[ Mantle 2 ]

The Compassionate Imperative

The Law requires us to refrain
from intentionally harming any animal,
unless survival, safety, or health genuinely necessitate it.

"Genuine necessity" means:
1) The action is necessary for meeting a real need, AND
2) No less harmful way of meeting that need is available, AND
3) Information concerning the veracity of #1 and #2 flows freely.

Non-Needs:
Fun, Habit, Taste,
Fashion, Prestige,
Pleasure, Curiosity,
Tradition, Preference,
Social Status, and Entertainment
do NOT constitute genuine necessity.  

The Three Criteria of the
Compassionate Imperative

In order to make sure
the Compassionate Imperative is satisfied,
the following Three Criteria must be satisfied:

1.  Honest Evaluation
2.  Choice of Least Harm
3.  Transparency to Investigation
​​
1. Honest Evaluation

Anyone exploiting an animal due to necessity
must, to the best of their ability,
be knowledgeable about
both A and B:

A.  The experience of the animal(s) involved...

A person harming an animal
may not willingly shield themselves
from the knowledge of the suffering they are causing,
and must make an effort, in good faith, on an ongoing basis,
to continue to witness and learn about said suffering,
for as long as they continue participating
in the harmful exploitation.

B.  The authenticity of the claimed necessity...

A person harming an animal
may not willingly shield themselves
from the arguments calling into question
the authenticity of their supposed necessity.

2. Choice of Least Harm

If exploitation is genuinely necessary,
then one must choose the most utilitarian option -
that with the highest ratio of Need-Fulfillment to Suffering.

Need-Fulfillment
-----------------------
Suffering

This involves:
A.  Use of the least neurologically advanced species
B.  Selection of the least painful and restrictive conditions
C.  Minimization of consumption to only the necessary amount
D.  Concurrently searching for alternative ways to meet the need
that involve less (or no) harmful exploitation and suffering.

These 4 criteria can sometimes be mutually exclusive,
but a good-faith effort must be made to identify
the combination resulting in the least suffering.

3. Transparency to Investigation

All harmful exploitation of animals
requires transparency about the reasoning for it.

Whilst actively engaged in any activity
that causes, incentivizes, or benefits from
the harmful exploitation of living creatures,
a person must be transparent to investigation
into their rationale for engaging in that activity.

The right to privacy is temporarily forfeited,
for the duration of one's engagement in said activity,
during which time one is required to answer questions
about one's knowledge concerning Honest Evaluation,
and one's process for identifying the Choice of Least Harm.

When answering such questions,
one must adhere to the Principles of Reason,
outlined in The Law of the Earth, Title 4:  Rationality.

Such questioning may be performed by anyone,
as long as the protocols in Title 5: Enforcement are followed.

All exploitation of animals
triggers an automatic warrant
for Enforcement Degree 2: Investigation.