The fact that humans are animals, and the fact that animals of other species do certain things, does not automatically make those things morally justified when humans do them.
This excuse is commonly used regarding eating animals, usually in the form of “other animals also eat each other”. And its use is ironic and absurd especially in the case of people using animals to claim that it is justified to use animals, and usually from two opposite directions, sometimes in the very same conversation by the very same arguer. The same person can say in the same breath that humans are superior to other animals and therefore it is justified for humans to use other animals in order to satisfy their desire, and also that humans are animals like all animals and other animals eat each other, so it is okay for humans to eat other animals as well.
So of course not all animals eat other animals and the people using this excuse choose to resemble carnivorous animals in order to justify the violence and oppression they exert on other animals. Why not draw moral conclusions from vegetarian animals?
Besides, if humans are just another kind of animal, then they should live like other animals, that is, like animals live in nature and not only when they have to justify eating meat. This means no technology, no auxiliary means, no medicine, no electricity, no clothes, no shoes, no glasses, no cars, planes, trains, roads, traffic lights and every artificial means on which modern human life is based. Alternatively, they can embrace the supposed superiority instead of using it as an excuse to abuse other animals, to overcome their natural impulses and not behave like animals but like civilized beings. And civilized beings do not kill other animals in order to eat and wear them. And they certainly don’t artificially inseminate them, kidnap their offspring, and keep them in unimaginably cruel imprisonment conditions for their entire lives.
And as for reproduction, if humans are just another kind of animal, then they should support only natural births completely unaided. No hospitals, no painkillers, no surgical intervention, no training and no professional staff to help. And alternatively, if they are superior then they should not derive their values from what other animals do but according to accepted moral criteria. For example, not to impose on someone else a situation that s/he did not choose, or did not choose anything about it, including its timing, location, who the parents will be, what the rest of the family will be like, what the genetic load will be, what kind of initial experiences will greatly shape her/his character, temperament and traits throughout life, with little if any possibility of influencing any of this. It is so commonplace and perceived as so natural, desirable and necessary, that we do not stop to think how crazy it is that each of us did not choose anything about the circumstances of our existence. This is an absolutely crazy idea, which we will not accept in any other context except for creating people. This is despite the fact that the creation and the circumstances of each and every one’s creation are undoubtedly the most important and dramatic thing in life for each and every one. Everyone’s life begins with compulsion. The compulsion of their very existence and of the circumstances of their lives, including the physical and social environment in which they will live, the family they will live with, the education they will receive, the shaping events they will experience, etc. All of these have a crucial impact on the design of each person and no one has any direct and complete access to any of them. The supremacy of humanity that people so love to wave in order to justify certain injustices, falls silent in the face of the injustice of the compulsion of existence and the compulsion of the circumstances of each and every one’s existence.
Humans in the modern era do not reproduce as a result of a sexual act that originates from their sexual urge, which in some cases causes fertilization. Human beings reproduce out of a decision to reproduce. Human reproduction, at least in almost all cases, is an act of choice not a sexual act with results that may be desirable or not. Humans have the option of using contraceptives, and in cases of unwanted pregnancy, they have the option of stopping the process at an early stage.
These possibilities are not in the hands of animals of other species. They don’t really have a choice. Humans can prevent pregnancies if they want to, animals of other species cannot. That’s why this comparison is incorrect and it’s not just a technical matter. The very possibility of humans to have sex, that is, to realize a sexual urge, without reproduction, distinguishes them from animals of other species.
There may be those who argue that like sex, reproduction is also a drive. But unlike reproduction, at least theoretically, it is possible to actualize a sexual urge with the absolute consent of all parties involved, which is not even theoretically possible in the case of reproduction. And even though sex is a drive, we don’t allow people to exercise it just because it exists. On the contrary, we think that forcing the sexual urge without consent is one of the gravest crimes that human beings can do to each other. And rightfully so. Forced reproduction is not equated here or equivalent to rape. This would be an invalid comparison both technically and in terms of value. The similarity we point to is not in the severity of the actions but in order to emphasize that the mere existence of a natural urge is not a justification for its realization. We have a sexual urge but we think that very clear and unequivocal conditions are needed for its realization. The same goes for the urge to reproduce if there is one. Reproduction should require very clear and unequivocal conditions, but in practice there are no conditions at all. Anyone can reproduce. And this is not an insinuation that there are people who should not be parents, although it is clear that the sarcastic statement that one needs a license to drive a car but you don’t need a license to be a parent, is true. We are not implying but explicitly arguing that no one without exception should create another person, partly because no person asked, chose or wanted to be born, before it was forced upon them.
In conclusion, in order for this argument to be taken seriously, it at least needs to be consistent.
It is impossible to justify certain human decisions on the grounds that other animals also do it, and to ignore other things that animals of other species do. This argument should be a package deal. If the animal standards are valid for humans, then they should not be prevented from reproducing in any sexual act and once fertilization has occurred, births should be completely natural and free of any professional intervention or use of artificial accessories. That means no more contraceptives, midwives, doulas, delivery rooms, NICUs, epidural, caesarean sections, hospitals, ultrasound, amniocentesis, genetic tests, birth preparation courses, maternity leaves, birth grants, milk powders, diapers, milk pumping for a bottle, etc., because if humans are like animals of other species then they should follow through. Or just get rid of this ridiculous excuse.