The Instigator
Autee135
Pro (for)
The Contender
ApotheosisOrangutan
Con (against)

Should animal abusers have punishments as harsh as child abusers (adult abusers, 18 and up)

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
ApotheosisOrangutan has forfeited round #5.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/12/2017 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 485 times Debate No: 100838
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Autee135

Pro

I believe that people who abuse animals should be punished just as severely as people who abuse children. Animals and children are both fairly defenseless against an full grown human. If a man/woman tied up a medium to large dog and kicked it, there would be similar injuries if they tied up an 6 or 7 year old child. A child is weak and can't fight against an adult, animals aren't as weak but if they get tied/chained up they don't have any way to escape. Animals can't go to the police and claim abuse, children sometimes can, but most of the time they're too frightened of what the repercussions could be. Therefore there should be similar punishments.
ApotheosisOrangutan

Con

The issue of animal abuse is one that challenges a person's morals when comparing the life of a human against another animal. Like veganism, those who want animals (excluding humans) to be treated as equal to humans are often unable to choose whether to spare an animal's (once again, excluding humans) life, or that of their own species. That, or they choose the former. My argument, though I may not agree through my morals, but definitely through my logic is that the mistreatment of animals should not be a punishable crime unless the animal is a human, because as of now (and in my opinion), humans are the dominant species of this generation and other animals that we may abuse are merely our prey, and do not need the treatment humans do when in these situations. Therefore, those who abuse animals should not be charged with the same punishments as child abusers.

I look forward to more detail on your perspective :)
Debate Round No. 1
Autee135

Pro

I believe that as the master beings we have a responsibility to take care of our fellow animals. One of the ways we can do that is by pushing higher penalties on animal abusers. In an ecosystem all of the animals work together to survive and thrive, humans rely on animals for all sorts of things; food, clothing, transportation. In that relationship they also rely on us for food, shelter, and protection. People who misuse this privilege need harsher punishments.
ApotheosisOrangutan

Con

I am going to take what my opponent said into mind as I compare two similar events. One where there was punishment, and one where the action was deemed legal and just. There have been situations in the news where children were caged in their homes. Their parents, who were responsible for their imprisonment were jailed. Another situation: let's say there's an elephant that lives in Africa, and has grown up there all of its life with its family. However, a zoo is opening, and they need animals. The elephant is taken from its home and put in the zoo, where it is caged in a small exhibit (at least compared to where it used to be able to live), with one or two others. The zoo is not shut down, nor is the action deemed illegal. That elephant had never relied on humans in the wild. Wouldn't this separation from the elephant's home cause mental and emotional damage, and the people responsible should be punished for such abuse? Keep in mind, abuse isn't just physical.
Humans in the elephant's case used their power for the entertainment of other humans. This is vain for humans to do, but it's been a way of life to cage animals in a zoo, or the circus. However, when other humans are imprisoned or abused in similar ways, this causes an uproar. This is because as humans, we can distinguish that humans are more important than inferior species.

*In no way do I agree with the abuse of animals through caging in zoos or circus. This has merely been a tradition that proves the dominance of the human species over others.
Debate Round No. 2
Autee135

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for perfectly proving my point. Yes there is a long history of humans using and abusing animals without punishment, but that's the problem. By instating harsher punishments people will learn it's not ok, the punishment for locking a child in a cage like an animal is steep... why isn't the punishment for locking an animal in a cage just as steep?
ApotheosisOrangutan

Con

This lack of punishment for animals' behalf is because humans have acknowledged our dominance over other animals. Since we have evolved, we have discovered our superior intelligence. We can communicate efficiently, invent and innovate creations, and learn to use our resources for survival, and entertainment as well.
If animals were to get the justice they deserve, they should be able to speak up for themselves, just as humans would. It may be our responsibility to provide a balance in the food chain, but we should not have to give them a place in the justice system. Animals are more expendable because they do not provide the same level of intelligence or evolution as humans do. Not to mention, they are often a danger to our species such as things like shark attacks. That is killing innocent humans that are peacefully swimming in a body of water. Shouldn't the sharks that were responsible face punishment as well? It's the same situation, just reversed. However, the difference is that the sharks cannot face justice for their actions because they are not intelligent enough to know better.
Debate Round No. 3
Autee135

Pro

There are animals that are clever and have cognitive thought. Monkeys and crows have been observed to use tools to accomplice a certain task. Tests have been done with dogs where they would refuse a treat from a person that wouldn't help their owner. Humans only get attacked by sharks when they go into the ocean, the ocean is the sharks habitat. Typically sharks don't attack from aggression, they think humans are food, sharks are painted as evil in movies and books but that's incorrect. Most animals don't attack humans unprovoked, humans do attack animals all the time though. There's whole species that have gone extinct or are close to it because humans destroy everything in their path. Whole forests are ripped down so that people can have better looking homes and cities. We reproduce faster than the world regenerates, humanity is destroying the world. Animals stop breeding when the population grows too large humans do not. This shows how humans may be able to use tools better and be smarter in some ways, but in all actuality, if humankind goes extinct every other species of animal will thrive.
ApotheosisOrangutan

Con

As I aforementioned, humans continue to evolve and adapt to the environment. We are starting to learn about our dangerous ways of the past, and have prevented extinction and endangerment of several animals such as the panda. We learn from our mistakes so that in the future we can do things better. Those who abuse animals should not be punished as harsh as a punishment for child abuse, because a human's life as the dominant species is more important. Sure, monkeys and crows can accomplish simple tasks, but humans can and have done so much more since we have been on Earth.

When being abused, animals do not suffer the mental or emotional stress that humans do when they are being abused, at least as science can say so far. Therefore, animals do not need the same amounts of protection that humans do. It's shocking that my opponent believes that without humans, animals will thrive. Without humans, there will be no one to fix the damage we have done to our planet, and no one to continue the thriving and growth of our own species.

Thanks for debating with me.
Debate Round No. 4
Autee135

Pro

Science doesn't exactly show how one feels. I have severe depression and I've had full body scans done. It shows what part of the brain is affected by the emotion but it doesn't show how you feel. My opponent's hypotheses that animals don't suffer the mental and emotional stress that humans do, is incorrect. Animals that have been abused suffer from PTSD, they show aversion to certain types of people, the ones who look, sound, or smell like their abusers. My aunt has a dog that was abused and neglected by his previous owner, a man, and whenever unknown men come into their home he panics. Animals deserve respect, they feed us, they clothe us, they show us love and devotion, why should we give them any less? Why should people who treat them like garbage get off with a small fine, or not be allowed to own animals on the property they abused them on? Thank you for debating me.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by ApotheosisOrangutan 1 year ago
ApotheosisOrangutan
Oops, thought that was the last round :"D
Posted by ApotheosisOrangutan 1 year ago
ApotheosisOrangutan
I don't think I misspoke, as that's my opinion on the matter. My morals may prove my perspective wrong, but logically, humans are the dominant species and therefore their lives are the most important. Actions of abuse against each other (humans) is more serious than abuse against other animals.

I make it sound really complicated, but I hope that cleared up your confusion...
Posted by Gotlyfe 1 year ago
Gotlyfe
"My argument, though I may not agree through my morals, but definitely through my logic is that the mistreatment of animals should not be a punishable crime unless the animal is a human..."

I feel you may have misspoken here?

Even if humans are the dominant of species, does that not mean that they should be the ones making sure the others are all treated safely?
Posted by What50 1 year ago
What50
I understand that it's for most morally wrong. But again we are more powerful than animals. A animals life doesn't match a child or even a human's life.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.