Animal Rights Thesis

The abuse of Animals is increasing around the world, for personal and recreational uses. Animals are used in ancient and modern medicine to cure different types of illnesses and diseases. Animals are also being used for testing different types of hygiene products; which leave many of them are left scarred for life, while others are left to die in a cage. Animal rights groups around the world are working around the clock trying to stop this abuse, groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Are working around the clock to make sure such practices stop. This paper will demonstrate how modern liberals view animal rights, and how animals are viewed within society.

More than ever before, our planet is one filled with meat eaters. In fact, the average American consumes 270.7 pounds of meat per year. And, as one might have guessed, the question of where this food set before them on the table came from is often unregarded or ignored altogether. As more media forms commercialize extremely unhealthy versions of double cheeseburgers and meat lover’s supremes, the consumer’s demand for meat spikes up and companies in the food industry are faced with the ethical dilemma of benefiting themselves, their companies, increasing profits...and doing right by the animals- who without, they would not even be where they are today. Needless to say that animal rights and the humane treatment of their precious lives have been disregarded. Why do we, as a

Purpose Formula: To persuade my fellow classmates, who are consumers of animal based products and supporters of zoos and wildlife conservation efforts, that animals deserve the same rights as humans and should not be used for profit.

A quick comparison to Vicki Hearne’s “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights?” to Peter Singer’s “Speciesism and Moral Status”, might indicate Hearne’s argument is stronger due to her strategic and effective use of emotional appeals (i.e. pathos). These appeals allow Hearne to connect quickly and easily with her audience. Hearne is also quite clever in terms of stressing her occupation as an animal trainer. However, after a swift comparison of the two articles, it is evident that Singer’s “Speciesism and Moral Status” offers readers a stronger and more valid argument. Both Singer and Hearne are arguing their position on animal rights and the extent of human involvement. Since Hearne’s article is primarily based on her attempt to persuade her

The matters pertaining the animal rights and their suffering for the sake of harvesting their flesh have been an issue with a variety of perspectives. Puppies, Pigs and People, a piece by Alastair Norcross, bring to question the treatment towards livestock and what is immoral about the process. The argument proclaims that since we (humans) do not require meat as part of our diet then the exploit of raising animals for consumption (humanly or not) is immoral. On a counter side of the argument, a philosopher, Carl Cohen, states in his work that animals possess no moral rights thus we have the option to eat them despite if it is immoral or not. In the case of who I believe offers the most optimum solution, I believe Cohen is the most accurate in his summation of animal’s roles in our world. I will argue that people have no obligation to abstain from eating animals, but morally speaking animals should be kept in humane living conditions in order for it to meet our obligations towards these creatures.

Many people who think that the way that we treat animals in the process of raising those for human consumption are wrong never stop, to think what they can do to stop this problem from further occurring. Furthermore, they make impassioned calls for more “humanely” raised meat. Instead to soothe their consciences they shop for “free range” meat, and eggs; which has no importance. Even if an animal is raised ‘free range” it still lives s life of pain and suffering that all ends with a butcher’s knife. Although many know that over 53 billion land animals are slaughtered each year for human utilization they still tend to eat this meat with no problem. The simple explanation is that many don’t care what happens to animals as long as they are eating and healthy. If they did care then they would what could be a difficult choice; to go without eating meat and selling it in any form.

Animal rights is a revolutionary idea that has been rising ever recently, since African-Americans and women both have rights now. This topic is argued in both Michael Pollan’s “An Animal’s Place,” where the modern hippy suggests that animals are mistreated and that organic farming is the best method of farming, as well as Blake Hurst’s “An Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals,” where the sass-mouth, Midwestern, pissy-pants farmer who assures the reader that there is nothing wrong with the way that farming is being handled in America. While these points are very contrasting, both authors strive to prove that their way is the “right” way.

