
behaviors, such as a mother pig using her powerful desire to nest to prepare for her brood, and to
root with her snout.”
Source: Brian Sherman, “Bring Tidings of Comfort to the Creatures in Our Factory Farms,”
CQ Researcher, December 23, 2011
Pro Argument #2: Factory farms are directly to blame for the increase in many illnesses, such
as food borne outbreaks.
Evidence: “…but some innovations have caused new problems, including the spread of
antibiotic-resistant infectious agents and the proliferation of hormones in meat. In addition,
residents living near massive livestock operations say they suffer from a variety of air- and
water-borne illnesses resulting from CAFO-related pollution.”
Source: Adriel Bettelheim, "Drug-Resistant Bacteria," CQ Researcher, June 4, 2003
Pro Argument #3: Due to the fact that the animals raised on factory farms are given steroids,
their muscles grow at a rapid rate, causing them to be full grown at young age. People would
typically title these meats as “Cheap Meat,” because there is a great amount of the meats;
therefore many people can buy them at a cheap cost.
Evidence: “Factory farms can produce large quantities of food cheaply; however animalwelfare advocates call them inhumane, and environmentalists and local residents say they
generate pollution and noxious odors and byproducts.”
Source: Don P. Blayney, “The Changing Landscape of U.S. Milk Production,” U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Statistical Bulletin, June 2002
Pro Argument #4: Many restaurants, fast food chains, and grocery stores are making an effort
to fight against inhumane conditions at livestock factory farms and feedlots.
Evidence: “"[T]the biggest restaurant chain on the planet, McDonald's, lined up on the same
side as the Humane Society of the United States on a major issue of animal welfare. It informed
its pork suppliers that they will have to stop confining pregnant sows in 'gestation crates' that are
too small to let the animals turn around… McDonald's was preceded by such mainstays of
American consumer culture as Burger King, Wendy's, Sonic and Winn-Dixie Stores, which have
moved against gestation crates (Chicago Tribune).”
Source: Steve Chapman, “Food and Conscience,” CQ Researcher, December 23, 2011
Pro Argument #5: The animals should be treated like one’s pet because they too are animals,
many of which are just as smart as dogs. Overall, factory farms are cruel, inhumane places.
Animals that are forced to give up their lives for the benefit of human use should be treated very
well.
Evidence: “Pigs are highly intelligent and social creatures, at least as smart and sensitive as a
dog. The state they are in would be subject to prosecution if committed against a dog. Yet
methods of production like these are sanctioned by commonwealth and state farm animal welfare
codes, and by state and territory laws that effectively deem farm animal suffering "justifiable",
"necessary" and "reasonable" on economic grounds.”
Source: Brian Sherman, “Bring Tidings of Comfort to the Creatures in Our Factory Farms,” CQ
Researcher, December 23, 2011
Arguments and Evidence-Con
Con Argument #1: It is very expensive to buy antibiotics that help numb or knock out the
animals before they are mistreated or killed.
Evidence: “…Kremer stopped using antibiotics or growth hormones in his pigs and says his
new methods not only are safer for humans but also save him $12,000 a year on drug and vet
bills.”
Source: David L. Smith, Jonathan Dushoff and J. Glenn Morris, Jr., “Agricultural Antibiotics
and Human Health,” PLoS Medicine, August 2005
Con Argument #2: Billions of people eat chicken; therefore the farms cannot wait until the
chicks grow up at their natural rate.
Evidence: “Many large farm operators routinely use antibiotics not just to treat sick animals but
also to promote growth. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 18
antimicrobial drugs for growth promotion in food animals. Half of these, including penicillin and
erythromycin, are chemically similar or identical to drugs used by humans.”
Source: Katherine M. Shea, “Antibiotic Resistance: What Is the Impact of Agricultural Uses of
Antibiotics on Children's Health?” Pediatrics, July 2003
Con Argument #3: Conventional products are much cheaper than organic products.
Evidence: “…organic farming is more labor-intensive and yields are generally lower, organic
food usually costs about 25 percent more than conventional products. Organic milk costs even
more — about $3.60 per half gallon, roughly double the price of conventional milk.”
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “U.S. Certified Organic
Farmland Acreage, Livestock Numbers, and Farm Operations, 1992-2003
Con Argument #4: It is very expensive to buy spacious, individual cages for all the animals.
Evidence: “Confinement is good for hogs,” says Joy Philippi, president of the National Pork
Producers Council, who runs a nursery with 2,000 pigs in Bruning, Nebraska. “The barns are
climate-controlled and well-ventilated, so livestock are protected from the weather. We can
deliver feed and water to them 24 hours a day.”
Source: Brian Hansen, "Crisis on the Plains," CQ Researcher, May 9, 2003
Con Argument #5: Lapses in food safety can happen at any point in the food supply chain, not
just in factory farms.
Evidence: “The U.S. food supply is safer and Americans are better nourished today than a
century ago, thanks largely to scientific and technical innovations such as pasteurized milk,
enriched breads and cereals and advances in veterinary medicine. Deaths from food-related
illnesses such as diarrhea, typhoid fever and dysentery have fallen dramatically since the early
1900s, and nutritional deficiencies like scurvy, rickets and pellagra have been brought under
control.”
Source: D. J. Wagstaff, “Public Health and Food Safety: A Historical Association,” Public
Health Reports, November-December 2004
Works Cited:
Brian Sherman, “Bring Tidings of Comfort to the Creatures in Our Factory Farms,” CQ
Researcher, December 23, 2011
Adriel Bettelheim, "Drug-Resistant Bacteria," CQ Researcher, June 4, 2003
Don P. Blayney, “The Changing Landscape of U.S. Milk Production,” U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Statistical Bulletin, June 2002
Steve Chapman, “Food and Conscience,” CQ Researcher, December 23, 2011
David L. Smith, Jonathan Dushoff and J. Glenn Morris, Jr., “Agricultural Antibiotics and Human
Health,” PLoS Medicine, August 2005
Katherine M. Shea, “Antibiotic Resistance: What Is the Impact of Agricultural Uses of
Antibiotics on Children's Health?” Pediatrics, July 2003
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, “U.S. Certified Organic Farmland
Acreage, Livestock Numbers, and Farm Operations, 1992-2003
Brian Hansen, "Crisis on the Plains," CQ Researcher, May 9, 2003
D. J. Wagstaff, “Public Health and Food Safety: A Historical Association,” Public Health
Reports, November-December 2004