Tom Regan is an American philosopher and teacher. Regan was born in November 28, 1938 in Pittsburgh, and he received his B.A. at Thiel College. He has spent most of his career teaching philosophy at North Carolina state university, where he is now professor emeritus. Regan is regarded as one of the leading intellectuals in the animal rights movement. One of his ethic essays includes “The Case for Animal Rights”, and it was published in 1985 when he was 47 years old. According to the essay “The Case for Animal Rights,” Tom Regan discusses the objectives about the abolition of the use of animal in sciences, the termination of industrial animal agriculture, and the elimination of marketable and hunting and trapping games.
The first objective is the eradication of the practice of animal in science because it will keep our creatures away from suffering. It is addressed to the Scientifics and the owners of animal laboratories because they are using animals for experiments and unnecessary research for the human benefits. The structure of this topic is comparing and contrasting animals to humans. People cannot validate harming or killing a human being for the assistances of others, in the same manner, people cannot justify hurting or destroying an animal life for the human needs. The creatures should have the same rights as the people. The tone over this topic describes the annoyance of how Scientifics views and treat animals with lack of respect and as less valuable thing in their laboratories just for the resource of humans.
The second target is the termination of animal industries farming because they allow faunae to be viewed and treated as resources for the general public. The intended audience for this topic...
... middle of paper ...
... like 10 times. He dropped the animal to the floor, and the chicken was suffering and dying. The guy was laughing at it. It is totally true that these big corporations are treating and killing the morality of these animals.
Regan’s article provides an excellent analysis about the effects of the incorrect point of view to animals and the damage of the moral position of our animals. The use of animals in experiments should be stop, and the exploitation of animals in the industries should be banned. If the cruelty and the immorally continues hurting our animals, we will sooner or later we will not have any animals on our planet.
Works Cited
Tom Regan. “The Case for Animal Rights.” The Norton Reader. 13. Peterson Linda, John Brereton, Joseph Bizup, Anne Fernald, and Melissa Goldthwaite.
New York. London: New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2012. 617.
Zak, Steven. “Ethics and Animals.” Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. Gilford: Dushkin Publishing Group, 2007
Regan, Tom. “The Case for Animal Rights.” In Animal Rights and Human Obligations, 2 ed.. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989.
...nimal rights yet I do question myself where to draw the line. I do not condone violence or harm against animals, yet I shudder at the thought of a mice plague and feel saddened by the extinction of our native animals by ‘feral’ or pest species. Is it right to kill one species to save another? I am appalled by the idea of ‘circus’ animals yet I will attend the horse races every summer for my entertainment. I think Tom Regan’s argument and reasoning for animal rights was extremely effective at making whoever is reading the essay question his or her own moral standards. Reading the essay made me delve into my own beliefs, morals and values which I think is incredibly important. To form new attitudes as a society it is important we start questioning how we view the lives of others, do we see animals as a resource to be exploited or as equals with rights just like we do?
As I have progressed through this class, my already strong interest in animal ethics has grown substantially. The animal narratives that we have read for this course and their discussion have prompted me to think more deeply about mankind’s treatment of our fellow animals, including how my actions impact Earth’s countless other creatures. It is all too easy to separate one’s ethical perspective and personal philosophy from one’s actions, and so after coming to the conclusion that meat was not something that was worth killing for to me, I became a vegetarian. The trigger for this change (one that I had attempted before, I might add) was in the many stories of animal narratives and their inseparable discussion of the morality in how we treat animals. I will discuss the messages and lessons that the readings have presented on animal ethics, particularly in The Island of Doctor Moreau, The Dead Body and the Living Brain, Rachel in Love, My Friend the Pig, and It Was a Different Day When They Killed the Pig. These stories are particularly relevant to the topic of animal ethics and what constitutes moral treatment of animals, each carrying important lessons on different facets the vast subject of animal ethics.
Regan, Tom. “The Case for Animal Rights.” In Defense of Animals. Ed. Peter Singer. New York:
... 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.
Clemmitt, Marcia. "Animal Rights." CQ Researcher by CQ Press. N.p., 10 Jan. 2010. Web. 27
As an advocate of animal rights, Tom Regan presents us with the idea that animals deserve to be treated with equal respect to humans. Commonly, we view our household pets and select exotic animals in different regard as oppose to the animals we perceive as merely a food source which, is a notion that animal rights activists
Morrison, Nick. "Animal Rights and Wrongs." Northern Echo, 24 Feb. 2001: n. pag. elibrary. Web. 12 Nov. 2013.
Regan T. The Struggle for Animal Rights. International Society for Animal Rights. Inc. darks Summit, PA. 1987.
Tom Regan, “The Case for Animal Rights,” in In Defense of Animals, ed. Peter Singer (Oxford:
A. A. “The Case Against Animal Rights.” Animal Rights Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Janelle Rohr. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1989.
I will first look at the views of Peter Singer, who is a utilitarian. A
21 Sept. 2011. Freeman, Carrie. The Packwood. " Framing Animal Rights in the "Go Veg" Campaigns of U.S. Animal Rights Organizations.
Every year, millions of animals experience painful, suffering and death due to results of scientific research as the effects of drugs, medical procedures, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. Basically, animal experimentation has played a dominant role in leading with new findings and human advantages. Animal research has had a main function in many scientific and medical advances in the past decade and is helping in the understanding of several diseases. While most people believe than animal testing is necessary, others are worried about the excessive suffering of this innocent’s creatures. The balance between the rights of animals and their use in medical research is a delicate issue with huge societal assumptions. Nowadays people are trying to understand and take in consideration these social implications based in animals rights. Even though, many people tend to disregard animals that have suffered permanent damage during experimentation time. Many people try to misunderstand the nature of life that animals just have, and are unable to consider the actual laboratory procedures and techniques that these creatures tend to be submitted. Animal experimentation must be excluded because it is an inhumane way of treat animals, it is unethical, and exist safer ways to test products without painful test.