Amazon.com Widgets

Animal rights: Should animals have rights preventing their consumption?

  • I agree that animals should have rights

    Animals should have rights because it is not fair that get abuse.Animals are not supposed to be bought just to be abused or killed they supposed to be bought to be loved,and to played with.Also it is not fair that they have to live in cages they should be able to live in the wild so that is the reason why animals should be able to have rights

  • I agree that animals should have rights

    Animals should have rights because it is not fair that get abuse.Animals are not supposed to be bought just to be abused or killed they supposed to be bought to be loved,and to played with.Also it is not fair that they have to live in cages they should be able to live in the wild so that is the reason why animals should be able to have rights

  • Yes, we have the power to make our own fake meat.

    Animals are sentient beings who feel pain and deserve to live with dignity and respect. Some animals are so smart that scientists argue they should have non-human personhood. We have the power to prepare food with all the nutrients we need without animal meat. Plus, raising animals for meat destroys the environment.

  • Humane slaughter is an oxymoron

    1. No animal rights activist is surgesting we treat animals as if they where humans, we are fighting for said animal to be treated as that animal should be. We have a duty of care over every domesticated animal, this does not mean we get to chose when we want to end there life (euthanasia being the one exception.) 2. Humane slaughter is an oxymoron. Look up the definition of humane if you don't believe me. If a murder was to make sure his victims where unconscious before he slit there throat the word humane would not be used by anyone involved with the case. "However, there should still be laws against animal cruelty." again there is a huge contradiction in your comment tell me whats not cruel about slitting the throat of a living being? When assessing things like this all ways remember the victims point of view.

  • Please stop humanizing animals and demonizing meat-eating humans.

    Think about it: are you going to prosecute every human being who is not a vegetarian? What if I accidentally swallow an insect while out cycling in the countryside? Or would this right only apply to domesticated animals? In which case hunting bans should be lifted immediately, surely.
    Humans, along with a huge number of animals on earth, are carnivores. Anyone in support of this argument is denying the basic right of humans to live according to their physiological needs. It's a ludicrous notion.

  • No, animals should not have these rights.

    Animals should have certain rights, such as the right to not be tortured or treated with extreme cruelty, but the human body is biologically made to consume animals. Also, other animals consume animals. Would we put a lion in prison for eating a zebra. Humans consume animals because we naturally learned to do so via evolutionary biology.

  • The suggestion is unnatural and impossible.

    Granting animals the right not to be consumed is unnatural and impossible. The biggest consumers of animals are other animals. How would one protect the rights of a mouse not to be consumed by a cat or a rabbit by a fox? What would the punishment be for the consumers? How are carnivores supposed to survive? The very notion is utterly absurd.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.