Animal Right ESSAY

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 462
  • Published : July 30, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
Vu Tien Huy
Animal Rights

Final Paper

This text talks about animal rights. In modern life, people use animals for purposes such as

biomedical, fashion or even recreation. They think that animals shouldn't have rights because they don't

possess three parts of soul and they just care about eating. In addition, because animals don't think or

make decisions and they are not true members of a moral community. Therefore, humans believe that

they can kill animals on demand. On the other hand, from this text, the author asserts that animals also

need rights. Firstly, animals are alive so we need to respect life. Secondly, acting violently towards an

animal may make you act violently towards a human. Thus, we should treat animals humanely

because we are human. Moreover, animals aren't morally self legislative, so they can not possess

rights. Therefore, we can't abuse animals to serve the interests of humans.

Some people believe that animals are dangerous for humans and should be killed for biomedical

research. The important example in this text indicates that no animal can ever commit a crime. The

author said: “Does a lion have a right to eat a baby zebra? Does a baby zebra have a right not to be

eaten?”(74). This question is very profound and it make us think a lot. It means that animals don't have

thinking so they act instinctively and unconsciously. Therefore, animals can't be killed by their action

The author uses this example against that idea above and also to convince the reader.

There are two possible weaknesses significantly in the author's argument. In the first place, people

talk about animal rights but they still eat them. Based on Snopes.com: “KFC sells equivalent of 736

million chickens annually”. This means it would have to own some monstrously huge chicken farm in

order to supply itself with well over half billion chickens every year. How can we think about animal

rights when we eat them every day?. Secondly, the author believes that acting violently toward an

animal may enable you to act violently toward a human. These are two completely different issues

because someone who abuses animals might not abuse humans. According to Buzzle “In the year 2000,

it had been reported that over 7,600 greyhound puppies and 11, 400 old greyhound dogs were killed. In

2006, over 350, 000 baby seals were killed by clubbing during the annual Canadian seal hunt. This

number still has increased steadily up to now.” However, the amount of human violence has more and

more decreased from the Middle Ages because humans are aware of universalization of human rights

all over the world. However, this isn't true for animals. From this we can see that animal abuse hasn't

gone down.

In my opinion, I agree with the author's view. Animal abuse is criminal and discriminative.

Animals need the right to live. In the first place, humans have three parts of souls and animals also

know feelings like humans. For example pets also feel happy when we play with them as well as hurt

when we violate them for human's purpose. In addition, some people believe that some animals are

dangerous to humans and need to be killed for biomedical research. It is an erroneous idea because all

animals are instinctual. For instance, we can't arrest a 4-year-old child because he steals someone's

money. They don't know any better.

Nowadays, there are many slaughter houses all over the world. There are regulations that a slaughter

house must reach but many do not reach these criteria. We have humane ways to kill the animal to

prepare it for eating, but most choose the least expensive way: throat slitting. They hang the animal

upside down, slit its throat, and let...
tracking img