The Instigator
TheBoss
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
rrdallas22
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

We should grant rights to Cetaceans

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/17/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 856 times Debate No: 26316
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

TheBoss

Pro

This is a debate about granting rights to Cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises in specifics.) In case you do not know what Cetaceans are, they are mammals best adapted to aquatic life. What I mean by "Rights" is that they get basic privileges, conditions, or considerations to which a group or individual is entitled.

The voting period for this debate is 1 week and the total amount to argue is 24 hours. Please note that you only get 750 characters to argue. This is going to be rather difficult but we will have to deal with it. There is three rounds.

Once again this is about granting rights to Cetaceans.
Thank you and please enjoy the debate.

VOTE PRO FOR GRANTING RIGHTS TO CETACEANS!
rrdallas22

Con

First and foremost, I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. Now, we begin.

What my opponent has stated is that we give "rights" to Cetaceans, mammals best suited to live in the water. If we were to do so, the argument could be made that we give rights to all mammals, land or sea. And I would suppose that by "rights" we give them special privileges, such as those of humans. And if we are granting rights to mammals, why not just grant special privileges to all animals? Are they not equal? In order to treat all animals equally, we would have to allow for such rules. This would cause the eating of most meats to be outlawed, we can't just kill them, they have rights. Hunting, would then be outlawed.

In 2009, the cattle industry attributed to $43.8 billion in income for the United States. With such rights, this would go away then due to the fact that we gave them rights we can no longer produce that money.

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
TheBoss

Pro

First of all, I will explain to you why cetaceans are so unique. It is proved that cetaceans can understand grammar. For example, if a trainer of a whale said whale, ball, trainer, the whale would get the ball, and go to the trainer. But if you say trainer and then ball, the whale would go to the trainer and then get the ball.
I would like to point out that just because you give cetaceans "rights", that doesn't mean you need to give all the other animals "rights" as well. For example, we wouldn't need to give bugs "rights". We are already not giving bugs enough time to live because we kill them accidentally by stepping on them while we walk. Even though you didn't intend to kill the bug you would still get charged for that? That doesn't make sense.
I would like to ask a question. What does cattle's have to do with cetaceans? And please note what I said before. Thank you


rrdallas22

Con

True, Cetaceans are unique creatures. However, this does not justify giving them special privileges. Also, might I add, if you were to give special rights to cetaceans only, you would give rise to animal rights activists who will not stop until they get "rights" for all animals.
And as for your question about cattle, I was stating under the assumption you do give rights to cetaceans, which progresses to all animals.
The idea of giving rights to cetaceans would only cause animal rights activists to be more upset that you are separating the cetaceans over any other animal. What about the birds, the fish? Are we supposed to give them rights as well?
Giving rights to cetaceans, in the end, would only cause people to push and push until you give special rights to the rest of the animals and before we know it, we can't do anything without having to respect the "rights" of every animal that we would be affecting. We would have to assess anything involving any animals.
Debate Round No. 2
TheBoss

Pro

First of all, I would like to point out the great example of slippery slopes. However, how do you know that animal rights activists won't allow it unless all animals have "rights"? Are birds and fish as intelligent as cetaceans? Are they endangered? There is no need to give other animals rights. Just cetaceans. Cetaceans are rather endangered compared to other species. For example, whaling is a problem. Japan, Iceland, and other nations won't be stopped from whaling if we don't give the cetaceans rights. Once again, all he has said this debate, is mostly that giving "rights" to cetaceans will only result in giving "rights" to other animals.
rrdallas22

Con

rrdallas22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TheBoss 4 years ago
TheBoss
Since the other side forfeited I win.
No votes have been placed for this debate.