...Responsibility to Animals Animals only exist through the eyes of the beholder. They are cute kitties, sweet puppies, and then we have animals like rats, chickens, cows, and pigs. Some animals we have emotional commitment with and those we do not. We are arguing for animals to have the rights as humans do. There are animals being used in labs, in poor conditions on farms for mast productions, and animals being mistreated. Should any animal have the right to life? Should they have the right to be pain free? Have right to food? Animals cannot not speak for themselves, so people are having to speak up for them. Animals do have rights that are the same as humans. Whether or not proving if animals should have the right could change how they are treated and the usage of animals. "What we conclude about animal rights will have consequences for the food we eat and the clothes we wear, and it will have direct bearing on the kinds of science we think morally justifiable"(Cohen, 1986). The argument here other than animal rights is that humans think they are in control of their own rights or wrong ideas as long as society or culture goes along with them. When asking the question, “what are our moral obligations to animals,” the argument is that we do not have any obligations toward animals, due to them being species, not taking part of political contract or of determining what right or wrong is. Humans have laws in place that we have created, therefore, non-humans are expose to the rules...
Words: 1510 - Pages: 7
...News Issue: Animal Rights Clearly define the ethical issue and provide a brief explanation as to why it is important. (4 marks) To many people, the concept of animal rights is absurd and long drawn. However, animal activism has increased in the recent past with formation of such organizations as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) that seek to incorporate ethics when addressing issues related to animals (Joyce 2014, par. 1). Apparently, animal rights activists argue that animals too have rights as is with human beings. Their arguments are anchored in the premise that there should ethical rules that guide our treatment of animals. This implies that human beings have no permission to do some of the things on an animal notwithstanding the situation (Bekoff 2009, p. 14). In fact, the animal rights advocacy groups agitate for legislation of non-negotiable prohibition of animal mistreatment. However, there is a growing concern about the specific rights that animals given the fact that majority of definitions have not actually outlined the rights. The issue of animal rights is important especially in the wake of public policies that are informed by the arguments of animal ethics. Just recently, Australia and New Zealand had to cut their exports of animals to Pakistan given the brutality and cruelty that the animals suffered when being slaughtered (Joyce 2014, par. 6). For majority of the activists, animals have intrinsic value and should be valued as...
Words: 2331 - Pages: 10
...A debate about animal rights has been an ongoing problem around the world for generations. For the first time, according to Singer (2003), the Australian philosopher Peter Singer proposed the assertion that animals have ‘rights’ in the 1970s. Ever since then, this claim has been the topic of many emotional and ardent discussions. There are many areas in which the issue of animal right’s is an acute topic. For example, there are moral aspects of keeping animals in zoos, eating them, using for testing etc.? I tend to think that animals should not have rights because they are not humans, and they are not able to fight for those rights. I agree with the point of view of Linker (2014) that people should treat animals respectably. However, it should be because they are not like humans rather than because they are similar to human beings. Human dignity is associated with some the moral qualities that are often difficult to explain, and certainly cannot be seen in the behavior of animals. Obviously, people have to take care of animals and not hurt them because they are living beings also experiencing emotions. However, this cannot be the basis for granting them rights equivalent to the human. People are beings endowed with sympathies and emotions, and any normal society cannot be indifferent to the suffering of the animals. A cruel treatment of pets, like dogs and cats, will induce revulsion even from people who had never had pets and are not planning to. However, Schultz (2013)...
Words: 862 - Pages: 4
...approximately 7.6 million animals that die each year due to abuse. These number have been going down each year due to the animal rights movement. People around the world should join the animal rights movement so animals can live a happy life like humans can. Most people do not see how much animals help us, like farming and food. People need to see how innocent animals are they only bad because they do what there owners do. Most animal that are abused are dogs and cats because they are the usual pets. There is a lot what animal rights is for. One thing it's for is to protect animals from abuse. You can help by reporting an animal abuser. You can protect most animals by just donating to the animal rights movement. You can save so many animals by reporting an abuse,...
