Animal rights groups feel that animals feel as much pain as humans do, and they suffer when they are kept in cages for long periods of time. An amount of animal research is done for Products, not to find cures for diseases so this is not necessary. Finally, it has also been said that humans can get all the nutrients and vitamins they need from vegetables and fruit. Therefore having to kill animals f... ... middle of paper ... ...eat animals wrongly and falsely. Also PETA has been changing the way people view animal’s abuse by teaching and sharing about Animal rights.
When it comes to animals and their rights, there is a definite line between our needs and our taking advantage of those species that we consider inferior. As long as man has existed he has been carnivorous, and the same holds true for many other species of animals. Animals are a necessity to humans for survival, whether it be for food, clothing, etc. However, the unnecessary torture of animals through testing is not a necessity for human survival. When it comes to the needless torture of animals that we claim to benefit, the animals lives need to be taken into consideration.
God created us to be stewards over animals and help and aid them through his will, not through our own will of holding them captive in zoo 's. By captivity, we are rejecting a fundamental value to honor God 's will. Besides rejecting God’s will, holding animals captive makes them more aggressive toward each other and humans. This aggression forms evil when they attack. Adam Roberts, senior vice president of Born Free USA states that holding animals captive outside their natural setting results in their aggression and sadness.
Animal welfare, on the other hand, permits these uses of animals as long as certain humane guidelines are enforced” (Frequently). Some people believe the concern for animals is a waste of time when there are so many humans in need. Pro activists, however, argue that humans and animals are equally important and both deserve attention. This is a problem that concerns everyone in the world. We, as humans, depend on animals for many things such as food and clothing, so where and when will this controversy end?
Many people and organizations, like PETA, are huge advocates for the ethical treatment of animals. But does it really matter if animals were treated ethically or not if they end up getting slaughtered and put on a plate for people to consume anyway? Gary Steiner wrote the article “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable” and explains his life as a strict vegan and why even eating ethically raised animals is inhumane. Eating animal products, even if treated humanely, is still considered unjustified to vegan lifestyle supporters, such as Steiner, but I happen to disagree with some of his argument. Steiner believes that eating humanely treated animals is a “profound contradiction” because people are unaware of the effects greater than just how the animals
If we avoid hunting them down or destroying their ecosystems, they can survive.” Zamir states (197). I believe that all animals are sentient beings that deserve consideration, respect, and understanding. I believe that all wild animals deserve to live free of humans. As Samir stated, the life of wild animals does not depend on human intervention, however, what we do to their habitats and ecosystem does affect their lives and their well-being. That is the opposite of what zoos do, and that is why they should be banned.
Another problem is when you get near the top of the steps you hit a point where you should look at things threw an egalitarian point of view. Which can bring you back to where you started from because you are supposed to respect everything which intern you end up respecting nothing. In conclusion do to the arguments I have shown, we can conclude the existence of animal ethics depends on the existence of environmental ethics. I have shown this by demonstrating the individualistic ways in which Singer, Regan and Taylor look at this world will only save the rights of animals , and the world can not survive with just animals. I have also shown that by demonstrating the holistic views of Leapold, Westra, and Naess will preserve the rights of the environmental as a whole.
One of the most touchy aspects of our relationship with animals is the use of animals in laboratory sciences. Some manufactures of cosmetics and household products still conduct painful and useless tests on live animals, even though no law requires them to do so. Some people, called anti-vivisectionists, are at one extreme in their concern. They want an abolition of all experiments on live animals. At the other extreme there are those who say that it is quite all right for us to do whatever we like to animals.
Humanity's true moral test, its fundamental test…consists of its attitude towards those who are at its mercy: animals (Kundera, 2002). How would you feel if they mistreated you, hit you, kicked you, and mad... ... middle of paper ... ...d defeat abusers for good. Animals will always thank us, and it will feel good to know that we did something for our planet, and for the ones who need us the most. Animals have the same right to live freely. Don´t let people make it seem like it is something normal and something that should be accepted by the society.
We would not subject this human to product testing and research but we feel it is all right to place animals in this position. A general defense to this is that the human life matters more than that of an animal, but what allows us to make that judgment. Singer addresses this defense by comparing the inequality placed on species to that of the inequality placed on races and sexes, hence his term "speciesism". For the majority of my life, since I remember having a specific viewpoint one way or another, I have considered my-self a person in favor of animal rights. It wasn't until I read A Utilitarian Defense of Animal Liberation that I realized my idea of animal rights was greatly understated.