What's Your View on Animal Rights?

[UsefulPlayer 1]

Animals have NO rights.

But people shouldn't be assholes to them.

 

[Xanadu84]

Animals have no rights per say. I'm not prepared to say that they are only a little bit sentient, nor am I prepared to grant them full rights of humans. However, animals do contribute to a system that supports humans, and we have thought of animals as sort of stand-ins for ourselves. Kind of like a child with a doll. Torturing animals unnecessarily reflects poorly on the torturers respect of life, even if it does not hurt an actual sentient being. And so you should not hurt animals without a clear purpose, like research or food.

The scary thing about PETA is that if you take the assumption that animals are sentient, then they behave in a rational, intellectually consistent manner.

 

[Raven's Nest]

I eat meat and support animal testing for necessary medical research. However there's a lot of fucked up stuff that would make you sick to your stomach that goes on in some countries in the process of doing these things. Real unnecessary cruelty happens in so many slaughterhouses in third world countries - real fucked up shit. Recently an undercover Australian reporter got some first hand footage of what happened to the Cattle we sent to Indonesia. The results were shocking to say the least, basically all of Australia was in an uproar and this is just one country.

I'm also pretty against Lamb and Veal, I feel that stuff is pretty morally wrong.

This is pretty much the problem.

To the others in the thread:

Many people in this thread are confusing the "right to use animals for eating and materials" which doesn't even exist, we simply do it. With that of the "rights for certain animals to live, be free from cruelty, free from fear etc". Those rights certainly don't actually exist either, in the UK we have the Animal Welfare Act 2006. This is about animal welfare, not rights. To help you distinguish between the two...

Animal welfare people want to make cages bigger, animal rights people want the cages gone.

So much of our meat production processes are unknown to the majority of the people that consume it. You say you wouldnt deliberately hurt a dog but would eat a cow. Those things have nothing to do with each other on a moral scale, you cant compare them side by side. If you were to say I'd punch a cow but not a dog then you are making a moral distiniction between two species of animal. If you say you would eat a cow but not a dog you are also making a moral distinction which is most likely influenced by your culture. See Korea, who breed dogs for meat consumption.

Animal welfare standards (that humans decide) determine how humans should treat animals that are either being used for meat, dairy or an other kind of production (clothes, oils etc), scientific research and those kept as pets or in captivity. The problem is in most first world countries we have legislation which bans cruelty to animals. The term isn't easy to legally define but I think most of us would agree it means to not cause undue mental or phsyical suffering. There is lots of scientific data to show how say stunning a cow before slaughtering it, causes less of both, yet Halal methods of slaughtering require animals to be fully conscious before slaughter. Some halal slaughterhouses will not stun their animals before slaughtering (others do). This would cause a violation with our Animal Welfare Act 2006. But we allow them to continue because "human rights to religious beliefs" trumps the rights we give animals.

Now I personally have a problem with that as I believe animals should not be caused undue suffering for the sake of a religious belief. I think the british government are picking and choosing at their own moral compass rather than making a valid scientifically backed judgement. Others may disagree but that's beside the point.

Organisations like PETA (as much as i personally dislike them) are highlighting valid concerns, especially with the export of live animals from Australia to Indonesia - This practise was outlawed in Austrailia following concerns raised by animal rights groups. Check it out.


Just because you haven't heard of the cruelty that takes place does not mean animal rights (or in this case, welfare standards) should not be fought for. It also doesn't mean animal rights groups are placing animal need above human need (another annoying assumption).

Maybe, just maybe, before exclaiming that your right to eat an animal comes with the rights of being a human, take a second to realise that your right to eat an animal might not have to involve unnecessarily hurting them... And maybe take the time to learn exactly where your daily meat products come from an exactly how they they are produced. In my opinion if you wouldn't do the preparing yourself, you don't deserve to eat the meat. And I can sure as shit bet 95% of you would'nt choose to raise (not hunt) and slaughter your own animals for meat.

 

[AreYouDumb]

Evolution decrees that all people and animals have the same rights based on simple logic.

The logic being that a person has the same rights that their parents did, and conversely, that the person's parents thus have the same rights as they do.

So you grandparents had the same rights as you and your parents. Who had the same rights as your great-grandparents, and so on down the line until we get back into the single-celled organisms. Unless you can point at a specific generation and say "There. That is a person. He has human rights, but his parents were animals and didn't," then it follows that we all have the same rights.

