Here some problems I have with that argument. You say animals can't give consent but don't justify that. What is required to be able to give consent? And if something can't give consent is it even relevant? Humans obviously can give consent and the question of our consent is one that matters. A tree can not give consent but the idea of consent in regards to a tree is nonsensical. So what needs to be justified is why an animal's consent is of any importance if it's not ever able to consent.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
Here some problems I have with that argument. You say animals can't give consent but don't justify that. What is required to be able to give consent? And if something can't give consent is it even relevant? Humans obviously can give consent and the question of our consent is one that matters. A tree can not give consent but the idea of consent in regards to a tree is nonsensical. So what needs to be justified is why an animal's consent is of any importance if it's not ever able to consent.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~