More than three decades ago Peter Singer heralded the need for a new kind of liberation movement, one calling for a radical expansion of the human moral canvas and more importantly, a rejection of the horrors human beings have inflicted for millennia upon other sentient beings, treatment historically considered as being both natural and unalterable. Often regarded as being the father of the modern animal liberation movement, Singer contends that the campaign for animal

In Peter Singer’s piece “All Animals Are Equal”, he begins his argument by an in-depth consideration of notable rights movements, such as the Black Liberation and women’s rights movement, then segues into the justification for equal consideration of rights regarding animals, before finally exposing the immorality behind factory farming and animal cruelty. According to Singer, “the basic principle of equality…is equality of consideration; and equal consideration for different beings may lead to different treatment and different rights” (Singer 1974, 506). Based off proposed animals’ rights to equal consideration, Singer formats his main arguments against factory farming and the mistreatment of animals in general. These arguments stem from

.According to the AARDAS (Animal Abuse Database Administration System) the four major causes of animal’s deaths include neglect, shooting, hoarding and fighting, followed by torture and mutation. (Evans 1) The abuse of animals is just one of the main rights that as humans we infiltrate. The ignorance of humans choosing to ignore the rights of innocent animals is drastically affecting our society. “The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality.” (Author Schopenhauer). Animals have rights, and our society continues to overlook those rights by using them in research, factory farming, and holding them in captivity, and these issues must be addressed with all seriousness for the sake of the animals and our society.

According to the AARDAS (Animal Abuse Database Administration System) the four major causes of animal’s deaths include neglect, shooting, hoarding and fighting, followed by torture and mutation. (Evans 1) The abuse of animals is just one of the main rights that as humans we infiltrate. The ignorance of humans choosing to ignore the rights of innocent animals is drastically affecting our society. “The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality.” (Author Schopenhauer). Animals have rights, and our society continues to overlook those rights by using them in research, factory farming, and holding them in captivity, and these issues must be addressed with all seriousness for the sake of the animals and our society.

Sunaura and Andrew Taylor’s “Is It Possible to Be a Conscientious Meat Eater?” is an informative essay about the dirty side of the meat industry. They speak out of the physical abuse and poor living conditions endured by animals raised solely for the purpose of consumption. Because of the inhumane treatment towards animals, Taylor talks about a vegan solution and the many benefits associated with it. Animal cruelty is a sensitive topic that readers can easily be persuaded to either side. But, for the purpose of this essay, the reader can be swayed towards being a conscientious consumer. As mentioned already, animal rights and veganism will be discussed.

In “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable,” Gary Steiner argues against the eating, or using, of animals and animal products. Steiner is the author of multiple books on topics similar to this, and a dedicated vegan of fifteen years at the time of this article. The author begins with an allusion to the recent outcries for the humane treatment of animals being raised for food. However, he points out, no one seems to be concerned about the animals being slaughtered, merely that they were not abused beforehand. Steiner then goes on to explain the two main

Imagine a world where thousands of animals are being killed by vegetarians and vegans. Well, guess what? You live in that world. People become vegetarian or vegan for many reasons. One of them is to ‘spare the lives of animals’, but by estimate “…300 animals per acre—including mice, rats, moles, groundhogs, and birds—are killed for the production of vegetable and grain foods, often in gruesome ways.” We may not like these animals very much but we’re still killing them. Even if they’re not as obvious as pigs, chickens, or cows. Whereas only one animal is killed to produce grass-fed beef and no lives are taken for milking a dairy cow. "What is it that makes it OK to kill animals of the field so that we can eat [vegetables or fruits] but not pigs or chickens or cows?"

While there are a vast amount of arguments to support the notion of vegetarianism, such as those presented in this essay, there are also a number of arguments that can be made in favour of meat-eating. For example, many non-vegetarians raise the question of how much impact an individual who quits eating meat has upon the meat market in relation to the whole of society, the country, or even the world. One person's decision to not buy animal products would not reduce the amount of animals killed to place these products in shops. This therefore seems to make the idea of vegetarianism, as an effort to stop