American Society Increasingly Devalues Unborn Children While Elevating Pets to Human-Child Status
Source: Joshua Monnington. "We Treat Animals Like Children And Children Like Animals." August 19, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
The author argues that American culture has gotten its priorities backwards: we're increasingly willing to abort unborn babies who don't meet certain 'quality' standards while treating pets like beloved family members. He blames this on society abandoning the belief that humans are made in God's image, which he says opens the door to philosophies (like Peter Singer's) that view some animals as more valuable than human infants.
Conclusion
Modern American society has inverted a proper moral hierarchy by treating children (especially unborn ones) as disposable commodities like pets, while simultaneously elevating pets to the status of human children—a shift the author attributes to abandonment of belief in God and the imago Dei (humans made in God's image).
Premises
- Cases exist where parents or surrogates have sought to abort children discovered to have health problems, treating the selection process like shopping for a pet and rejecting 'defective' offspring
- Massachusetts and similar jurisdictions have expanded abortion access up to birth, demonstrated by lawmakers celebrating unlimited reproductive 'freedom'
- A near-billion-dollar industry (IVF/genetic selection) allows prospective parents to select embryos based on desirable traits, mirroring pet breeding practices
- Cultural trends show declining birth rates alongside explosive growth in pet-related spending (nearing $160 billion), with many pet owners treating animals as full family members
- Surveys indicate many young adults rank career and personal fulfillment above having children, treating parenthood as optional rather than essential
- Peter Singer's philosophical arguments—that newborns are not full 'persons' and that some animals' lives may be worth more than infants' lives—reflect and legitimize this societal inversion
- These trends collectively demonstrate a shift toward viewing both children and pets as consumer products/accessories meant to serve adult convenience rather than as beings with inherent worth
Assumptions
- Human dignity is grounded in being made in the image of God (imago Dei), and rejecting this belief inevitably leads to devaluing human life
- There is a natural, God-ordained hierarchy in which humans (born and unborn) possess greater moral status than animals
- Individual anecdotes (Gilkar/Ahmed, Dineen/Lawton, Hilton, Drewitt-Barlow) are representative of broader societal trends rather than isolated incidents
- Increased pet spending and declining birth rates are causally or morally linked phenomena rather than independent trends
- Selecting embryos for health/genetic traits is morally equivalent to selecting pets by breed/color, with no meaningful distinction in intent or context
- Peter Singer's utilitarian philosophy has had significant real-world influence on societal attitudes rather than being a marginal academic position
- Choosing not to have children for personal fulfillment reasons reflects moral decline rather than legitimate personal autonomy or circumstance