Speciesists have a prejudice in favor of the view that all humans are somehow infinitely more valuable than any animal. Sadly, such prejudices are not unusual. Like racists and sexists, speciesists say that the boundary of their own group is also a boundary that marks off the most valuable beings from all the rest. Never mind what you are like, if you are a member of my group, you are superior to all those who are not members of my group. The speciesist favors a larger group than the racist and so has a large circle of concern; but all these prejudices use an arbitrary and morally irrelevant fact�membership of a race, sex, or species�as if it were morally crucial. The only acceptable limit to our moral concern is the point at which there is no awareness of pain or pleasure, and no preferences of any kind. That is why pigs count, but lettuces don't. Pigs can feel pain and pleasure. Lettuces can't. Peter Singer 2001.

The members present were invited to state why as Humanists they do not extend the principle �Not doing to others what you would not wish them to do to you� - to members of other animal species. There was a lively discussion between the carnivores and the vegetarians, but there were probably no dramatic conversions.Anyone wishing to follow the theme of the treatment of non-human animals could go to the website: dominion or read one of the following books:

Peter Singer, Animal Liberation A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals -- perhaps the most influential book of the animal advocacy movement; focuses primarily on ethics, vivisection (animal experimentation), and factory farming

Tom Regan, The Struggle for Animal Rights -- well-written, covers diverse ethical issues.

Marjorie Spiegel , The Dreaded Comparison: Human and Animal Slavery