Animal Rights (ANSWERED)

QUESTION

THIS PAPER MUST INCLUDE AN OUTLINE AS WELL , PLEASE TELL ME HOW TO PAY FOR OUTLINE.

**********The TOPIC of this paper is : ANIMAL RIGHTS************

**Requirements:
MUST be (5-7 pages, double-spaced) not counting the cover page and the reference pages.
Absolutely no plagiarism!
You MUST USE AT LEAST 3 scholarly sources for your paper beyond the course textbook. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced and paraphrased; any quoted material must be placed in quotes, and must have accompanying APA style in-text citations.
Only doc, docx, and odt file types are accepted – PDF files are not accepted.

ANSWER

Animal Rights

Animal rights are based on the belief that non-human animals deserve autonomy without interference by human beings. They are moral principles that deem animals have the same stature as humans thus should have the ability to live as they wish. Animal rights seek the end of animal exploitation by humans, such as for food, research purposes, entertainment, or destruction of their habitat. The lack of animal rights is deemed as negatively impacting the ability of animals to live a whole life. The idea of animal rights is contentious since animal products are deeply embedded in today’s society, for example, meat products. Animal rights propagate the idea that animals should be allowed according to their choosing, not hunted or bred. The essay thesis states that animal rights should be conferred to end human-animal exploitation since animals can be classified as legal beings and sentient creatures.

Animal Welfare versus Animal Rights

Animal welfare focuses on the well-being of animals. It supports compassionate treatment by using regulated caretaking plans such as attention to health status. Animal welfare is based on the idea that humans should care for and treat animals as humanely as possible. The animal welfare concept also prohibits abuse or torture but allows the use of animals for food, research, and entertainment (Park & Valentino, 2019). Animal rights emphasize that animals should have equal rights as humans. The idea is that humans should not use animals for food or research. In addition, the animals should live in their natural habitat without human intervention.

Importance of Animal Rights

Animal rights are essential since they counteract the argument that animals are only useful for human exploitation and lack the capacity to think. Animals have been described as physically complex machines, a perception that has led to increased animal cruelty globally. In addition, the lack of animal rights has led to the increase in farmed animals which outnumber animals in the wild. The majority of these animals endure harsh conditions in factory farms due to the lack of preventive regulations. In recent years, scientific evidence has found that animals possess enhanced cognitive complexity similar to humans. Animals enhanced cognitive sophistication makes them susceptible to feelings such as pain and pleasure. The awareness of animals’ inherent reasoning is sufficient reason for enhancing animal rights. Furthermore, animal exploitation has led to mass extinction driven by humans. Approximately 543 species of vertebrates have gone extinct since the start of the 20^th century (The humane league, 2021). In addition, research estimates that a fifth of all species will be extinct by the middle of the 21^st century due to human exploitation. Animal rights are thus critical to ensure the sustainability of animals in their original habitats.

Arguments For Animal Rights

Every species has the inherent right to live freely by virtue of being alive. Animals’ rights should be upheld with the same status as a legal person to ensure they are protected and promote greater animal welfare. An individual is defined as a person with certain alienable rights, volition and, a lucid mind. This definition covers all human beings regardless of each’s prejudices. This dimension focuses on phycological attributes, such as the ability to focus on theoretical ideas. Therefore, this definition does not focus on animal and human differences, such as pairs of limbs.

The second definition focuses on legal personhood. This concept focuses on the idea of bestowing human rights to non-human entities. This legal personhood attribute is often found in corporations that can enter into contracts and thus can be sued as a legal person. Under legal law, they are considered legal persons; thus, the same should be extended to animals. The basis of this concept is that some animals experience life similar to humans due to their enhanced intelligence quotient (Park & Valentino, 2019). These highly intelligent animals should thus not be abused but accorded the same rights as humans.

According to research, animals are sentient; thus, the human species’ claim is different is based on speciesism. The French philosopher, Rene Descartes, stated that animals lack consciousness and moral status. Descartes argued that animals are complex machines without experiences. Another view is that animal’s sentience is too short; thus, experience life differently compared to humans. However, this theory is flawed since drawing boundaries based on species characteristics is arbitrary flawed. Singer (2017) states that humans suffer a form of speciesism where animals are amoral based on their lesser level of consciousness than humans. According to the utilitarian theory, speciesism is wrong since animals experience physiological and physical pain similar to humans.

