Essay Ethical Treatment of 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”.

Animals share the same right as human beings. To have a right is to have a claim or entitlement to something and to have that claim recognized by others. There are two types or rights; legal and moral rights. Legal rights are comulgated by law making part of government. Moral rights are stems from reason and worth for example life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. I believe animals share both rights because the only difference between human beings and animals is basically the ability to speak.

If an individual were to read this without looking further into my logic, they might think I am a cold-hearted person who takes pleasure out of beating cute puppies. But I am far from this. As an animal lover and cattle producers, I have the utmost respect for animals and despise people who mistreat these creatures. But in this instance I take a deontological approach and agree with Cohen in that animals have no right, but we as human have a moral obligation to care for animals humanely. As Cohen states, animals lack the ability for free moral judgment, as they are not capable of exercising or responding to moral claims. Cohen goes on to say that it is only within a community of beings capable of self-restricting moral judgments can the concept of a right be correctly invoked (Cohen, 340). Therefore it is on the basis that animals are unable to make claims against others or have moral judgment that they do not have rights. But I find it vitally important that we as humans understand that we have an internal commitment or obligation to treat animals

Many people nowadays have different views on what exactly to define animals as, and whether or not they deserve any rights. Some believe that they are nothing more than a childhood pet used for entertainment, while others believe that they are beautiful exquisite animals. Currently, animals inside of a household have more rights that cattle or chicken since they are treated as another member of the family. I think that all animals are worthy of moral consideration, not just house pets, since all animals have enough intelligence to be domesticated, they can all feel emotions such as pain and happiness, they can all care about the wellbeing of others, and they all play a critical role in the circle of life.

Creature rightsAnimals have rights. They have rights since they were made by god. All creature shouldbe treated similarly like human. Creatures are species like people. They are recently living theirown attempting to survive the world and endeavoring to live in peace.

As I have clarified earlier, neither the claim that non-human animals have no rights nor the claim that our moral obligations to humans need to be equal to those to non-human animals is cogent enough to conclude that we have no moral obligations to non-human animals. We surely do. A relevant example would be the global species conservation efforts. Over the past fifty years, WWF, one of the world’s largest independent conservation organization, had invested over one billion dollars in more than twelve thousand conservation initiatives and helped conserved a number of species, including elephant, giant panda, polar bear, great apes, etc. Dr. Claude Martin, former Director General of WWF International once said, “our objectives have never been clearer - slow climate change, reduce toxics in the environment, protect our oceans and fresh waters, stop deforestation, and save species." One of the major goals of WWF is to promote the biodiversity of ecosystem and habitats that is vital for the health and livelihoods for all the living organisms on earth. Meanwhile, Dr. Claude Martin’s statement does not show that the motive behind conserving endangered species arises solely out of humans’ moral obligation to non-human animals, but our obligations to these

The rights for animals is a debated topic and goes back and forth with the idea that animals should have rights just like humans. The idea that animals should have rights is argued in the article “Primates and Personhood” by Ed Yong where it speaks about how chimps and gorillas should have rights and protections. The organization GAP works on helping make laws for animal rights.

Animal rights are another issue we are facing right now. There are many who believe that they have no rights, others say that they have the same rights as humans and others are in the middle of these two extremes issues. The topic is very complex because if animals have rights which one are those since the only way to protect them is by regulating them on how are they are treated or how can they be used. Animals are used in many ways such as food, medicine, research, cosmetics, cloth and sport among many other ways. Many who believe that the reason animals have no rights is because of the lack perception where they don’t feel or have pain like humans. There is no doubt that animals feel pain or pleasure and just for that reason they have rights, some people say. On the other hand, we cannot compare animals to humans because they are indeed different and for that reason, they cannot have the same rights. For example, animals can’t vote.

There are people in today’s society who don’t believe animals deserve to have rights simply because they are “lower animals”. Mark Twain, however, would argue that humans are the lowest of the animals in his essay “The Lowest Animal”. Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse or animal neglect, is defined as the human infliction of suffering or harm upon any non-human animal, for purposes other than self-defense or survival (dictionary.com). Everyday, animals are locked in cages, beaten, tested on, tortured, and abandoned. Those horrible things occur in every society, and only select groups of people and organizations try to prevent it.

Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” The social issue of animal rights first arose in the 1970s; since then the animal rights movement has gained momentum and a considerable amount of followers “Animal Rights.” Organizations like PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) hold demonstrations and protests in the streets and outside businesses to denounce the maltreatment of animals. There are two sides on this issue, those who believe that the life of an animal is inferior to that of a human’s and those who deem that animals deserve to have a life free of human interruption “What Are Animal Rights.” Without animal rights, our society can be deemed unfettered by empathy and restrained by immoral values.

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.

We eat meat, we use woollen clothes. Sometimes we buy pets, such as-cat, puppy, bird etc. as our hobby. Zoo was our favourite place when we were child. We pass our time watching various types of animals in National Geography channel. After all these, we never give our attention to what impact they have for our activities. There is always a question about ‘’animal rights’’. Though both human and animal are the creation of God, human being never faces that much argument about having rights but animal does. After studying on this topic, I understood that Most of the argument goes against having animal rights. There are less right preserved for non-human being in environmental ethics.

Animals have always played an essential role in many aspects of this world. Some people look upon these roles with favoritism, some with disgust. Animals are considered different from humans by some people because of their behavior, mannerisms or actions. Some animals are used as food by humans and other animals, while others are trapped for their furs. Many times people acquire animals for pets, only to neglect or mistreat them. For many years, the ethical treatment of animals has been a very controversial topic for moral discussion, often in reference to an ethical code or rule. In this paper, I will discuss these ethical issues identified with the treatment of animals as well as exploring these issues from a virtual ethicist’s

Argument for Animal Rights The argument for animal rights assumes that animals posses their own lives and deserve to be assigned rights in order to protect their wellbeing. This view insists that animals are not merely goods utilised only to benefit mankind and they should be allowed to choose how they want to live their lives, free from the constraints of man. But if animals are given absolute rights, then surely they shouldn’t be allowed to kill each other, as this would be a violation of these rights.

Non-human animals are given rights only because of their interactions with human beings. Without involvement with humans, animals do not deserve rights. It is through this interaction with humans that animals are even given moral consideration. We do not give rights to a rock simply because it is a creation of Mother Nature, similarly non-human animals do not have rights unless it is in regards to humans. As pointed out by Jan Narveson "morality is a sort of agreement among rational, independent, self-interested persons who have something to gain from entering into such an agreement" (192). In order to have the ability to obtain rights one must be consciously able to enter into an agreement, non-human animals are