There are a lot of weapons that we've developed which we've pulled back from - biological weapons, chemical weapons, etc. This may be the case with armed autonomous robotics, where we ultimately pull back from them.

All the arguments to prove man's superiority cannot shatter this hard fact: in suffering, the animals are our equals.

Habits of thought lead us to brush aside descriptions of cruelty to animals as emotional, for "animal-lovers only"; or if not that, then anyway the problem is so trivial in comparison to the problems of human beings that no sensible person could give it time and attention. This too is a prejudice - for how can one know that a problem is trivial until one has taken the time to examine its extent?

I do not believe that it could never be justifiable to experiment on a brain-damaged human.

Even people who are aware that the traditional family farm has been taken over by big business interests, and that some questionable experiments go on in laboratories, cling to a vague belief that conditions cannot be too bad, or else the government or the animal welfare societies would have done something about it.

Surely there will be some nonhuman animals whose lives, by any standards, are more valuable than the lives of some humans.

Grain that is used to feed animals that end up on our tables as turkeys and hams could have gone to feed starving people.