Animal Rights : The Preservation Of Endangered Animals

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.

The statement by Paul McCartney rings true, “If slaughterhouses had glass walls everyone would be a vegetarian.” Animal rights is a concept which people hardly ever consider in a serious light. Being born as a human being, having a superior mental capacity and sense of times makes people think that they can rule this world and use other living beings as they see fit. This mentality leads to people say things like “animals are born to eaten” or how Aristotle claimed “all of the nature exist specifically for the sake of men” and “that animal are merely instruments for humankind.” (Pg. 495). This way of thinking often leads to overconsumption of animals, cruelty to animals and loss of species.

Billions of animals are killed by human beings each year. Most of these animals live in filthy, unfavorable conditions and undergo painful procedures before being slaughtered for food or other purposes. The way that these animals are treated would never be considered ethical when applied to humans, even though animals and humans have much in common. Humans should not kill or harm animals purposefully, just as they should not purposefully harm other humans.

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.

‘’Species have value in themselves, a value neither conferred nor revocable, but springing from a species’ long evolutionary heritage and potential’’ (Soule 1985).

It seems that nowadays there are activists for more causes than can be counted, but one cause that stands out most in today's times is animal activism. Animal rights activists believe that animals other than humans should be allowed to live their lives without any suffering and should not be considered anyone's property. In today's society animals suffer quite a bit through many different ways, most caused by humans, such as animal testing, factory farms, fur farms and even pollution. Although there are a lot of efforts being put out to stop these monstrosities by many animal rights groups and even individuals.

I would argue yes, based on general definitions of terrorism that animal liberationists and animal rights extremists are terrorists, as their unlawful actions have an indirect affect on the civilian population by driving up prices for animal based products and hindering potential medical advancements. I acknowledge that there that multiple businesses that utilize illegal or amoral procedures when handling their livestock or test subjects, however these companies should be dealt with though policy changes and criminal investigation not by sabotaging their equipment, threatening the livelihood of the employees, and abducting the animals and then releasing them in the wild where they lack the ability to survive or potentially could cause unnecessary

Do you know that animals are different from human? According to (Lin, 2014) “many animal activists point to the publication of “Animal Liberation” in 1975 as the catalyst for the modern American animal rights movement.” Also, “1980 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is founded.” In (Mother Nature Network, 2008) points out that “It wasn't until 1822 that animal-protectionists won their first public victory”, so after that people will think what is the definition of animal rights movements according to http://www.thefreedictionary.com “The right to humane treatment claimed on behalf of animals, especially the right to be treated as persons or more like persons under the law.” Also, in (Opposing Viewpoints, 2011) the animal rights

Animal Bill of Rights is a bill that is created based on the U.S Bill of Rights in order to protect the animals from getting harmed and used in experiments in an abusive way. I stand with Rifkin, Braithwaite, and Yong on how animals need a “Bill of Rights” due to the fact that we humans, specifically the scientists, have been treating animals in an inhumane way and considering them as an object to help achieve many goals. I wouldn’t think that such law would go against centuries of human culture because we have become more and more savage to other animals, and we would need to have some restrictions to prevent us from hurting them more.

Should animals be harmed to benefit mankind? This pressing question has been around for at least the past two centuries. During the early nineteenth century, animal experiments emerged as an important method of science and, in fact, marked the birth of experimental physiology and neuroscience as we currently know it. There were, however, guidelines that existed even back then which restricted the conditions of experimentation. These early rules protected the animals, in the sense that all procedures performed were done so with as little pain as possible and solely to investigate new truths. Adopting the animals? perspectives, they would probably not agree that these types of regulations were much

The world has existed with the presence of both living and non-living matter. Human beings have been accorded the right of protection and preservation of the environment, where the animals belong. In essence, humanity is all about coexisting with animals and plants, together with the other non-living matter. With preference of human beings over animals, and with preference of animals over plants, every category higher than the other, is relinquishing the capacity to dominate and coexist with the higher authority. The world is evidently a home to both plants and animals, including the non-living matter. All animals are living. Moreover, all plants are living. The distinction between human beings and other animals has led to the establishment of a code of relationship and use which human beings has embraced over the years. Human beings have dominion over animals. This is in accordance with the innate characteristics and capabilities that human beings possess unlike other animals (Hargrove 168). With respect to this, human beings have often used animals in assorted ways. The many ways that animals are beneficial to human beings has elicited concerns over the rights of animals. Because of this, there is an ethical relationship between plants and animals, together with animals and man.

Animals all over the globe are being abused and mistreated on an everyday basis by people who have no sympathy for them. In addition, not as many people are striving to protect these animals, whether they are farm, wildlife, or domestic animals. Should animals of every kind have some sort of “Bill of Rights”? A way of laws protecting animals, separating them from the cruel and giving them more rights than they already have. I will be asserting why animals do need a “Bill of Rights” and I will be explaining the positive and negative outcomes of what may happen if animals do actually get fundamental rights and privileges.

The ethical debate over whether animals have rights and if so, to what extent, is one that has captivated the greatest of philosophical minds since Aristotle. Philosophical opinion and thinking on the moral worth of animals is varied and without a definitive hard line valuation. Add to this, with the cultural variances seen worldwide, a consensus has not been made as to the degree of moral responsibility there is to defending animal rights. The growing body of knowledge of societal differences and beliefs has made the question whether any unbiased, absolute standards pertaining to values could exist. Cultural relativism is the idea that a person's beliefs, values, practices and behaviors should be understood based on that person's own culture, rather than using the standards of their own culture to evaluate judged against the criteria of another. (Shafer-Landau, The Fundamentals of Ethics, p. 121). Even if it runs counter to personal or cultural moral standards social scientists and philosophers alike must also avoid ethnocentrism. Cultural norms concerning the types of meat eaten in many countries, are very different than that of the United States. For example, in China, eating dog meat has been widely accepted and many in China eat dog stew on a regular basis as well as celebrate the Yulin Dog Meat Festival. In some places eating man’s best friend is simply a matter of cultural taste, not a question of moral worth. Although most moral theories do not offer a meaningful

magine eating a delicious piece of bacon with the fat juice dripping off while biting into the bacon, it crunches. Now imagine the pig that the bacon came from. An innocent creature now has been shocked with electric prods, had its throat cut, and has bled out to death. Pigs are not the only creatures to suffer such a despicable death. Animals like sheep, cows, chickens, and goats are slaughtered for their meat. The animals are all butchered in a place called a slaughterhouse. Slaughterhouses are horrible places where humans believe they have the right to treat animals any way they want as long as they get the meat they need. People who eat meat need to understand what happens to an animal before it winds up on a plate.Animals can not defend themselves against humans. Therefore, someone else must defend the animals. Slaughterhouses must be stopped.

Do you know 2 million animals are killed by wildlife services ? Animal rights have been a prevalent issue since 1970s. An organization called Animal Legal Defense Fund has supported a petition that strengthens the protection of animal rights. The petition states that all animals are to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse. The Animal Defense Fund is working on trying to show congress the importance of the Animal Bill of Rights. Every day, animals are being manipulated by humans to do things that they don’t want to do, or that violate their rights as living creatures on Earth. Animals and humans should have equal rights despite of their barriers . As an animal lover, I agree with the idea of creating the Bill of Rights for animals.