And when you realize that then you realize the question isn't whether animals have rights, but whether people do.

Uh, no. That sounds sensible but it isn't true. Here how you really should think about it. Human rights extend to all members of this species. The way you decide if something is the same species is if you can breed with it and create non-sterile children.

So here's the thing, at some point my ancestors(obviouslly I can't point to a specific generation) would not be able to breed with me and create non-sterile youths. At that point we no longer have humans.

Your argument means that people who are born sterile have no rights.
And while at some point your ancestors may not have been able to breed with you, they were able to breed with a subsequent ancestor who had the same rights as you and who you were able to breed with. At that point, did that ancestors parents not have the same rights as that ancestor?

1st point: Okay, I should of been clearer, I'm talking about when two beings, who are totally capable of breeding with creatures of the same species and creating none sterile (but otherwise totally normal) offspring, breed together and cannot create a non-sterile offspring.
2nd point: Here's the thing, we are humans, if they can't breed with us they aren't humans. It doesn't matter if our ancestors are some kind of theoretical "almost-human" bridge between species, what we are now is what we must measure humanity by.

I think Kwil was making the point that at what point does the animal become the man, I don't think (from my understanding) that the evolution of a new species is as sudden as "Oh look now he is a human". Kwil is more trying to suggest that the line between being a animal and being a human being is blurred (I know we are technically animals but I am referring to animals and humans in the legal and philosophical sense) He is not really focusing on the precise science but more on the issue of how we judge what is human.

 

[Giest4life]

I don't have well formulated views on animal rights, partly because I don't believe in human rights, but that is another story. What really gets me are the people who are fine with eating meat but not being cruel to animals. I spotted a quite a few of them on this thread, too. Don't they, honestly, know how the Western food industry works? The cruel and frightening way they process life into deliverable packages is not in any way better than the simple torture of an animal. The animal does not give two shits if you are going to eat it after torturing it, or if you are going to dump its body in the sewer. These people and their rationalized hypocrisy really pisses me off. Other than that, I think PETA are twats. I really don't know of any other animal rights organizations.

I think this
1ets arent like property that you can abuse.
2: I SUpport testing for medicine but not cosmetice
3: Eat little meat, You dont have to scarf down meat all the time, Veggie burgers can be good too.
4Kinda religious here) God made all creatures and loves them, We have no right to think we are superior to them.

I'm also religious, but I'm here to burst your bubble. God actually said in the bible "Go, kill, and eat" to Peter (I think, one of those guys).

Nice; real classy.

 

[manic_depressive13]

The difference here is that, despite what organisations like PETA say, the vast majority of farms do not mistreat their animals, and in the few cases where they do (suck as battery hens and veal) most of us are rightfully disgusted by it. For example, a pig or a cow living on a farm gets fed regularly and well, they always have a safe place to sleep, most of them get the chance to breed, and the farmers do their best to protect them from predators and diseases, so on average they actually get to live much longer lives than they would in the wild; and when their number eventually does come up, they are killed in a way that keeps their suffering to a minimum. That is a million miles away from 'mistreatment'.

What are you talking about. Live longer than they would in the wild? They wouldn't exist in the wild because they have been bred specifically for consumption. And I'd say getting slaughtered is about as mistreated as you can get. I hate that it's assumed that as long as they're not trapped in absurdly small spaces until adulthood (and many of them are) that suddenly it's excusable.

Look; I'm not going to say it's "immoral", and I'm not going to say that it's "unnacceptable" or "unethical". What I will say is that it, and the way it's justified, disgusts and terrifies me.

It's less that we think animal life has no value (at least in my case - hell, I loved my pet hampster dearly until it died) and more that animal life is secondary.

That's the thing. I don't see the difference between people and animals.

Do I think cows should be treated cruelly? No, not in the slightest.
Would I eat cow? Yes. It's dead, it no longer cares.

People don't care about much when they're dead either. Does that make it okay to kill them? It's not the eating of the dead thing that bothers me. It's just that to eat it you have to make it dead, and I don't like the idea of making things dead. It sickens me.

As for meat being part of the human diet? It actually -is- necissary. Protein is essential for growth and body repair and whilst we now have the -option- to change our diets it doesn't necissarily mean we should. We are omnivores, our bodies are biologically set up for the consumption of meat.

