<< We've heard this "right of society" line before, it has been used to
sterilize and exterminate disabled people, gays, deaf, gypsies, blacks,
alcoholics, Jews, any social "deviant."
>>
It's offensive and ignorant to accuse Singer of being a Nazi. As he makes clear, he thinks that any rational being hasa special claim on our moral concern. He goesa lot further towards defending the nonrational than most would, too.
Incidentally, Singer,a utilitarian, is consistent in rejecting the existence of rights as sometrhing apart from utility. He does not make an exception for animal rights. IHe just uses rights talk as a convenient way of summing up his utuilitarian view that the suffering of sentient animals hasa lot of moral weight and accordinging, we shouldn't kill them or otherwise abuse them--to turn it around, they have certain rights which we violate if we treat them in certain ways.
Singer has a good deal of influence, or anyway,a long-standing platform in philsophy in this country already, and has for many years, as the author of lucid and influential essays taht are widely anthologized., The most famous oif these, Richa nd Poor, advovates tyhe typically Nazi position that people in rich countries are morally obligated to spend less on themselves and give more of their wealth to people in poor countriies. But what elsew ould you expect from someone like Singer who has no respect for the rights of the disadvantaged?
--jks