Words: 651 - Pages: 3
...animal’s right. (30 marks) There are many different attitudes towards issues of animal rights. Some believe that exploiting animals for uses such as, medical, cosmetics and domestic testing there is also a growing concern about the abuse and use of animals in some such as blood sports and zoos. Although, there is animal rights in place, animals till get exploited and abused Within this essay I will outline how traditional Christians view animals and how modern day christens view animals and how both views conflict; I will also outline philosopher’s views of animal rights. The traditional Christians view is that animals should be preyed on and eaten but others, this is known as ‘nature red in tooth and claw’. Traditional Christian’s downgraded animals in three ways, god created animals for the use of human beings so, therefore, believe that humans could do as they pleased with animals, Also, they thought that animals were worth little moral consideration as animals don’t have souls or reason, whereas, humans do, However, they also thought that animals were in relation to humans but not on the same terms. Although, not all traditional Christian’s believed that not all animals were regarded with little worth some saints demonstrated that Christian’s should treat animals with respect and kindly. Stt Anton of Padua preached to fish’s and St Francis of Assisi preached to the birds and became a popular pro-animal Christian. Throughout the bible we are taught that we should stewards...
Words: 1435 - Pages: 6
...Animal Rights Introduction Ethics and morality have consistently been topics of concern in our society. Concerns about ethics and morality also extend to matters associated with the treatment of animals. The purpose of this discussion is to summarize and critique several different theories associated with the ethical treatment of animals. The discussion will focus on the treatment of animals as it relates to hunting and trapping animals, eating animals, using animals for research, and the manner in which domestic and wild animals are treated. The research will summarize and critique several theories including anthropocentrism, Animal liberation, Strong Animal Rights Theory, Weak(er) animal rights theory, Two-factor egalitarianism, biocentric egalitarianism, ecocentric views. Anthropocentrism Anthropocentrism views human being as the center of the universe and regards the world from the point of view of human values and experiences (Dictionary). According to the western philosopher Immanuel Kant human beings alone are rational beings and as such have intrinsic moral worth. Kant asserts that human beings do not owe animals anything because they are not rational beings. However, he does assert that people should be kind to animals but only because kindness to animals assists in developing character in human beings. In other words kindness to animals should not take place for the sake of the animal but for the betterment of the human being. In addition to Kant...
Words: 3790 - Pages: 16
...Animal Rights Since the beginning of living, the interaction between man and animals have been something unavoidable. The encounter in the wild, the hunter and the hunted, and the survival of the strongest are the rules of the jungle an it is because of this relation that we have with the animals that people have been study them. The philosopher Pythagoras was one of the first person who talked about animal, describing their soul were in the same category as the humans begins. Also, in the Bible is told that the humans are in a superior level when they justified that a bled animal can be eaten. Rene Descartes wrote in his meditations that animals do not have soul; therefore, they are not able to feel and their treatment can not be consider as a moral issue. Knowing that there is a lot of controversy about the animal rights, is inevitable to ask what are the advantages and disadvantages about giving them rights? The first and maybe the most important factor that we need to discuss firstly is the ability that both, humans and animals, have to think and feel. On one hand, human beings are complex evolved creatures who are accorded rights on the basis that they are able to think and to feel pain; additionally, any other animals are also able to think (to some extent) and are certainly able to feel pain. Therefore non-human animals should also be accorded rights, like a free and healthy life. However, on the other hand, human beings are infinitely more complex than any other...
Words: 747 - Pages: 3
...Animal Rights This argument about animal needing rights has been going on since the twentieth century. Until this day animals still do not receive he rights they deserve. Not all animals deserve to be locked up in a cage at a zoo or in a scientist’s laboratory. How we treat animals has shown an uncivilized community. Prejudice has a way of denying that animal rights have no expectations to the fact that they should be given the rights as we have for ourselves. Doesn’t matter what the case may be, prejudice is morally unacceptable, because think about it, you will eat a pig or cow but it’s in human to eat a dog. [pic] Eating animals isn’t bad but it’s on the wrong side. The way factories torture the cows, pigs, and chickens is the wrong way that we should be eating them. This book that I read Eat Like You Care: An Examination of the Morality of Eating Animals By Gary L. Francione and Anna Charlton, explains that they agree that “unnecessary” suffering and death on animals are ridiculous. The book explains that there will be no different on how we make our meat. Another book by Gary L. Francione, Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? This book explains that an animal should have rights to live without suffering, just how humans live without suffering. In the Los Angeles Times, there was an article Animal rights, writ too large? This article explains that you can be against animal abuse and animals having rights. But don’t be an hypocrite...