Oh god I'm so tired. I know what protein is. Yes, the fact that we are able to is reason to change our diets, because eating meat is shit stupid and unsustainable. "I like the taste" is literally the only justification in the western world. Admittedly in some places they may have difficulty getting all the protein they need from other sources, but for fuck's sake, don't pretend it's necessary. You're killing them because you want to. Spare me your crap and at least accept responsibility.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Personally I support a lot of animal rights. I am veggie, I work as a horse sports massage therapist (so always around animals), I try not to use products that test on animals, I think animals get a really raw deal in general for testing stuff. It's absolutely disgusting. Use guys on death row instead - they pretty much voided their "human rights" anyway.
Saying that, I do not support PETA or any other narrow-minded, extremist "animal rights" company or group.

I believe animals should have more rights than they do, but we will have to be careful on how to go about it. Animals are my life so of course I am going to be passionate about the subject. Doesn't mean I will do stupid things like hate meat eaters or pour red paint over people wearing leather/fur.

They're a bunch of idiots, in my opinion.

That's a beautifully mature way of wording your opinion!

Spoiler

This sums up my point nicely. They're a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites.

Then again, I think hunting for sport is fine, and that veal is tasty.

 

[AreYouDumb]

Just out of interest why does sentience have value over animal life?

and secondly:

How do we know animals have sentience, and if they do can we still eat them whilst being moral? (if sentience has value)

 

[darthotaku]

torturing animals for fun and profit is cruel and I hate people that do it. aside from that I don't care. Eating animals is perfectly acceptable though, as is sport hunting. as long as it's a clean, humaine kill I'm fine with it.

 

[darksakul]

Bottom line for me is that humans come first. Don't fuck with my food sources or tell me to eat soy just because the animals aren't treated well. We're at the top of the food chain, so we'll do whatever we want.

Now, being abusive to your pet or doing stuff like dog fighting...well, then I support animal rights. There's no reason for that stuff. If you hate animals that much, you can always avoid them.

Agreed.

To me humans come first, animals like 4th or 12th in my priority lists.
I will admit I am no animal lover, I do not own pets and I eat meat.
Now that that is said, senseless abuse towards animals (I think) is wrong.
If you ask me Michale Vick should still be rotting in jail for his underground dog fighting circuit and his NFL career down the toilet. Beating/ abusing the weak, animals, children and so on is a extreme no in my books.

Shit that gets me steamed is roaches have more rights in Hollywood than human actors, the whole PETA organization and there affiliates (some are said to be known terrorist groups) and this idea that Animals' have "rights". Rights towards what? Other than being allowed to be animals and not abused I do not think they are privileged to have rights.

In a society where, we eat animals, we experiment on animals, we make animals do things for competition like Horse and greyhound races. We make them to silly stuff on TV, Pet owners dress there animals it idiotic costumes. And we are encourage by our society to neuter or spay our pets, other words keep them from reintroducing. They have no rights, we didn't give rights to animals for 10 thousand years why are we going to start now? With except for the few animals that are protected due to religion example Hinduism with cattle. What benefit we have for giving animals rights? None, what is it going to cost us, major resources. Other than food and clothing materials (leather, wool) medications are made from animal byproducts, antihistamines is a cow byproduct, snake anti-venom is made by injecting horses with snake venom, flu shots are made with chicken eggs. Also makeup is make from Afterbith.


I think it was a sad day in modern history as far as animal rights mumbo jumbo is concern when Martha Stuward is fined for cooking lobsters on TV because "She was torturing a live animal in boiling water". Duh, you do not cook dead lobsters, because keeping the critters alive is the only way to guarantee freshness also you have to boil or steam crustaceans to cook them, not like we can put them to sleep with anesthetics.

 

[AreYouDumb]

To me humans come first, animals like 4th or 12th in my priority lists.

Now why do you think that?

 

[Raggedstar]

As a veterinary technican (...student) naturally I'm all for animal welfare.

The problem with animal rights I feel is that it's all about extremes. NO ONE is allowed to own a pet or otherwise contain or claim ownersip to an animal, NO ONE is allowed to kill an animal (some I've seen oppose to even self defense), NO ONE is allowed to eat/wear/use anything created from (or at the expense of) an animal. NO ONE, NO TIME, NO WAY can do any of those things and every connection between human and animal. Everything eliminated, not changed.

