The Instigator
burbachrocks
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
DiablosChaosBroker
Pro (for)
Winning
6 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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/21/2009 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,471 times Debate No: 7501
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

burbachrocks

Con

The claim that animals have �€˜rights�€™ was first put forward by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer in the 1970s and has been the subject of heated and emotional debates ever since. There are many contexts in which the question of �€˜animal rights�€™ comes up. Should we farm animals? If so by what techniques? Should we eat animals? Should we hunt and fish them? Is it morally acceptable to use animals as sources of entertainment in the context of zoos, circuses, horse racing etc.? Often the same organisations that campaign on environmental issues (e.g. Greenpeace) are also concerned for the welfare of animals: both sets of concerns derive from a commitment to the value of Nature and the Earth. The question of animal rights might well come up in a debate on biodiversity, and is one with so many political and social implications that it is also worth having in its own right. This debate is about the ethical principles at issue; the separate debates on biodiversity, vegetarianism, zoos, blood sports, and animal experimentation deal with more of the concrete details.
DiablosChaosBroker

Pro

Let's duel!!!

I think my opponent for opening this debate. Although I was expecting that he would be pro in this debate, I would like to try the devil's advocate for once. :D

*DRAWING PHASE*

#1. We each draw 5 cards, with my opponent drawing the sixth card as he goes first.
#2. My opponent played no cards whatsoever, but *analyzed* the situation without any arguments placed on the field. What a pity to leave his side of the field defenseless. :(
#3. My opponent, nevertheless, has asked questions with his analysis.

*MAIN PHASE*

I will answer my opponents questions:

"Should we farm animals?"

Currently, we should, until the time when we can genetically engineer crops in agriculture to the extent that there will be an almost endless supply of plants that we can eat. Then, instead of actual meats, we use meat analogues, foods that mimics the aesthetic qualities (primarily texture, flavor, and appearance) and/or chemical characteristics of certain types of meat.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...

In case you're wondering whether we can consume enough protein from meat analogues, we can include textured vegetable proteins so we don't even have to touch meat whatsoever. Textured vegetable protein is made from soy flour, a by-product of making soybean oil and high in protein, and low in fat.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...

"If so by what techniques?"

http://www.amazon.com...
http://www.nzqa.govt.nz...
http://www.bffairrodeo.com...

"Should we eat animals?"

Yep; to maintain a healthy balanced diet. Unless the time comes when we can genetically engineer crops in agriculture to the extent that there will be an almost endless supply of plants that we can eat.

"Should we hunt and fish them?"

Yep; to maintain a healthy balanced diet.

"Is it morally acceptable to use animals as sources of entertainment in the context of zoos, circuses, horse racing etc."
Yep; animals do have rights. We just ignore them and violate their rights. ;D

*Battle Phase*

Animals do have rights. We just ignore them and violate their rights. My opponent should demonstrate why animals do not have rights.

This is how we treat animals:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJfXami4haU
http://www.mccruelty.com...

Here are some interesting facts:

Electric-immobilization systems require that birds be handled and processed while they are still alive and conscious, which causes them great suffering:

* 1. Birds endure bruised and broken wings and legs and can suffocate when they are dumped and shackled.
* 2. Frustrated workers often commit gruesome gratuitous acts of abuse and have been documented tearing live birds apart, spitting tobacco in their eyes, spray-painting their faces, stomping on them, punching them, kicking them, and even sexually assaulting them.
* 3. Electric current levels are too low to render birds insensible to pain, and all birds are conscious as their throats are slit.
* 4. Those animals who miss the blades—and millions do each year—are scalded to death in defeathering tanks.

Source: http://www.peta.org...

*Main phase two*

It is my opponent's burden to prove that animals don't deserve rights, (rights that we violate everyday).
Debate Round No. 1
burbachrocks

Con

o.k just to let you know i got the first round stuff of a website i forgot to put in the adress so just a heads up.

And im talking about dogs well im also talking about house pet not like cows bears and all of that stuff. so ya
DiablosChaosBroker

Pro

Well, that was pretty disappointing...

Without making an argument or even refuting my points, this debate seems to be over.

"o.k just to let you know i got the first round stuff of a website i forgot to put in the adress so just a heads up."
------> Plagiarism: http://www.idebate.org...

"And im talking about dogs well im also talking about house pet not like cows bears and all of that stuff. so ya"
------> What???

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
burbachrocks

Con

i give up i need to pracice a little more bye thanks for wasteing your time
DiablosChaosBroker

Pro

DiablosChaosBroker forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 5 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
Thanks Puck. I didn't realize the plagiarism.
Posted by Puck 5 years ago
Puck
Or just found someone to plagiarise.

http://www.idebate.org...

Judging by DCBs linked debate comments, clearly not averse to.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 5 years ago
I-am-a-panda
He most likely has a debate on this and is seeing two sides to each coin.
Posted by DiablosChaosBroker 5 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
Wait, did you change sides: http://www.debate.org...?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 3 years ago
Man-is-good
burbachrocksDiablosChaosBrokerTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 5 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
burbachrocksDiablosChaosBrokerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01