Words: 508 - Pages: 3
...Merissa Acuna Aretha Matt English 102 5 November 2014 Animals and the Exemption of Their Rights Almost every American grew up eating some kind of meat or wearing some type of fur, leather, or wool, we grow up going to zoos and circuses, and some people even have pets like birds and rabbits at home in cages. We unknowingly exploit animals in every way possible. The impact that our actions have on these animals is never taken into consideration. Due to animals serving us humans several different purposes, the animal is forgotten. The idea of whether animals should have rights is at a peak in controversy. Animal rights activist believe animals have legal and moral rights the same way humans do. On the other hand there are several corporations...
Words: 1138 - Pages: 5
...Argumentative essay: Save animals. Say no to animal testing! Nowadays, it is a well-known fact that many companies test their products like cosmetics and medicines with animals before production to check their products ’safety and quality. A huge amount of animals are used in research purpose every year. Is it right for human beings to sacrifice millions of animals for testing purpose? Should animal testing be banned? Animal testing is a controversial issue and there is a heated debated about pros and cons of animal testing in society. People hold different points of view. Supporters of animal testing think that animal testing are critical to medical and scientific development. Opponents of animal testing think that animal testing is inhumane and cruel. It is generally believed that animal testing should be banned because it is unethical, unreliable and unnecessary. First and foremost, it would be interesting to see that supporters of animal testing argue that animals do not have feelings and rights. They are convinced that it is right to take animals ‘lives and make them suffer because they think human beings are more superior to other animals. They also think that only small amount of animals are being harm and kill each year. Actually, animals also do have feelings and rights, they are not deserve to suffer for research purpose. One should however, not forget that large amount of animals are killed because of us, there are actually 19.5 million animals are killed every year...
Words: 1376 - Pages: 6
...Animal Testing: A Reasonable Stance Animals can give us love and happiness when we are caring for them as pets, but what else can animals give us? Over the past century animals have also given us vaccines, drugs, and more that have kept our society healthy and safe from deadly infections, all due to animal testing. But are the welfare of animals something that should be risked to make our lives better? The issue of animal testing has caused an ongoing battle in our society that deals with both science and animal rights. There are those who favor it because it is allows for scientific progress, and there are those who oppose it because it is the ethically right thing to do. Both sides have valid arguments, which most people choose to side with one or the other. With a better understanding of each side of the issue, animal testing, we can conceive a credible truth. The complex issue of animal testing is one that should not be researched in a bias way. One must explore both and all sides of the argument to come to a valid conclusion. While I have yet to find a piece of writing that equally argues both sides of animal testing, the combined research I have done on both sides of the spectrum allows for a solid foundation for this discussion. These two stances on animal testing are opposite not only in position on the issue, but also in reasoning. The side for animal testing is reasoning on the means of science and research used to develop new medical treatment, while the side against...
Words: 2983 - Pages: 12
...Nowadays, animals are in danger of dying out, at least one million animal species have already disappeared since 1980. Worse still, as the using of hunting, laboratories, and commercial getting common, the number of animal species decreases faster and faster, and this phenomenon will continue if no one come out and speak up for the animals. Today, animal right is a highly contentious issue. Do animals have rights? Philosophers have different standpoints. In “The Case for Animals Rights” which is written by Tom Regan, Regan states that animals should have fundamental rights as humans, and also be protected from the unnecessary harm. In addition, in Peter Singer’s article “All Animals Are Equal”, he has the same standpoint as Regan that animals should have the same principles that human received. In contrast, in the article “The Case of the Use of Animals in Biomedical Research” by Carl Cohen, he supports Regan in his moral theory, however, he argues that animals should not have rights, and he also points out that the using of animals in medical research is important. “The Case for Animal Rights”, “All Animals are Equal” and “The Case of the use of Animals in Biomedical Research” let us know that although hurting animals is not unlawful, it’s morally wrong; for the purpose of protecting animals, people must change their beliefs. In Regan’s article, he supports that animals are equal to humans, and should have the same rights as humans. Although animals and us born in different...
