Amazon.com Widgets
  • The people who said no have very appalling reasons. I have a different perception of animal rights than the more widely accepted one.

    What do you think gives something rights? Emotions, Right? There aren't any "Furniture Rights Movements", Are there? Because couches have no emotions. Now think back to the Atlantic slave trade. Black people were thought to be completely different from humans. They were treated like - let's face it - livestock. They were auctioned off and were forced to sleep in barns, All because they were thought to be lower species. There are human rights because skin color doesn't affect your humanity or sentience. It's the whole reason human rights exist: because everyone has feelings. Just because we have more advanced brains and better technology doesn't give us the right to disrespect them. They have sentience, Too. Anyone who's had personal experience with animals (and I don't mean hunting or fishing) would understand what I mean. It doesn't matter that they lack parts of the brain that we have. Elephant mothers will stay with their dead calves even when they know they can't stay long. They will nudge the body gently, As if hoping for a miracle. If she weren't capable of feeling emotion, Why would she even bother? Animals are sophisticated and intelligent, Capable of sculpting societies and solving problems. Every living thing was designed to eat, Hunt, Grow, Survive, Be free, And reproduce. This gives them natural and intrinsic rights to do all of those things. I've read that humans are permitted to kill animals for food. Assuming that the person who says that is quoting the Bible, It still says it's wrong to torture them. Whether you're Christian or you believe in evolution, They still have this similarity: animals were here first. So what if they don't feel emotion as strongly as we do? Their capability to feel love, Anger, Joy, Anguish, And fear aren't any less relevant.
    That said, I don't believe animals should be treated like people. I have a very different perception of animal rights than extremist organizations such as PETA. It's much better to appreciate and respect each separate species as its own. That really brings out the diversity and complexity of the natural world. Speaking of PETA and the like, I am not completely on board with their ideals. They possibly want to abolish pet ownership and encourage strict veganism. There are some nutrients and amino acids only found in animal products. I eat animal products not because I like it, But because I want to be healthy. But animals should be slaughtered humanely instead of being raised in those deplorable factory farms, As they still have intrinsic rights.
    I am not saying that we should treat animals as we would humans, Or that we should stop eating meat or owning pets. I am saying that we should have respect for other living things and that this world doesn't belong to us. Please at least consider it.

  • Yes, animals should be allowed to have rights.

    Of course, animals should not have the same rights as people as they do not have the same processes of thinking and understanding as we are capable of. However, I believe animals should have the right to a sustainable, cruelty-free life. This of course could be problematic on deliberating which animals have what rights, but we could certainly start off with the farms and zoos.

  • Yes, they should have the rights that can apply to animals.

    There should certainly be laws protecting some basic rights for animals, such as their right to life or their right to health. If someone violates the rights of an animal, e.g. by killing it illegally, neglecting it, or abusing it, then those people should be held accountable. Many of the rights to which humans are entitled do not carry over to animals (such as the right to vote or the right to free speech), but animals should have their basic rights to be alive and safe.

  • No they shouldn't

    Because if they did then we wouldnt be allowed to have them as pets and we wouldnt be able to kill them for meat and then i would go hungry and die of not eating and then get brought back to life by a cow and my mum will explode

  • They cannot speak.

    No, animals should not be allowed to have rights, because they have no way to assert those rights. While people should not be allowed to harm them, they cannot speak for themselves. It would end up being people imposing their own rights and wishes, while claiming them on behalf of the animal.

  • No, animals should not have rights.

    Animals don't have a soul and their purpose is to serve man. Animals are there to serve men as companions and food. They were not made to be an equal to man, but they were made to be a useful tool for the good of man. It is the responsibility of society to treat animals in a manner that they deserve and not abuse them, but animals should not be given rights that elevate them any higher than the place they were designed hold.

  • Just an animal

    No, animals should not have rights. They are simply animals, and do not matter to much, as long as they have good healthy populations and are not endangered. There should not be any laws about killing pets and things, because they are not all that important, people just like them.


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

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