Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Argument for animal rights
Human rights VS animal rights
Primates and humans similarities
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Argument for animal rights
I believe with the petition of the Animal Bill of Rights to an extent. I believe in equality and would like to have other people see the same way as I. For someone to just comprehend and see where I am coming from with all the animal rights and precautions. For someone to see the point of view of animals and how they can’t even speak for themselves without being labeled as rabid creatures. My perspective as a concerned citizen, I believe animals should have a Bill of Rights because research has proven the similarities between humans and animals, and because I believe in equality.
At least two attributes we have in common with animals can be listened through scientific research. “The function of two of their forebrain areas is very similar
…show more content…
to the mammalian amygdala and hippocampus- areas associated with emotion, learning, and memory.” We share culture to an extent we at home don’t even know. Did you know that animals adapt to repetitive daily uses? A culture is learned through generations and that is something a Japanese monkey has accomplished. In 1963, the monkey discovered bathing and ever since then it has been a daily dose to the troops all around. Emotions can be detected to any large pet owner. They can see all the emotions through the way their pets rub against their leg, wine when they pull out of the driveway, and cuddle up against their bodies while watching a movie. Maybe people believe animals can communicate and they’re right. Fingers are usually pointing towards chimpanzees and I see why they are. Chimpanzees ought to be one of the many sharp-witted animals in our world as seen done through Washoe the chimpanzee. She was taught as a deaf human child 350 American Sign Language words and connected them through the emotions. Her human instructor signed “my baby died”, and Washoe signed back “cry” while touching her cheek. There are many more attributes to list and I wish for all to take some time out of their day to recognize the intelligence of the species we share our earth with. “If the hawk does not care about the feelings of the rabbit that it eats, why should humans be any different?”. We as humans have the mentality to know right from wrong. The answer is physical or spiritual in nature. We have many distinctive characteristics that include character, appreciation of beauty, self consciousness, understanding time, connections between words, meaning of life, a sense of morality, captivity of wisdom, and many more. Animals have yet to identify what time is, so how can we expect more than what they can barely give. We have to be an example of what we should be on this world. We should always look out for our furry friends and make sure that they aren’t being mistreated. Having an Animal Bill of Rights would be beneficial to animals because they would finally get representation on this planet.
“Harvard and twenty five other U.S. law schools have introduced law courses on animal rights,...Germany recently became the first nation to guarantee animal rights in its constitution.” Many Universities and a country are recognizing this and I believe it’s time we do as well. The first law, “The right of animals to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse.”, would give animals full respect as to how they are being treated. Far too many animals are being neglected and abused and we can definitely change that. The second law, “The right of laboratory animals not to be used in cruel or unnecessary experiments.”, would defend the helpless experiment animals of being mistreated during research. We are in the twenty-first century and should find a way of testing items on living animals. The third law, “The right of companion animals to a healthy diet, protective shelter and adequate medical care.”, is not only for the animal health, but for us too. We eat the chickens that are injected with steroids to be twice as big as they naturally are. This law would help keep animals healthy as well as ourselves. The fourth law, “The right of wildlife to a natural habitat, ecologically sufficient to a normal existence and self-sustaining population.”, would secure the homes of many animals in the wild. Helpless baby chipmunks won’t need to fear a human being for tearing its home apart. They wouldn’t be seen as an award when they are seen with a hunter's eye and would just be living their daily and normal life. The fifth law, “The right of farmed animals to an environment that satisfies their basic physical and psychological needs.”, can be the supportive law of farm animals being mistreated in farms. Many farmers have multiple animals to make a profit, but fail to realize that every single one of those animals have feelings and wonder why
they’re being propelled against a wall for simply existing. The final and sixth law, “The right of animals to have their interest represented in court and safeguarded by the law of the land.” would always animals to be represented when injustice is done to them. Many animals are harmed and it is time that there is a law to punish those who think they are superior to any living creature. I am a strong believer in equality and research has stepped in to help with the beneficial Animal Bill of Rights. Just because a living species is unable to express feelings using verbal sounds doesn’t mean they are any less than those who can communicate verbally. I will hope for a world where we are all treated equal. No matter what skin color, race, or species. I stand with this law and hope for the best for all animals.