Words: 986 - Pages: 4
...The argument for animal rights assumes that animals posses their own lives and deserve to be assigned rights in order to protect their wellbeing. This view insists that animals are not merely good utilized only to benefit mankind and they should be allowed to choose how they want to live their lives, free from the constraints of man. But if animals are given absolute rights, then surely they shouldn’t be allowed to kill each other, as this would be a violation of these rights. Should murderous animals be administered prison sentences or even…capital punishment? One method of preventing animals killing each other would be to provide animals with a vegetarian environment which caters for their every need. However, in this fictional vegetarian world wouldn’t the rights of the animal be suppressed as it is being held in captivity against its will? From an evolutionary point of view it is the natural right of a stronger animal to devour a weaker one. If this is acceptable then surely it is acceptable for us to eat meat too, as we humans are more evolved than the creatures we eat. But this argument implies that if you have physical power over someone or something then you should be allowed to do what you want. If this was the case, it would be perfectly acceptable for me to torture an infant, purely because I have the physical capacity to do so and if an alien race should happen to invade Earth with the intention and power to kill and eat us, they should also be allowed...
Words: 1527 - Pages: 7
...Essay on Animal Rights Animals are great little creatures. They give pleasure on many different levels. They are they for beauty, comfort, and love. Animals are creatures of the world that are here for those reasons. We as humans were creatures as animals long ago, but we’ve evolved. Most animals have evolved too, but that does not give them the same right as a human being. I support Machan’s views on animal rights and livelihood. Animals should not be granted with the same right as we are, as humans. Animals are not even close to being in the same league as humans. Yes animals can feel pain and emotion, but that does not give them rights to freedom that humans have. I think that the treatment of animals should be learned at a young age. Growing up on a farm, I learned how to treat animals. There is a certain amount of respect that everyone should give to animals. You shouldn’t really be cruel to them. What is the purpose of making a living thing suffer? There is no purpose and its just wrong. Being on a farm you know the boundaries when it comes to animals and yourself. I had pets and then I had animals. Cats and dogs are usually the favorites when it comes to having pets. They give you pleasure. Chickens and ducks were there for the sole purpose to be eaten, sold, or for eggs. When on a farm, you grow attached to certain animals more easily than others. I would never get attached to cows, because I knew that they wouldn’t be around very long. We would process them...
Words: 1137 - Pages: 5
...Animal Rights Animal Rights Johana Diaz Professor Irene Silas April 2011 Animal Rights Animal Rights Like humans, animals feel emotions such as pain, anxiety, and affection then if humans have rights, animals should also have rights. It is true that animals are different from people but it doesn't mean that they are inferior to them. Animals are abused and killed for a variety of socially acceptable purposes: 6 billion are slaughtered as foods, 200 million are murdered by sport hunters, 50 million die in laboratories and 25 million are murdered for their fur. Numbers never lie, cruelty towards animals is a fact. It is important to let humanity know why animals should have rights. Informing on the physical and psychological abuse that they suffer through violence, research of educational and scientific purposes and for the entertainment of people. Animal Rights, also known as Animal Liberation, is the the idea that the most basic interests in animals should be allowed the same amount of attention as basic interests in human beings (Wise, 2007). Peter Singer, a philosopher with a sensible focus on suffering in animals, incites people to extend their moral care boundaries to include animals. He says that animals shouldn't be discriminate against because they are not part of the human species (Yount, 2008).I agree completely with that just because animals don't have the same rationality as human...
Words: 1560 - Pages: 7
