Supportive of Ag-Gag Laws.
Article 2: “In the medicine and finance industries for example, whistleblowing isn’t considered a crime. Yet whistleblowing and undercover investigations in agriculture have had tremendously positive impacts on public welfare.”
Rebuttal: The authors fails to explain or give any examples of instances where whistleblowing in the medicine and finance industry have been perfectly ok. Also the author fails to explain why whistleblowing in the agriculture is considered to be such a terrible crime.
Rebuttal: Ag laws do protect the farmers in the agriculture industry by only covering up their tracks from whistleblowers. The author fails to link how the farmers are benefited due to the ag-laws. The author also states that these laws will send consumers the signals that farmers are hiding something, but in what way will this send those signals. The laws are solely there to protect the farmer from any disputes because of whistleblowing.
Antagonistic to Ag-gag laws.
Rebuttal: The fact that the three federal statutes addressing the wellbeing of animal welfare but doesn’t pertain to animals in the food industry is just cruel and inhumane. Animals should be treated the same under any circumstance including the agriculture industry. The laws are only protecting the big name businesses not the animals themselves.
Article 2:“Factory farmed animals are constantly mistreated and abused. Without undercover investigations, illegal animal cruelty will resume and farmed animals will continue to suffer a brutal reality.”
Rebuttal: The author is arguing that animals are constantly being mistreated in the industry but fails to bring to light that not every business constantly mistreats the animals. The authors tries to make the reader think that 100% of the industry is abusing their animals.