The modern fight for animal rights has been geared toward factory farms and the removal of animal testing and ag-gag laws. Protection for test animals and farm animals has become an important focus for many animal rights groups including ASPCA. The end of uncomfortable and inhumane treatment of animals is still a fight thousands are fighting
Gunnarson, Helen W. "Animal law comes into its own: as Americans place more value -
Almost all humans want to have possession and control over their own life, they want the ability to live independently without being considered someone’s property. Many people argue that animals should live in the same way as humans because animals don’t have possession of their lives as they are considered the property of humans. An article that argues for animal rights is “The case against pets” (2016) by Francione and Charlton. Gary L Francione and Anna E Charlton are married and wrote a book together, “Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach (2015). Francione is a law professor at Rutgers University and an honorary professor at University of East Anglia. Charlton is also a law professor at Rutgers University and she is the co-founder of the Rutgers Animal Rights Law Clinic. In this article Francione and Charlton mainly focus on persuading people to believe in animal rights but only focus on one right, the right of animals not to be property. The article is written in a well-supported manner with a lot of details and examples backing it up, but a few counter-arguments can be made against some of their arguments.
Many people may argue that animal cruelty laws should not be stricter because abuse to animals and abuse to humans are on an entirely different level; however, the numerous studies connecting the violence to animals with the violence to humans are indisputable proof that lenient animal cruelty laws are not only unethical but also dangerous. Ask your conscious what is the right thing to do, and when it tells you, write to your congressman and ask them to fight for helpless animals’ rights, and if you join organizations such as the ASPCA, perhaps together we can successfully end the suffering.
PETA states that, since before the 1920’s there has been animal experimentation. Not until President Lyndon Johnson signed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (LAWA) in 1966, animals in the United States had no protection in laboratories, circuses, and zoos over breeding, transportation, housing, feeding, and veterinary care. The LAWA is now called the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). (Williams, and DeMello)
Every year millions of animals are abused, injured, and hurt. It seems as if humans are not very concerned about animal rights according to these statistics.. Animal rights is the idea that animals should not have to suffer and be able to be in possession of their life. Some people are willing to sacrifice things such as certain brands of makeup or certain kinds of food to improve animal welfare. For many years animals have been experimented on and placed in factory farms. Factory farming is a method of producing food products where the factories value how much they produce and how much they profit over the welfare of the animals. These farms keep animals confined in small spaces and make the animals eat things they were not originally
In his Meditations, Rene Descartes argues that animals are purely physical entities, having no mental or spiritual substance. Thus, Descartes concludes, animals can’t reason, think, feel pain or suffer. Animals, are mere machines with no consciousness. Use the Internet to explore the issue of animal rights. Investigate the legacy left by Rene Descartes concerning the moral status of animals.
believe that animals do not have the same rights as humans because they are not
Animal-rights advocates say the rule would make it easier to shut down unscrupulous commercial operations that confine breeding females at length, depriving them of food, water and veterinary care and leaving them outdoors to freeze in the winter and roast in the summer as they give birth to litter after litter of profitable pups- (Chebium). Animals don’t have a voice; people have to be the voice for them. Animals have no way to help themselves because people make them do what people want them to. They cannot talk back to say that they do not like or want to do what people make them do, people have to go off on what is right. Animals are living creatures they need food, water, and to be taken care of or they could die. People take advantage of animals because people look at them and think since they are not human their lives are not important. When we think they are not worth anything people start neglecting animals.
Many people feel that animals have no rights and are here solely for our use.
"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.
It is the notion of our time that non-human animals exist for the advancement of the human species. In whatever field -- cookery, fashion, blood-sports -- it is held that we can only be concerned with animals as far as human interests exist. There may be some sympathy for those animals, as to limit practices which cause excruciating suffering, but those may only be limited if they are brought to public light, and if legislators receive enough pressure from the public to change.
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.
over 1,800 cases of animal cruelty in the past year because of the lack of animals having rights revealed in the media, with 64.5% involving dogs, 18% involving cats and the other 25% involving other animals. They should have rights because they have feelings, they are valuable, and they mean a lot to some families to the point where they’re considered to be a part of the family. Most importantly, humans are also animals, So think about how you would feel if someone had full control over you or someone you loved and did things to you that you didn’t enjoy or like. You have to think about their world from their standpoint. Yes, they are animals but they should not be less valued just because they are different from humans.
... 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.