Wild Animals Aren T Pets By Zuzana Kukkol

As you look at the text of “A Change of Heart about Animals,” answer and then discuss the following questions:

Reflecting on my life as a means of deciding on a topic, one time period struck me as particularly important in terms of writing itself: my second year of second grade. Moving to Poway in 2007, the first class I was in was Mrs. Ramin’s 2-3 combo at Painted Rock. I had purple wire-rim glasses, a brown Hello Kitty tracksuit, two friends, and a hatred of writing. This was particularly unfortunate for young Analise, since Mrs. Ramin’s main focus was writing. She encouraged her students to write daily, setting aside 20-60 minutes each day for it. Although I hated it at first, my passion for creative writing grew as I turned my love for my sister and for Webkinz into tales of adventure and peril parallel to my then favorite series, Magic Tree House. I wrote, drew, and colored whatever my seven-year-old imagination spun for me. After that spark, the fire of writing died down to a smolder until eighth grade, when I wrote my first successful essay, “Flowers for Algernon: A Comparative Essay On How Two Versions of the Story are like

Should animals in Captivity be allowed? Animals in Captivity should be allowed because they get the medicine they need, animals can live longer, and the animals can get smarter. The first reason animals in captivity should be allowed is that animals can get healthy. There are rehabilitation programs that nurse animals back to health.Veterinarians can prevent and control a disease. Second, animals can live longer in captivity. In the article, by Hannah J. O’regan and Andrew C. Kitchener states, “Gorillas live for more than 50 years in captivity compared to 35 years in the wild” (223). The animals diets also help them live longer. Lastly animals can get smarter. Animals in captivity do more activities making them smarter. For example, “Rats raised in enriched environments had larger brains”(O’regan and Kitchener 224). Animals in captivity should be allowed because they are able to get healthier, their lifespan increases, and they get more intelligent.

If a farmer breeds cows, treats them as well as possible, and then kills them as painlessly as possible at age three for food, utilitarians and sentientist Kantians alike would believe this is morally justifiable. Utilitarians believe that humans should do what maximizes pleasure and minimizes pain, so while the cows may have an immediate interest in avoiding suffering, they have lived a happy life and have no concept of death, so painlessly killing and eating them would not be morally wrong. Sentientist Kantians would also believe that there is nothing wrong with killing the cows for food because Kantians believe that, given that there was no cruelty involved with raising and killing the cows, the cows are merely a means to an end.

“An Animal’s Place” written by, Michael Pollan is an article on rather animals should have the same constitutional rights as humans. Pollan explains in the article that, “Zogby poll found that fifty-one percent of Americans believe that primates are entitled to the same rights as human children”. Pg. 362 meaning, people want to stand up for how animals are being treated in factories. More and more animals are treated like they are machines and not animals. Pollan goes on to explain how he went to a few of the animal factories in the United States, to see how they operate. We found he was displeasing. They cage thousands of hens and pigs to the point that they become depressed. They start producing less and some resort in eating cannibalizing.

Animals deserve better treatment from the people who don’t care about them. Shamu is mainly about whales that are being held in captivity. Evidence dogs is primarily about dogs that go to jail because of their owners and also get treated woefully. Both of these articles are describing how animals should get protected. The authors of Evidence dogs and Shamu convey his or her point of view on how to protect these animals by facts about the program, mood, and solution

That would be good for people, because there are a lot of things we can't do that animals can. We could use their help.”( Grandin) I don't know where humans, or life in general would be without the help of animals. They help us through hard times, the can teach us life lessons and, they can be trained as service dogs to help others in need. Though sometimes we doubt them, if we learn to accept that humans aren't “all that” and animals can do things too, the society would be all around a better place.

In chapter 7 of “The Social Animal,” David Brooks introduces a character named Erica to demonstrate that anyone willing to work hard can move up in life. Erica grew up with her mom in public housing. At the age of 10, she attended a public school that was not challenging her. In order to be more challenged, she knew that she would have to get into the new private school, New Hope. She was desperate; she wanted the fancy uniforms, the art studios, and the chance to go to college. When she went to her social worker, the lady said it was impossible for her to get in. However, Erica didn’t like this answer, so when it was time to go she didn’t budge. She exclaimed in a stubborn manner, “I wanna go to New Hope […] I wanna go to New Hope […] I

The main theme of Animal Liberation by Peter Singer is summarized in one quote by Isaac Bashevis Singer, “In their behavior towards creatures, all men [are] Nazis” (84). Singer spends the whole book attempting to prove that Nazis and the abusers of animals are the same. He does this by talking about scientific testing and the way animals are treated before being killed for their meat. He dives into the specifics of what happens during animal testing and animals killed for meat in order to appeal to the humanity of the reader in order to exploit it. By exploiting the humanity of the reader Singer attempts to guilt the reader into becoming a vegetarian.

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.

The poem that I chose for my essay was “Why Nobody Pets the Lion at the Zoo” by John Ciardi. This poem was a modern/rhyming couplet type of poem that included ten couplets. The poem is about a lion in a zoo desperately wanting to be pet, but not being able to trust his teeth enough to give anyone a chance. I realize the poem has a deeper meaning that is hidden beneath a simpler and more naive-like exterior. I believe the true meaning of the poem is not being able to control your actions and emotions around someone so you choose to stay away; losing an opportunity so the person is safe.

The Vancouver Aquarium uses dolphins and belugas to provide entertainment and utilizes the profit gained, to aid them in research. In The Case for Animal Rights, Tom Regan’s moral principles state that there should be total abolition of the use of animals in science as well as for entertainment purposes (337). Moreover, he claims that humans and animals have equal values and rights. Based on this principle, I argue that the practices of the Vancouver Aquarium of using belugas and dolphins for scientific and entertainment purposes is immoral and thus unjustified.

Why is it that we as a society condemn the actions of a man against a man but very rarely a man against an animal? I think this question must be understood if we are ever to change the rights animals have. As of yet I don't believe animals have any actual rights. Rather humans have rights that involve animals. If we are to truly allow animals to have rights the same or similar to humans then we must first define what it is that makes us feel as if they are entitled to rights.

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.

In regards to animals, the issue of rights and whether they exist becomes a touchy subject. In the essay, “Nonhuman Animal Rights: Sorely Neglected,” author Tom Regan asserts that animals have rights based upon inherent value of experiencing subjects of a life. Regan’s argument will first be expressed, later explained, and evaluated in further detail. Lastly, that fact that Regan thinks rights are harbored under the circumstance of being an experiencing subject of a life will also be discussed in terms of the incapacitated, etc.