We never really see how badly animals are treated, but in reality many animals are kept in conditions that many would consider abysmal. Not only are they often malnourished, they are placed in extremely compact living conditions in which they can barely move their entire lives. Even animals like fish, which are often seen as dumb and not capable of conscious thought, are able to feel pain physically and emotionally according to various studies. These conditions need to be drastically improved and this could potentially be achieved through an animal Bill of Rights. Nevertheless, if there is an animal Bill of Rights, it should be kept fairly limited.. Animal rights have become a common topic to talk about in recent years, especially with the release of …show more content…
The largest reason for this is that not every animal is the same, and not every animal has the same capabilities and intelligence. Not all animals need to be given very many further rights, such as in the case of fish where it is arguable that “the benefits of sportfishing, both financial and recreational, may outweigh the ethical costs of the likely suffering of fish.” (Braithwaite) Creating a universal Bill of Rights that covers all animals would only hinder progress and be a general inconvenience for little benefit. It could greatly slow or even stop research that relies on mice or other tiny animals for testing and biological research. This could not only increase the time taken to discover new medicine and medical techniques, it would also increase food prices due to the increased cost of taking care of animals used for meat. Rather, we should focus on creating laws on a case by case basis quickly to prevent abusive treatment of animals. This would result in minimal hindrance to other progress by only passing laws for certain animals that need it the
"The Case For Animal Rights" written by Tom Regan, promotes the equal treatment of humans and non-humans. I agree with Regan's view, as he suggests that humans and animals alike, share the experience of life, and thus share equal, inherent value.
Vivisections, medical research that harms the research subject without providing any benefits to them, is supported by philosophy professor R.G Frey on the basis that the using and killing of animals is morally permissible because humans' quality of life exceeds animals' quality of life. Frey does not disregard the fact that vivisections harm animals, he sees no difference in the pain felt by humans and animals; nonetheless, Frey does not believe that all members of the moral community have lives of equal value. He believes that sacrificing the lives of those with less value is better than sacrificing the lives of those with higher values. Therefore, Frey defends the act of vivisections on the basis that humans' lives are of greater moral value
Most would not put animals in the same category as humans so giving them the same rights seems quite ridiculous; since humans are supposed to be seen as the alpha species. What is a more realistic term is to consider them our property, because we continue to use animal testing and think it is okay to harm these animals. In the end, animal testing and research is cruel and should be done away with. It is a proven fact that animals feel pain just like humans do. No animal deserves to have his or her life purpose be to give his or her life unknowingly for science. We must to put an end to this cruelty and torture because just like humans, animals are living beings. No matter how it is perceived, it is cruel and unusual punishment.
... animals in technologically intensive economies and threats to the very surgical of wild animals species” (Fellenz 74-77). Even after all this, the number of animals used in agriculture and research grows by the billions every year, in the United States. “Many animals have financial value to humans. Livestock farmers, ranchers, pharmaceutical companies, zookeepers, circus trainers, and breeders are among the many people who have a financial interest in the animal trade. If humans were to stop using animals, these people would be out of work. Many others would be deprived of their favorite sport and leisure activities” (Evans). Thanks to the many efforts done, by the many people in England and the United States, many other counties began creating animals rights as well, like Asia and South America. Still to this day, do animals rights organizations flourish worldwide.
Animal rights can defined as the idea that some, or all non-human animals are entitled to the possession of their own lives and that their most basic interests should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. Animal rights can help protect the animals who experience research and testing that could be fatal towards them. The idea of animal rights protects too the use of dogs for fighting and baiting. Finally, animal rights affects the farms across america, limiting what animals can be slaughtered. The bottom line is, there is too much being done to these animals that most do not know about.
Now think about the needs of the animals that are caged up and stripped away from their natural homes. For example, chimpanzees spend hour's everyday grooming each other feeding their young and providing a comfortable environment for them to live in. They are loving protective parents and when they are taken away from their homes, they leave behind their children and the chimpanzees are no longer in their comfortable nests, but caged up alone and with cold, steel bars around them for the primary purpose of being experimented on (Baird, 1991). Not a nice picture right? But this is just one example of what most of the animal have to go through. I argue that animals have rights and should not be treated unfairly.