The utilitarian theory states that moral actions are those that increase pleasure and alleviate pain. According to the utilitarian model, pleasure is the only inherently satisfactory objective while pain is the vice-versa; thus, inflicting pain on animals is similar to humans. According to Singer (2017), equality should not be based solely on the level of sentience instead on a species capacity to feel pain. The capacity to feel pain is the only thing humans and animals avoid; thus, animal rights should be based on this premise (Stucki, 2020). Therefore, moral consideration should also be based on a species innate characteristic to feel pain and suffering.

An animal should be accorded rights since it would eliminate cruelty experienced in factory farms. Humans mutilate animals in factory farms in various ways, including dehorning, castrations, or killed without the use of anesthesia. In addition, animals in concentrated animal feeding operations are packed in vast numbers leading to psychological suffering; thus, introducing animal rights would increase the animal’s pleasures and alleviate the pain of being held captive. Humans have alienable rights to prevent suffering; thus, animals should be accorded the same rights to prevent their continued suffering.

Counterarguments

The critics of the concept of animal rights often grapple with the question of animal responsibility. First, the critics argue that rights and responsibilities are inseparable; thus, animals should also be responsible for society. Second, rights are a human construct unique to the human moral code; thus, animals cannot have rights since the concept is alien to them (Vea, 2020). Third, rights cannot exist in a vacuum; thus, every right has a corresponding duty. Finally, the critics argue that animals are amoral and cannot follow man-made laws.

Animals are labeled incapable of differentiating right from wrong thus cannot be held accountable for their actions. For example, if one monkey kills another, will the monkey be charged by a jury of his peers using the laws made by man. Animals are often described as acting on instinct rather than logic. Opponents of animal rights also argue that animals’ rights would blur the line between humans and animals, a situation that would have grave consequences for humans and animals. For example, granting animal rights would suggest the end of predation since it would be infringing on the rights of other animals.

Consequences of Animal Rights

The impact of granting animals rights similar to humans would lead to a shift in many sectors of the economy. The impact of animal rights would lead to the increase in alternative protein sources such as plant-based proteins, leading to less impact on the global environment. In addition, clothing would cease to be made from tanned leather or animal products, increasing pollution through their waste. In the contemporary world, fur is increasingly being rejected due to animal cruelty issues; thus, animal rights could increase the usage of faux materials.

Furthermore, the water ecosystem would recover from decades of exploitation, leading to replenished ocean habitats. However, advocacy groups deem the introduction of animal rights as far-fetched, thus raising awareness of the need to treat and reduce animal exploitation. Current U.S laws are geared towards protecting animals from cruelty rather than giving them freedom of autonomy. The watershed moment in animal rights was in 1992, when Switzerland amended its constitution to confer animals the status of a being (Stucki, 2020). In 2007, Spain’s autonomous Balearic Island bestowed legal rights to apes

Conclusion

Animal rights are based on the belief that non-human animals deserve autonomy without interference by human beings. The essay thesis states that animal rights should be conferred to end human-animal exploitation since animals can be classified as legal beings and sentient creatures. Animal’s mental capacity and capacity to feel pain is sufficient evidence to confer animal rights, leading to reduced animal exploitation. However, this would blur the line between man and animal since rights are a human concept; thus, animal welfare should be enhanced.

References

‌ Park, Y. S., & Valentino, B. (2019). Animals are people too: explaining variation in respect for animal rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 41(1), 39-65.

Singer, P. (2017). Animal liberation or animal rights? In Animal Rights (pp. 165-176). Routledge.

Stucki, S. (2020). Towards a theory of legal animal rights: Simple and fundamental rights. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(3), 533-560.

The humane league. (2021). Animal Rights: Definition, Issues, and Examples. Thehumaneleague.org. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/animal-rights

Vea, T. (2020). The learning of emotion in/as sociocultural practice: The case of animal rights activism. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(3), 311-346.

To get your original copy of this completed paper, please Order Now

Related Questions