Animal Rights And The Ethical Treatment Of Animals

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of the most recognizable organizations within the animal rights movement, due in part to their attention grabbing antics and controversial advertisements. While PETA has been successful in creating visual rhetoric that generally appeals to the audience’s cognitive reasoning and emotions they are often not successful in catalyzing actual change in behaviour.

Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.

The truth about PETA, is that they do not want all animals to roam free. They want the population of dogs and cats to be reduced through spaying and neutering. They would like people to adopt animals from pounds or animal shelters, rather than buying from pet shops or breeders. They do claim to be the number one animal activist groups out there. Are they who they claim to be? What they don't advertise, is that

PETA, though it does many things, has four main objectives. They focus on animal cruelty on factory farms, which are also known as confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and intensive livestock operations (ILOs). These farms are more worried about profits and high volumes of goods than they are about human health, safe food, the environment, fair treatment of animals, and the surrounding economy (Factory Farms). PETA also focuses on cruel treatment to animals in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry (like Khartoum). They also work on projects helping birds, beavers, and abused backyard dogs, as some examples. To reach the public, PETA uses many tactics, including working “through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and direct action.” (PETA: Official Page). PETA tries to reach the public any way possible.

The Animal Bill of Rights is meant to protect animals that don’t have legal protection. There are laws that protect some of the animals, but are often insufficient and full of loopholes. In this society we have many people who think the total opposite of defending the animals. It may be because of selfish thinking. Sometimes one might think, it is needed for them to survive or because they want to be able to show their children the animals in person at zoos. Now, the question is, if animals need a Bill of Rights? I strongly believe that they do need a Bill of Rights because there are animals on the day-to-day basis that are being mistreated and abused by humans that don’t care for them. We need the Bill of Rights because it will give a better voice to the animals being treated as if they were nothing in this world. I agree with what the source indicated “ Animals in the U.S. are considered just “property” by law, even though they are living, feeling beings”. If they were not considered “property” humans wouldn’t be harming these animals and would rather be caring or not giving them much attention if they aren’t an animal enthusiast.

PETA’s main principle is that “Animals are not ours to consume, wear, experiment on, or for the use of our entertainment.” In layman’s terms, animals should be able live their lives without interference from humans.

Imagine this; You are wearing blinders next to your eyes, like the horses that pull the Amish buggy. You can’t see left, you can’t see right, you can only see straight forward to your set destination. This is how I imagine PETA and its followers when they wrote their most recent article about the FFA and their views about it. They only saw one view of the FFA and that was the only way they promoted it. You would think they would be thanking the FFA for all they do against animal abuse and their work of promoting animals as more than just “food” or a “project”

Introduction, animals that are being tested safety of their products that’s been a subject of an intense debate for over 10 years. While, a lot of people that alleged animals, the remained animals are being subjugated by the research cosmetics companies all over the country/all over the world. Even though, the scientists frequently profit from animal research, I don’t think all the suffering, the pain, and the animals dying are worth just trying find out the human benefits from the products.

“Nearly as many, 68 percent, were concerned or very concerned about the well-being of animals used in ‘sports’ or contests as well as animals in laboratories (67 percent) (Kretzer, 1).” Many people question whether an animal is capable of thought and emotions. Others feel as though animals are the equivalent of humans and should be treated as such. Since the 1800’s, animal rights has been a topic that has several different sides including two extremes. If animals can react to their environment, emote, and are aware of things done to or with them, then they should have similar rights to humans.

The interest group that I will discuss in this paper is the one of the most well-known animal rights groups in the world; People for the ethical treatment of animals, commonly known as, PETA. Founded in March 1980 by Newkirk and fellow animal rights activist Alex Pacheco, the organization first caught the public's attention in the summer of 1981 during what became known as the Silver Spring monkeys case, a widely publicized dispute about experiments conducted on 17 macaque monkeys inside the Institute of Behavioral Research in Silver Spring, Maryland. The group first came to

Seems rhetorical, but the fact is animals live through this everyday, without even given the choice. As humans, we establish our authority among all living beings, but for what reasons? Are humans better than all other species? Or is it true that we should hold a precedence over nonhuman animals? The ultimate question then remains, should animals have as much or equal to the same rights as humans? Their are endless arguments for and against this question, and many sub arguments that go hand in hand with each side. In this paper, I will discuss the definition of what animal rights entails and expand on the history that developed it’s meaning. Furthermore, I will thoroughly discuss, reason, and explain each opinion presented by our current society as well as the positions held by previous philosophers. Lastly, I will draw a conclusion to the opinions presented by discussing my personal position on the argument of animal rights.

The study of good and bad, right and wrong, moral principles or value held by a person or society, promoting human welfare, maximizing freedom minimizing pain and suffering is called ethics. The discipline that studies the moral relationship of human beings and also the value and moral status of the environment and its non-human contents is called environmental ethics. It considers the ethical relationship between the humans and the environment. Animal and animal rights are the highlighted topic in the environmental ethics.

The strongly repeated use of words such as “effective”, “successful”, and “victory”, and phrases that praise PETA for all of its accomplishments has a purpose: to foster a particular way for supporters to see themselves in the nonhuman animal rights movement, namely as donors and consumers of PETA, its tactics, and its selection of “cruelty-free” products. The recurrent discourse has also fostered and contributed to a particularly neoliberal ideological composition of the nonhuman animal rights movement that encourages competition with other non-profits and defines “success” by the number of single issue campaigns it wins, the amount of media coverage it gets, the number “likes” it receives on social media, and the number of donors it

For many years now the world has seen controversy over the rights of animals and if they think and feel like humans do. Many people see animals as mindless creatures or as food, while others think they have emotions and can feel pain. In other countries animal protection laws are in place that are strictly enforced and seem to work well with the system. In the United States however; some of the animal rights laws are considered to be useless and under-enforced (Animal Legal & Historical Center). More people today are beginning to see that animals should have rights and should be protected by laws and regulations (Animal Legal & Historical Center). Sadly there are many people residing in the United States who don’t take animal rights or protection laws seriously. These people abuse animals in many ways, including food industries that disobey the regulations set in place for the slaughter of animals used for consumption. Luckily for the animals there are people who fight for their rights and the enforcement of laws called animal rights activists.

PETA is an organization that fight for animal rights in the world, with more than 5 million members and supporters ,(Our mission statement). PETA objective is to let people all around the world know about animal abuses in every sectors such as food, research and also fashions industry. PETA had launch various campaign for the animals right by attending schools, collect donations and advertising. While fighting for the animals right, most of the PETA advertisement is controversial because of use of women as the subject and graphic images. According to their web, www.peta.org, PETA explains that “we try to make our actions colorful and controversial, thereby grabbing headlines around the world and spreading the message of kindness to