Many countries around the world agree on two basic rights, the right to liberty and the right to ones own life. Outside of these most basic human and civil rights, what do we deserve, and do these rights apply to animals as well? Human rights worldwide need to be increased and an effort made to improve lives. We must also acknowledge that “just as one wants happiness and fears pain, just as one wants to live and not die, so do other creatures” (Dalai Lama). Animals are just as capable of suffering as we are, and an effort should be made to increase their rights. Governments around the world should establish special rights that ensure the advancement and end of suffering of all sentient creatures, both human and non-human. Everyone and everything should be given the same chance to flourish and live.
The abuse that animals endure at human hands is heartbreaking, sickening, and infuriating. Animals are just as delicate as humans, so why not abuse us too? Animal lives should be just important as ours. No animals should be killed or abused for testing, entertaining, clothing, or hoarding. Every year, millions of animals are being killed and torture for testing.
In the first place, animal rights are violated. Innocent animals are “Exposure to drugs, chemicals or infectious disease at levels that cause illness, pain and distress,
Animals will have rights when they have the means to enforce them. They don't have the ability to reason as humans do. The human race has such a vast understanding of the necessities for all of the different species of animals to exist. Humans are far superior to any other animal because they are so advanced in technology. One advantage of advanced technology is, humans can store information as reference material. With all of this reference material humans can look back at previous mistakes so they don't do the same thing again. With this knowledge, humans can see and predict outcomes before a choice is made. Humans have the knowledge to enforce their rights, something no other animal has.
Animals have their own rights as do to humans and we should respect that and give them the same respect we give each other. Animals deserve to be given those same basic rights as humans. All humans are considered equal and ethical principles and legal statutes should protect the rights of animals to live according to their own nature and remain free from exploitation. This paper is going to argue that animals deserve to have the same rights as humans and therefore, we don’t have the right to kill or harm them in any way. The premises are the following: animals are living things thus they are valuable sentient beings, animals have feeling just like humans, and animals feel pain therefore animal suffering is wrong. 2 sources I will be using for my research are “The Fight for Animal Rights” by Jamie Aronson, an article that presents an argument in favour of animal rights. It also discusses the counter argument – opponents of animal rights argue that animals have less value than humans, and as a result, are undeserving of rights. Also I will be using “Animal Liberation” by Peter Singer. This book shows many aspects; that all animals are equal is the first argument or why the ethical principle on which human equality rests requires us to extend equal consideration to animals too.
Animals DO have feelings. They may not be able to talk and tell us where it hurts, but they do feel pain, just like humans. There are laws to protect animals, just like humans. I do not feel as though the laws are strong enough, nor are they enforced the way they should.
Should animals have the same rights as humans? The answer is simply an opinion, but before someone decides whether or not animals have rights they must first take into consideration a few things. First, one must decide what the term “rights” is referring to: moral rights or legal rights. Secondly, one must determine what the term animal is referring to: are humans considered animals? Thirdly, one must ask are animals’ sentient beings: Can animals feel pain and suffer? The next element is to take into consideration is all of the beneficial and atrocious aspects of animal testing, and then decide if the beneficial aspects outweigh the atrocious aspects or vice-versa. The final step is to decide if there is a middle ground to the argument: Can animals have rights
Animals deserve fair and ethical treatment, however not necessarily equally. Non-human animals and humans are not one in the same, there is no way we will ever be defined and put in the same category. Humans have reference levels, the ability to reason and think logically. We have evolved to the point where we can study, contain, and determine the outcome of basically any animal on Earth, now it’s up to us to ensure they are treated fairly.
... the world. Whether we choose to accept it or not, animals should have rights just like we do because they deserve them. They should have a right to live until they die and not to be killed, they should have a right to be treated with care and respect, and they should have a right not to end up as some people’s dinner in a cruel way. Non human animals can feel happy, pain, sadness, fear, love and even anger and so just because we have the power to completely dominate them does not give us a right not to accord them their rights, they deserve them. We are all living things, we all have fear and love, we all breath and so all of us should have rights.