A lot of people don't know that there HAS been progress to lessen the amount of cruelty in agriculture, medical testing (which includes veterinary schools, since they often use similar rules), or even casual pet ownership. An animal under considerable amount of stress is no good to a farmer or investigator. Meat doesn't taste or feel as good (animals also might not reproduce or eat properly either) and findings will be skewed when it comes to testing. One mouse can be worth hundreds of dollars to an investigator, and even their own protocol has to be judged by an animal care commitee (including explanations of WHY they need to use animals in the first place. Otherwise they will be forced to use other methods). In a by the book facility, these animals are kept MUCH better than what people think (which is often the images from The Plague Dogs from the 70s or in old and sometimes staged PETA videos). Even in medical research, some areas of study have even phased out the use of animals, which is great progress.

Mind you, I'm against bloodsports, canned hunting, improper slaughter and upkeep of livestock, commercial mass animal-producing facilities (not limited to puppymills), improper use and care of medical animals, neglect or torture of ANY animal, etc. I believe there is always room for improvement.

I do have a thought though. If you create a hit video starring your kitten (or a wild animal doing cute things in your yard if you want to eliminate the whole ownership thing), is it considered exploitation if you upload it to Youtube and get partnership for it? If so, then I think we're all morally fucked over.

 

[CitrusLover]

If animals had no rights they would be wiped out in a few hundred years and the human race would be reduced to eating plants and eventually cannibalism.

Animals also produce things that this world needs to survive (oxygen for example) if they had no rights the world would die.

 

[darksakul]

To me humans come first, animals like 4th or 12th in my priority lists.

Now why do you think that?

Why? Well I priorities many things before I prioritize animals like Money, automobiles, my own food, not being annoyed by "pest", my own entertainment and a number of other things.

How many of us swat a bug and killed it for just a minor annoyance?
How many of us pass up a injured deer on the road because we do not want to be late for work?
How many of us are mad when birds poop on your car?
The things we put horses though so we can race them a few times every year, or how we used them for TV just to see a cute puppy, kitty or even a young chimpanzee.

Hell we teach children it is okay to use (pretend) animals for gladiator matches in the sake of our own entertainment in games like pokemon.

Everything in and about human lives are prioritized over animals, and I find nothing wrong with it.

 

[darksakul]

Animals also produce things that this world needs to survive (oxygen for example) if they had no rights the world would die.

No animal produce Oxygen, your confusing animals for plants.
Please read a biology text book or just look it up on Wikipedia for reference.

 

[BaronUberstein]

Animal rights is an absurd concept because having rights means responsibilities. A cow simply can't comprehend human laws and thus doesn't deserve rights.

PROTECTION against cruelty is a good idea though.

I don't know where I stand with veal, I understand it's not the nicest thing, but it's damn delicious. Veal stuffed ravioli w/ fresh mozzarella...mmmm

 

[Jimmybobjr]

Animals are Dumb and Tasty.

Thats my View on animal Rights.

 

[darksakul]

Animal rights is an absurd concept because having rights means responsibilities. A cow simply can't comprehend human laws and thus doesn't deserve rights.

PROTECTION against cruelty is a good idea though.

I don't know where I stand with veal, I understand it's not the nicest thing, but it's damn delicious. Veal stuffed ravioli w/ fresh mozzarella...mmmm

A better way to say it is not animal rights but human responsibilities towards the animals we own and use. We are responsible towards animals used for companionship, food and materials, for medical experimentation and procedures, and our entertainment.

 

[6037084]

I really don't care, you could torture a cute kitten in front of me and I wouldn't give two damns because the kitten wouldn't give a shit about me if I was being tortured, so I see no reason to give a crap about it just because it is cute and fluffy. Also animals tasting good basically guarantees them never going extinct, the buffalo was nearing extinction at one point then humans started eating them now they are nowhere near being extinct.

killing an animal for any other reason, especially sport, is inhumane. We're the only creature on earth that kills other animals just because we can and for no other reason.

This is wrong lots of animals kill just for the joy of killing for example a weasel ( or some other animal like that I can't be bothered to google their proper english names ) got into a chicken coop in my grandfathers farm and it murdered every single chicken in there and only ate like half of one and left, and I bet if you did some research you'd find plenty of cases of animals killing for fun.