The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Animal Rights

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/8/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 371 times Debate No: 43605
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




People who abuse, or abandon animals should be punished greatly. They should be tortured, rapped, or killed. I think that any of these would be great justice for the poor innocent animals that they mistreated. But I believe that they should be tortured, slowly, and very painfully. ((:


To be clear to anyone reading this, I am not against the rights of animals as the title and my Con position would imply, I am against my opponent's resolution, the idea that people who mistreat animals should be tortured, raped, and killed.

I have a few reasons why this is an unreasonable and over the top punishment.

----It'd be Contradictory----

The punishment for child abuse, no matter how extensive, is not torture or rape[1]. Why should abuse of an animal result in a worse punishment? Is it because we value the safety, comfort, and life of animals more than people?

----Eye for an Eye----

Some people might say that it's simply an eye for an eye, so in that way the punishment is fair. However, wouldn't making the punishment equal to the crime make the punishers just as bad? The actions my opponent suggests are extremely sadistic, and clearly motivated by revenge. We cannot allow society and our justice system to let such primitive and animal feelings have free roam.

----A Line Must be Drawn----

My opponent might say that these actions would be necessary to prevent these things from occurring. The first thing to keep in mind if such a notion is put forth, is to realize that this would be a statement without data to back it up. The second thing to think about is our humanity. If a person treats children or animals inhumanely, they are separated from society, put in jail. What my opponent wants would rob a consenting society of its humanity, even it these heinous actions were done with prevention in mind. There's no point in a slightly more orderly society if that society has to lose its humanity through allowing rape and torture simply for reasons of retribution or justice, both of which are completely subjective terms, and can be easily seen as the same thing.


My opponent wants people who mistreat animals to be raped, tortured, or killed. Since no exceptions to this rule are listed, we can assume this is a blanket punishment. So I would have to discredit this stance somewhat by pointing out that there are circumstances in which a person may have had no ill intention toward the animal that was abused. The definition for animal cruelty can include neglect[2]. So under my opponent's line of thinking, and following the correct definition of animal abuse/cruelty, a person who has many cats, for instance, and can't properly feed them all, but keeps them all through a mixture of affection and denial, could be raped or slowly and painfully tortured. Or a mentally sick person who isn't responsible for harmful actions towards animals could be raped and painfully tortured for actions beyond his/her control.

Thanks for reading.

Debate Round No. 1


Jessbby777 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Jessbby777 forfeited this round.


End debate.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
Good call my miniature metacarpal'd matey.
Posted by MyDinosaurHands 2 years ago
Depends on who is rapping though.
Posted by kbub 2 years ago
"Rapping" isn't much of a punishment...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by InfiniteBears 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ff and better arguments