Can animals have rights? This has been a huge dilemma over animal handling and whether there are rights that animals are entitled to. The answer to this is quite simple and obvious that the animals have their rights. Animals need to be handled in a nonviolent mode; that is in case you are not a Vegan, you had better go Vegan, and Vegan is about non-violence. Most individuals have misused animas by extract meat and skin from them, killing them for fun and overworking them.
Just like sexists and the racists support their wicked actions, the same way most individuals are in such a state of arguing that animals have no rights. Women and children are the most victims that receive blows from inhumane acts by the fellow human generation since they are seen as a weak and have no say. Animals too are seen as creatures that have no say hence some people take into action and instill any manner of action that they think is right for them. The art of selfishness is exhibit where the human carry out the actions with an aim of satisfying their desires.
From time in memorial, there has been an urge to have principle of equal consideration of interest of the moral basic principle. In mind, they do not consider that the principles that they call for implementation will be effective to other species other than humans. Animal liberation is a book that is written by Peter Singer. The book reiterates equality issue is rarely measured by same or equivalent actions; it calls for equivalent deliberation. This is a key feature when discussing about animal rights. People repeatedly ask if animals are supposed to have rights, animals just has humans can enjoy life without torment and abuse.
Humans are considered as animals; hence, we are all susceptible to pain, suffering both mentally and physically. Just as human beings even, the non-human experience pain, happiness, fright, aggravation and love. This calls for a rightful sober mindedness of the human beings to consider the way they handle animals putting into consideration of the above analysis. Supporters of rights animals trust that animals have an inbuilt value, a value entirely separate from their convenience to humans. The activists believe that each living thing desiring to enjoy life is entitled to it, liberated from hurt and suffering (Vilkka 48).
Animal rights must not be viewed as a new trend, it has come out to be a social movement that face up to society’s traditional analysis that all nonhuman animals live exclusively for human use. Jeremy Bentham, the initiator on reinventing utility theory, acknowledged that when making a decision innate object, it is not all if they can be rational. It is about can they suffer? (Scott & Alderson 23).With such perspective mentality and posing the question, it will create an enhanced environment of human and animals hence the animals will enjoy their rights too as humans do (Phillips 6).
The issue of animal experiments is clear-cut: if an experiment abuses the rights of an animal, then it is morally incorrect to perform the experiment on the animal. Those in support of animal experiments view that good done to human beings overshadows the harm done to animals. Such a view is a consequentiality row, because it seems to be at the consequences of the exploits in deliberation.
It cannot be used to defend all forms of experimentation since there are some forms of suffering that are probably impossible to justify even if the benefits are exceptionally valuable to humanity.
Phillips, Allie. Defending the Defenseless: A Guide to Protecting and Advocating for Pets. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Print.
Scott, Harold, and J C. Alderson. The Concise Encyclopedia of Crime and Criminals. New York: Hawthorn Books, 1961. Print.
Vilkka, Leena. The Intrinsic Value of Nature. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1997. Print.