Do animals have Rights?!
People exploit them.
Many humans want animal products and don't care what gets harmed, as long as they get what they want.
Animal testing is another issue.
What do you think?
with love,
scottie x
Answers: I don't think so. But they should do.
People exploit them.
Many humans want animal products and don't care what gets harmed, as long as they get what they want.
Animal testing is another issue.
What do you think?
with love,
scottie x
I don't eat meat (including chicken, turkey, etc.) out of choice, as I do Not approve of killing defenseless animals.
I do not buy any products, including cosmetics, that have done any sort of animal testing. And I do spread the word when I find out about the testing. Many prominent cosmetic companies, such as E.L., A...mis, Cli ... nik, and many of the sister companies practice animal testing. Please Do Not Support Them!!
".."
It depends...
But it seems as though within our societies animals have no rights accept to supply humans with food and entertainment/amusement. It is an ineveitable fate and it has become an accepted part of our society despite many controversies and dispute.
We humans have taunted animals and enslaved them simply because of their minimal resistance. We have developed a poor relationship with them, where we appear to be the superior prevalent speices due to our more increased abilities of intelligence and communication.
i agree. they should have some rights. obviously not the same exact rights as humans, like not the right to vote and stuff, but the right not to be tortured and things like that. Because really, animals in testing, circuses, slaughterhouses, fur farms, it's worse than just killing, it's torture.
Specific examples: for animal testing, they at least have the right to not be alive while they are being tested or dissected. yeah believe it or not, it goes on... *shudder*
principally as animals are mammals living full of life thus they do have a right to live ....kindness to animals is a form of mankind or humanity....do not consider them items for eating ,killing them and making fancy items,use for research purpose ...these are all abuses wherein nobody considers that it is a life....if one gets hurts ..he immediately takes some kind of treatment to avoid loss of blood,suffering and preserving ones life...thus animals though silent cant converse with human being but still dogs,cats,and other pets do reciprocate when given love.....even tigers/lions also reciprocate....you must have seen the film where cubs of lions are reared by mankind and then they are left in the natural habitat....they in end also reciprocate is shown.....if not seen must see...forgot the name of the film....hope the issue is more clearer to you.....
some do.. some don't..
Until they have the right to vote, no.
No they don't, not in the sense that humans have rights. . Animals are legally property either by a private person /institution or by the state. That's why the state issues licenses and tags for hunting and you cannot simply take or hunt a private person's or organizations animals. Once you purchase an animal it becomes your property.
However,the community and the state decides how these "properties" are to be treated. Unwarranted cruelty or mistreatment is not allowed. While enforcement of such laws are probably haphazard at best (the public outrage over abuse of pets and common domesticated animals such as dogs and cats are exceptions that prove the rule) especially in the case of animal farming, they are nevertheless in place.
The problem with extending human like rights to animals is where do you draw the line?
They have only the rights that lawmakers specifically give them.
Quote: Flexitarian Vegan-"Until they have the right to vote, no"
so does that mean when women didnt have the right to vote, it would be perfectly fine to abuse them and kill them for food?
i think that every living creature should have rights, but at this point, animals do not
Here's what I think. I think that the worst of all exploitations of animals are those who sterilize their pets in name of population control.
These are people that justify forcefull mutilation of an animal because they can reason it to something they wish for. Mutilation.... sick people. I not only find it abusive to animal and the worst form of cruelty to animals but I also find that there are those who stand before others and preach about dog fighting and other sorts of problems with treatment of animals while all the while carrying their pet down to the vet to pay to have someone mutilate it.
Anyone who wishes to ask that lame question of, "what do you want us to do, have animals everywhere," don't even ask because you can't justify the sickness with me.