Amazon.com Widgets

Animals should not have a vast majority of human rights

Asked by: King_Odysseus
  • Animals should not have anywhere close to human rights.

    While it is true that there should not be cruelty against animals, they are not anywhere close to humans. Animals cannot think in the same way we think. Most of this depends upon how you view humans, however. If you follow the Bible, then it says "So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.'" (Genesis 1:27-28). If you are an atheist or agnostic, then there's literally no reason why animals and humans can't thought of on the same level. In my opinion however, it's sad that we're all debating about animal rights when we're at the same time killing off unborn human beings because their existence is inconvenient. If it was shown on the news that a veterinarian was euthanizing puppies, a lot of people would be outraged. But somehow we think it's not bad to kill human babies? Insanity.

  • Animals are not Humans and do not have the full capabilities of humans

    I have to admit, animals are very important. However, why should something that is not human have the same rights or more rights than a human. It is absurd. Animals cannot converse in any human language. Animals cannot hold jobs. Animals cannot comprehend most human things. Animals do not pay taxes. Other than bringing joy and questionable sciences, what have animals contributed to society that would grant them equal rights to a human child below the age of 5. What would grant them human rights.

  • The UDHR is written for humans

    The majority of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or UDHR, articles are human specific! Animals can't participate in government, be protected from separation from family, or be granted freedom of speech, to work, belief, liberty, equality, privacy, movement, property or marriage/family.

    It's simply not a matter of the importance or intelligence of animals, but rather of the aims and limitations of the UDHR!

  • The UDHR is written for humans

    The majority of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or UDHR, articles are human specific! Animals can't participate in government, be protected from separation from family, or be granted freedom of speech, to work, belief, liberty, equality, privacy, movement, property or marriage/family.

    It's simply not a matter of the importance or intelligence of animals, but rather of the aims and limitations of the UDHR!

  • Not to the exact same extent

    Animals have basic moral rights. We do not afford them rights such as freedom of religion, assembly, free speech, etc. or any legal rights like we do with humans. But the category of rights that both humans and animals have are moral rights, in particular the right to be free from cruel and inhumane treatment.

  • Animals are alive. Humans are alive. How then, are animals somehow less than humans?

    Humans are, of course, incredibly selfish and narcissistic as proven many times in history. "Everything in the universe revolves around us". "This gender/race/literally any other category that exists is less than us". But truthfully, animals are actually more important than humans. Humans are destructive. Humans are selfish. Humans attempt to kill each other for made up reasons. Humans destroy their own planet then deny it. Animals are no less smart, they have evolved the smarts for surviving as their own species, and humans should stop believing smarts = similarities to humans. Animals are living beings, and deserve respect and rights just as much, if not more then humans do.

  • We don't give them rights already

    We don't give animals much rights anyways. When an animal is abandoned you can adopt it so long as it's owner isn't out there. And if we don't grant them certain rights we give people the ability to abuse animals. As for taxes and jobs, illegal immigrants do not pay taxes and cannot legally get a job, are you saying we should consider illegal immigrants as less then human. Also, while animals cannot converse in human language they are pretty good at telling the mood of a human based on how the human is speaking and if you actually look into animals they can communicate with you through non-verbal means. A person who has never learned any language can also not understand human language, so should we consider them less then human too?

  • To be human is to be associated with humankind.

    A large number of dogs are employed on metro stations, airports, public gatherings and a number of other places. They save HUMAN LIVES, they save human rights. Further, what is it to be human? Different civilizations have different responses to that. How can you then come to single conclusion which attempts to impact human rights which are universal in nature and would impact everyone equally? A life is a life, no matter if it's human or animal. And, all humans are entitled to human rights irrespective of them being economically productive or not. Therefore, animals must have human rights as well.


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