Animal rights should not be introduced to law
After the liberation of slaves and then women, now the lights are being shed upon the subject of animal rights for public discussion. As the world population grew, so did the demand for animals. However, not all animals get the same treatment from humans. Some animals are caressed with love and care by their owners during their entire lives, while some others are kept in tiny cubicles where they do not even have enough space to turn around, only to be slaughtered for food after a few months, and still others get tested for lethal dosage of drugs and get vivisected without any anesthesia. The situation begs the important question. Should animals have rights? In this essay, it will be argued that they should not because first, they lack the ability to deliver their duty, and second, if they have rights, the human society could suffer greatly. After the two main points, Klein’s refutation to Singer’s marginal humans argument will be presented.
Animals should not have rights because they lack the ability to deliver their duty. According to the social contract theory, individuals were born into the state of nature, where they had to fight each other for survival. People formed government and made rules that limited their rights for the sake of the general stability and happiness.* They could no longer kill or rob others to get what they want because of the limitations, but it also meant that they did not have to worry of murder and theft as much as they used to. The arbitrary duties that people imposed upon themselves were beneficial for the humanity on the whole when all was said and done. People got out of the state of nature and started to cooperate with each other to conquer the nature. Even now, the social contract theory still remains salient. People in any society have been required to follow certain sets of rules to be protected by the law because rights and duties are two sides of the same coin. An English philosopher Roger Scruton pointed this out well in
Animals should not have rights because they lack the ability to deliver their duty. According to the social contract theory, individuals were born into the state of nature, where they had to fight each other for survival. People formed government and made rules that limited their rights for the sake of the general stability and happiness.* They could no longer kill or rob others to get what they want because of the limitations, but it also meant that they did not have to worry of murder and theft as much as they used to. The arbitrary duties that people imposed upon themselves were beneficial for the humanity on the whole when all was said and done. People got out of the state of nature and started to cooperate with each other to conquer the nature. Even now, the social contract theory still remains salient. People in any society have been required to follow certain sets of rules to be protected by the law because rights and duties are two sides of the same coin. An English philosopher Roger Scruton pointed this out well in
Cited: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=should-humans-eat-meat-excerpt http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/John-Locke-Thoughts-Concerning-Education.pdf http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_3_urbanities-animal.html http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1382&context=ealr http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/15656.pdf http://public.callutheran.edu/~chenxi/phil345_111.pdf http://www.freehealingtools.com/kanzi-an-ape-of-genius