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

Animals should be given equal rights to humans

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
RedBlanket has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/2/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 723 times Debate No: 103767
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




This debate will have a few topics related to it. Not only philosophy, but health and ecology too.

I understand that some societies rely on hunting gathering to this day and they cant survive without meat. But why societies that can can survive without it continue doing all that to them?

I believe that animals deserve equal amount of rights as we are.
We have no right to adapt the supremacist view that they are above us. Here is a list of things we do to them, which they dont deserve:

- Cows, Goats and Chickens. We use them and what they produce (milk and eggs) for food.

- Foxes and cows. They are being skinned to make leather or fur.

- Geese and ship. Are victims because of their feathers or fur. Geese have their feathers plucked out violently to make products like pillows and Ship have their fur removed for wool clothings.

- Horses and some dogs. Being forced to participate in races. They go through terrible conditions before those races.

- Killer whales, dolphins and some other fish. Forced to perform tricks (in places such as Sea World) or simply live in small confined places.

- Lions, tigers, elephants, monkeys. They either live in a Zoo or perform tricks in circuses.

- Dogs. They are used in the military and police to find drugs and participate in dangerous operations. When they are not active they sit in a small cage. Some dogs dont participate anything, they are just tied down to some place.

- Wolves, Deer, bears, rabbits and some other animals. Are targets for hunters.

- Rats, cats and monkeys. Often used for animal testing, mostly which isnt necessary.

- Fish. Are victims to fishing, a lot of time done for sports.

So what arguments are there to justify all what I listed?


Hello Mr. Burns,

Humans are superior to every other animal.

As a human, I say that as a superior mind to 99% of the animal kingdom.

We, the human race, have been a driven force for the last 13,000 years, creating civilizations and creating an infrastructure to resist the deadliest phenomenon's of nature.

Let's end these 1 sentence paragraphs.

I think what you are thinking of is a trade, a trade between life and materials. Because you didn't put enough info in your initial argument I infer that you're implying that we should be completely ban and criminalize the act of killing (in any way shape of form) any animal. This absolutely disgusts me due to how it destroys human nature.

I am a complete Darwinist and believe in the progression of species via natural selection. Survival of the fittest. That's what I believe in. (If you do believe DON'T believe in natural selection, I gladly volunteer to talk about that.)

Honestly, I think if we should, we should destroy all other life on Earth. That's fine.

And I do believe that all animals (besides insects) have sentience. Able to feel happiness and pain.

Though what you're implying is so GRAY.

How should we decide and play god on who we should pardon and who we should kill?

How should we decide which animals are good and which are bad?

We should just kill animals as we see fit (excluding mentally deranged and wasteful circumstances). And do as how EVERY OTHER animal on the planet does it.
Debate Round No. 1


I will disregard your last statement as it simply emphasizes your sentiment and doesnt try to put any argument.

If you believe in Darwinism and the 'survival' of the fittest, you also justify violence towards other beings, theft, robbery, murder and rape. If you read a book on evolution such as the Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, you would have known more about how the evolution theory applies to animal behavior and can be generalized to humans too.

I dont think a society should be politically encouraged to fully support and base its ideology on the survival of the fittest. The first thing that would happen is huge layers of poverty, poor social policies and blue collar crimes being more justifiable...

Your intelligence relating to you should tell you to support technology that deviates from producing animal products and looking for alternatives. There is already a technology that produces food that tastes like meat! That meat is expensive, but technological advances will get you to your juicy tasty meat. Use your intelligence, get a Phd in biology or biochemistry and solve that problem, dont pour salt on animals wounds and dont make your stomach their graveyard.

Henceforth, the intelligence point just back fires at you when you tried to establish some supremacist view on differences that exist between us and animals. The pain should get more of our attention, cause pain is the feeling that is shared between all earth species.


By "survival of the fittest" I mean that people should rise up and take what humankind wants. And that chaos within our own species will cause more harm than good. Why can't we do what we please to animals while we uphold human morality?

Furthermore, the food argument. I can't fathom how many people are involved and center their lives around livestock farming. A majority of these people exist in third-world countries, causing a lack of jobs and turmoil in Africa, South America, Central Asia, etc, etc. This would surely cause a further disbalance between those communities.

Don't joke and say that they should all transfer to biology.
Debate Round No. 2


If a society is poor and cant survive without hunting or using animals, then I guess it is not practical to tell them to switch to starvation. But this is not what this debate is centered around. The debate is centered around, the billions of lands land animals that die needlessly every year.

Animals cause disease in humans. Humans aren't carnivores like lions and wolves, which eat raw meat and suffer no consequences of the cholesterol that is in the meat. Humans need to process the meat very well for it to be edible. That includes removing the bad parts, removing germs and bacteria (especially from fish) and heating the meat. Milk is another product which is not healthy to humans, it is meant for calves and baby goats. All those products are linked to diabetes, cancer, heard disease and more diseases.

Animal farming leads to ecological damage such as increased global warming, imbalance in the food chain or the ecosystem in general (it back fires at fishers in poor african countries) and deforestation.

As you can see, it backfires at you in the end, even if you dont care about animal pain.

Watch the documentary 'Earthlings' on youtube, before you post your next post.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by MrBurns2017 2 years ago
That guy doesnt seem to have anything to say.

Those non-vegan people never have any argument for their wrongdoing..

And still they are tough on crime that targets another human.
Posted by canis 2 years ago
No animal would ever ask for any rights. No animal would ever give any rights.. We are animals..
This debate has 4 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.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.