The Animal Protection Movement Of The Nineteenth Century

The starting point of this essay is to establish and lay out an animal rights claim. The point here is not to solely list which specific rights animals have, as that goes beyond the scope of this essay, but to discuss why animals do in fact have a claim to rights, and what this means for humans. The need to understand the intrinsic, or inherent value of animals allows us to see the base from which their claim to rights is derived. Inherent value refers to the idea that animals are valuable in themselves, not in what they provide us. Tom Regan, an animal ethicist, sets out the moral grounding from which we can

“In 1863, Bergh had been appointed by President Abraham Lincoln to a diplomatic post at the Russian court of Czar Alexander II. It was there that he was horrified to witness work horses beaten by their peasant drivers. En route back to America, a June 1865 visit to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in London awakened his determination to secure a charter not only to incorporate the ASPCA but to exercise the power to arrest and prosecute violators of the law” (ASPCA Is Founded). He was horrified in what he saw and wanted to make a change. “Bergh’s impassioned accounts of the horrors inflicted on animals convinced the New York State legislature to pass the charter incorporating the ASPCA on April tenth, 1866. Nine days later, the first effective anti-cruelty law in the United States was passed, allowing the ASPCA to investigate complaints of animal cruelty and to make arrests” (ASPCA Is Founded). Anti-cruelty laws were and arrests were now made so that animals could live safely and happily. Many shelters were made around the world because of Henry

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”.

Bentham disputed that infants and the disabled should be treated such as animals because infants and the disabled are weak and defenseless like most animals. In the third place, the 19th century had an outburst of people who were interested in animal protection. The 19th century produced multiple laws, groups, and acts such as the Martins act, an act which focused on the treatment of horses noted Author Debbie Legge and Editor Simon Brooman in their book "Law Relating to Animals"2 (p12), and instituted groups whose purpose was preventing cruelty to animals. The groups sent men to inspect markets, slaughter houses and livestock reproduced by the Animal Legal and Historical Center 3, In fact, the most recognized organization for animals that was apart of the elite group that sent out inspectors was named the SPCA or more formally know as the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Throughout history, humans have utilized nonhuman animals for the benefit of mankind. This tendency increased as civilization developed, and presently, necessitated by staggering population growth and technological progress, human use of animals has skyrocketed. We eat them, we breed them, we use them as test subjects. Some people have begun to question the ethics of it all, sparking a debate on animal treatment and whether or not they have rights. In a paper on the subject, Carl Cohen lays out his definition of rights, explains their relationship with obligations, and uses these ideas to present the argument that manifests clearly in his piece’s title, “Why Animals Have No Rights”. THESIS

First off, organizations are being created to help stop horse slaughter. Henry Bergh stopped a cart driver from beating his horse, resulting in the first sucessful arrest for horse mistreatment on April 26, 1866 (“How to Help a Horse”) I feel that got people to notice what horses deal with everyday while pulling carts. EWA researchers looked at relationships between slaughter and abuse. They found that the amount of

Regan, T. (1985). The case for animal rights. In P. Singer (Ed.), In defense of animals (pp. 13-26). Retrieved from http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/regan03.htm

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 debate about animal protection has been around since the late 1800s. Many organizations such as the Women’s Christian Temperance Union and the American Humane Association supported antivivisectionism. An antivivisectionist is a person who is against any operation on animals that are for scientific research. The antivivisection movement reached its high point

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.

“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 Case for Animal Rights,” Tom Regan emphasizes his philosophy on animal and human equality. After reading further into his work, he illustrates a societal system that belittles animals and their significance to our own existence. Regan conceptualizes that animals won’t have real rights unless we change our beliefs. We need to acknowledge a problem. After identifying the issue, we must recognize that there is a need for change in society. In addition, he also reiterates the importance of the populace changing the way they view animals. The way society views animals will create a snowball effect that will influence politicians to also believe in animal rights.

This eventually lead the formation and founding of the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection in 1875, then trailed by the formation of similar groups at around the same time, all the way to now present day. “A May 2013 Gallup poll found that 56 percent of Americans say medical testing on animals is morally acceptable, with 39 percent saying it is morally wrong”. “Younger Americans are less likely to accept animal testing”. The poll [also] found that women are more likely to object to [animal testing]. Queen Victoria was one of the initial opponents of animal testing in England, according to a document written by her private secretary in 1875. The letter said as follows: “The Queen has been dreadfully shocked at the details of some of these [animal research] practices, and is most anxious to put a stop to them.” This then eventually led to the Great Britain’s Cruelty to Animals Act of 1876. “The USDA breaks downs its data by three classifications of pain type: animals that endure pain during their use in research, but are given drugs to ease it. (339,769 animals in 2010); animals who experience pain and are not given drugs (97,123); animals who do not experience pain and are not even drugs (697,801).” The US military started testing on animals

While no country has completely banned animal testing, laws have been put in place restricting the use. For example, India, New Zealand, The United States, and Israel have banned testing on animals for all cosmetic products. The first organization that was to protest animal experimentation was, The Society for the Protection of Animals liable to Vivisection, which was in England in 1875. Because of the organization that protested, in 1876 England’s Parliament passed the first national anti-vivisection act, the Cruelty to Animals Act. With this law, it required all experiments to have a permit and protected all vertebrate animals. The United States have also passed many laws about animals testing such as The American Anti Vivisection of Society in 1883. It was the first organization in the United States that helped with the issue of animal testing. Some states have completely abolished animal experimentation in schools. While many countries have tried to help stop the progress of animal testing, animal testing has began to grow as the years go

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.