Animal Rights Should Be Legal

For many years there has been an ongoing debate on whether or not animals should be given rights, even there own bill of rights. Some who are against the animal bill of rights argue that testing products on animals is important to the safety of humans. Others who want the new bill of rights claim that animals have feelings and that science is treating them inhumanely. Animal activists also add that animals are intelligent beings and are aware of how they are treated. Based on science proving animal activists correct on many of their points, this calls for a new bill of rights, in the United States, especially written for the protection and care of wild and domestic animals.

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”.

When a cause is brought up and given light, it has a way of splitting people in how they react to it. And such has been true when it comes to granting new rights, because it’s brobdingnagian in our society that is always hungry for freedoms. We are split down the middle on whether, or not to consider animals, just like us, and thus deserve the rights we hold in our society today. On the other end, are people who don’t believe such rights should be given to animals. While the pro-arguments hold value, there is much more to see on the other end. As to why animals shouldn’t have a “Bill of Rights” like we as humans do. It’s shown in various different ways, even the most popular arguments held by the opposing side. Such as cows hurting the environment, zoo’s being inhumane, and pets. There are other factors as well to take into consideration such as food, psychology medicine, and even culture.

In discussion of animal rights, one controversial issue has been whether or not animals should be use for medical testing. On the one hand, some scientists argue that animal testing has contributed for many cures and treatments. On the other hand, animal rights activist contends that alternative methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. Others even maintain that animal testing is an essential part in medical research. My own view is that animals should not be used in medical testing because is no longer necessary now there are methods that are safer and have better results than animals do.

Many researches are finding that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined. A percentage of people feel that concern should be brought upon how animals are treated. The Animal Legal Defense Fund’s Animal Bill of Rights is a petition to the United States Congress. The petition states the basic rights that all living beings other than humans should have and that our government should protect. It states the right of animals to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse. The right of laboratory animals not to be used in cruel or unnecessary experiments. The right of animals to be in a healthy diet, protective shelter and sufficient medical care.The right of wildlife to a natural habitat, ecologically good enough to a normal existence and self-sustaining population.The right of farmed animals to an environment that fulfill their basic physical and psychological needs. The right of animals to have their interest represented in court and safeguarded by the law of the land. These are the six important keys in the act. No one can predict what actually happens to animals behind doors or even in nature, but it is fairly easy to say that not all animals are

The idea of animal rights has been around for centuries. Even decades ago, people were taking action for the welfare of animals. Marc Bekoff and Ned Hettinger share this idea all the way back in 1994 when they said that there is evidence that scientist are concerned with animal welfare by acknowledge that they use the guidelines in place to protect animals during research, in order to have their work published (Bekoff 219). Guidelines are the basis for the moral and ethical treatment of animals. Each person may have his or her own standard, but having a standard among the entire population ensures the welfare of the animals. Unfortunately, these standards are not at a level to where the animals are being protected. Many animals in captivity are treated in ways that would shock the average person. Orcas for example, are starved until they do the desired task (Cowperthwaite). This form of operant condition can lead to success, but often leads to resentment and hostility towards the trainers.

Nowadays, People are more and more exploiting and handling animals as if they are some kind of resources. Some people view themselves are the most important beings on the planet, so everything can be done in order to ensure their survivals such as carnivorous eating and testing on animals. However, some considered this as humans violated morality, as animals have their own lives, have feelings and families as human posses. Therefore, in this essay, philosophers such as Tom Regan, Carl Cohen and Mary Anne Warren express their own individualistic approach on the subject of moral ethics and whether or not animals have rights related to John Stuart Mill.

“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.

In the article, In Defense of the Animals, the author Meg Greenfield discusses why animal rights activists’ fight for the protection of animals. Society has become numb to the brutality, pain and suffering caused to animals in pointless acts. Brutality such as clubbing baby seals to death for their skins, raising animals for food in dismal conditions and conducting scientific studies on animals for the cosmetic industries profit are unnecessary. Even when scientific experiments on animals are to find medical cures for the human race, they are practiced in uncaring methods usually ending in animals being euthanized. Animal rights activists who speak for the protection of animals has gone to the extreme by trying to stop all cure related experiments

In animal testing, animals often face depressing conditions in which they themselves turn into a shell of their former selves. The statistics of animal testing reveal what is really happening behind the scenes in animal testing, and the completely unacceptable ways that scientists are in using animals in their experiments. The little differences in humans and animals when it comes to livelihood and communication shows that animals aren’t so different from us after us. Due to this, animals should be given more rights and granted some of the same privileges as humans. And maybe one day, more constitutions will pledge to protect the natural foundations for life for animals as well as

Specific evidence points that animal testing should not be allowed; however the debate is also on moral grounds. Several people, about 60% of the population, agree that animal testing should be banned because it is just wrong. To be born into the world on a concrete floor and be made to lead a life with no freedom is worse than having no life. They have no chance to stop the pain or torment, simply because they are “just animals.” Animal activists and everyday people believe that humans are voices for the animals. Therefore, animal testing is considered ethically wrong and people should act as the advocate for the animals.

A major issue that is happening all over the globe is animal testing, it’s cruel and inhumane because animals suffer in pain. From the book Rights For Animals by Deirdre Rochard it said “Most people believe that animal rights should extend as far as

Many animals are tested all over the world each day. “Many people ask,” is that right? The statement has been made over and over again that animals should have rights. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of the reforming utilitarian school of moral philosophy, stated that when deciding on a being’s rights, “The question is not ‘Can they talk?’ but “Can they suffer?” I would ask the question is it better for animals to suffer or for people to suffer? Is it right to make no advancements in research in order to save animals? People all over the world disagree with animal testing, but it is very important. Animal testing should be done because it saves lives, animals make very good test subjects, and although people may

In our world, protests occur each day on the issues of animal cruelty and human rights, but when the issues are put together which will reign over the other? The author Peter Singer of “All Animals are Equal” and “Tools for Research” presents his argument for determining when animal experiments are justified. The author starts his paper with a counter argument, questioning if one would be willing to let thousands of people die if those people could be saved by experimentation on a single animal. The answer is a unanimous no; in our culture we value human life over everything else. The author follows by asking the reader if they would be prepared to carry out their experiments on humans who are mentally retarded or orphaned babies, if that

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.