Problem:
The 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant had a profound respect for nature and thought that animals too should be considered in our treatment of them. We should not cause animals undue harm and suffering. If we are to slaughter the animal, then we must do it quickly and with the least amount of pain and agony, avoiding torture of any sort as a barbarity by any account. Kant's reasoning, however, differs from Bentham's in that Kant thought that we should treat the carriage horse or household dog well, not for their own sake, but for our sake, lest we come moral monsters. For instance, Kant thought it not correct that people would simply shoot their old horse or old dog. Instead, Kant thought that we are indirectly obligated to care for the old horse and dog, for their faithful years of service; they give their youth and power to their master; the least the master could do is to take care of them, when they are weaker and can no longer work.
What do you think? Have other animals a place in your 'moral universe'? What is your argument?