Is the pursuit of equality a worthy ethical goal? No it's not because in reality people don't think logically about detailed issues in life which Peter Singer brings up in the book. Singer is regarded as a rationalist. He supports a philosophical system based on reason rather than on sentiment, self-interest, or social conditioning. He has taken a preference utilitarian approach to the ethical issues involved in embryo experimentation, genetic engineering, surrogate motherhood, abortion, and euthanasia. This approach regards an action as ethically correct if it satisfies the preference of those affected and has the best consequences for the greatest number of people.
             Singer rejects the idea that killing is wrong regardless of the circumstances. I disagree because I support capital punishment. I read and hear horrible stories about guys killing little girls, and I think to myself that little girl could be someone I love and care about. I would want that guy dead. If people want to commit crimes so badly then they should pay for what they do. I think the death penalty should be given the day after they have been convicted. I feel that when a killer stays in prison he takes up space in already over crowed prisons. I
             don't think the murderers should be wasting up other peoples hard earned money. If you kill someone you should prepare to die the next day. Singer rejects the idea that killing is wrong regardless of the circumstances. He analyzes in detail why and how beings' interests should be weighed.
             Singer believes it is wrong to kill an innocent human being. A human foetus is an innocent human being. Therefore it is wrong to kill a human foetus. I disagree with this in certain situations. When an young girl is raped and pregnantied I feel she should have the right to get an abortion. Or when a girl who is on crack sleeps with 5 men and gets pregnant. I feel this is a battle between morality and so
             ...