Disclaimer: This is an example of a student written essay.
Click here for sample essays written by our professional writers.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UKEssays.com.

Animals Have The Right To A Life Philosophy Essay

Paper Type: Free Essay Subject: Philosophy
Wordcount: 2462 words Published: 1st Jan 2015

Reference this

It’s fascinating how different people take this issue in diverse ways. As time goes by, it’s getting more contradicting since everyone has their own feelings towards animals. There are those of us who believe that animals are more or less like human beings with feeling and emotions. They too are able to feel physical and emotional pain. It is therefore undisputed that these animals have rights just like human beings do. They have the right to existence and survival, good life, good health and nutrition and a good home too. These rights should not be sacrificed merely because humans believe that the advantageous penalties for humans of such sacrifice are extra imperative than that of the shortcoming for animals. They shouldn’t be deprived of a life that they could have had, but had their rights thrown out of the community concerns. Over the past years, humans have caused excruciating twinge, anguish, and demise upon animals for diverse reasons including that of the savor of their flesh, the appearance and texture of their hair or skin, or for games such as amusement in circuses and zoos or hunting. Animals don’t have to spend their entire existence in a lab being relentlessly used for testing.

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!

Essay Writing Service

In addition, there are substitute routes that organizations could acquire in assessment of their foodstuffs instead of testing on animals. Animals have rights that critically need to be protected. wonder, does anyone out there still suppose that it’s acceptable to test on animals regardless of the actuality that it may be able to do well for humans, but ultimately does such a great deal of harm to animals, moreover knowing that there are special measures that can be employed? We ought to be acquainted with the fact that if animal rights denote anything, there is no ethical validation for any institutionalized animal abuse, or any impairment to animals against their rights for that reason. I still get to wonder if there is anyone in my shoes that still feels like animals are still entitled to rights. There is no doubt to the naked truth that animal mistreatment has abundant payback to people. For instance, zoo animals facilitate education and amusement to thousands of natives, but do we ever ask ourselves how the animals feel when they are locked up in cages with people frequently scrutinizing them and taking images the much it pleases them? Nevertheless, their rights may without doubt be sacrificed since it benefits further for humans, right? Why is it satisfactory for us to test on animals? Why is it that no one gets bothered? Researchers allege that since animals are to a great extent like us, we require them in order to better appreciate and treat our infections, whereas these similar researchers furthermore assert that animals are nothing like us, implicating that we should have more honorable concerns for the exploitation of animals.

Animals have been used in therapeutic research for centuries. The majority of animals used for research are rodents which include rats, mice, hamsters and gerbils. Some may opt to use dogs, cats and an assortment of goats, ferrets, pigeons, monkeys and rabbits. The resistance against this autocracy is fights back as essential as any of the ethical and social issues that have been fought over in modern years. Animal rights are a poignant issue, perhaps even second to the pungent abortion debate. For decades the significance of animal study has been abhorrently overrated. Although researchers have depended on animal test statistics to attain medical advances, there should be supplementary means of research since testing on animals is malicious, brutal, and frequently uncalled for.

However some organizations like The American Medical Association press on to the fact that research linking to animals is extremely fundamental in maintaining and civilizing the health of human beings. They indicate that practically each progress in therapeutic discipline in the 20th century, ranging from antibiotics to organ transplants, has been achieved either straightforwardly or obliquely in the course of the use of animals in laboratory experiments. They furthermore accentuate that animal research holds the key for solutions to AIDS, heart ailments, aging, malignancy, and inborn defects. Finally they maintain that, the outcome of these experiments has been the eradication or control of scores of contagious diseases. This has predestined a longer, improved, healthier life with greatly less anguish and affliction for humans. For various patients, it may imply life itself.

Conversely, there ought to be extra ways of research as the entire procedure of animal research remains vindictive and heartless. Animal rights activists have managed sufficient information that has bunged down numerous laboratories that infringe anti-cruelty principles. Formerly, research labs have had to be consequently poised owing to animal vindictiveness. Reports relating to terrifyingly excruciating experiments on apes and the dirty laboratories the animals are obligated to reside in. Animals are restricted to existing in infinitesimal and tiny metal cages in which they can hardly move about. From the confinement of primates in the undomesticated, to the “factory-like” proliferation of pests and dogs, to the detention and segregation of cages, exploration studies are intrinsically spiteful.

Animal research is habitually pointless, record has exposed that countless essential medicinal progress has been prepared by quantifiable clinical research and close up annotations of human patients, not animals. As a matter of fact, in some countries that don’t use fit animals to tutor veterinarians or educate surgical techniques. A good example is a country like England whereby they exploit solitary ailing or wounded animals and does the majority of their exertion on animal cadavers. Humans can offer well-versed permission or approval as monkeys and dogs can’t. Scores of AIDS patients have claimed that they are enthusiastic to undertake innovative drugs so there is no rationale as to why we should not allow them. Besides, in nearly all cases the drugs will necessitate to be tested on humans prior to the FDA approval of them, and it is a well-known detail that not all drugs work the equivalently on humans as on animals.

The largest part of what we carry out to animals we would by no means do to people. We comprehend that people have definite rights that maintain them from being experimented on by other people. We fail to realize that it is not viable to validate rights for humans, who are apparently a category of animal, and rebuff rights to non-human animals. Animals have a right to existence at the same way as humans comprise a right to life. Human principles ought to inflate to concede and reverence the rights of non-human animals.

In modern society, it remains a debatable issue as to whether animals have rights. It is a frequently asked question in most societies. Are human not animals yet they have rights? Then why should we deny our animals and pets those rights that they so technically disserve? The responses fluctuate all through our society. While some people deem that all animals should have

rights just like humans, others insist that non-human animals bearing rights is a pure waste of time. I purpose to respond to a sequence of questions to do with the subject of animal rights in most societies and optimistically show how extreme the society we live in has drawn closer to and precisely what we are doing individually or as a society to protect human rights.

At the outset, we have to ask ourselves how we treat animals in our society. Humans and

animals have co-existed mutually on the globe for millions of years. Animals have been used by humans for foodstuff, attire, utensils, legal tender, friendship or companionship, spectator sport, leisure and business gain. They have been tamed, sought after (hunted), worshipped, trained and traded. They have been used, abused and maltreated. Humans are animals too, even if a lot of people do not consider themselves as an animal. For that reason, it matters how we relate to animals. On the whole, humans handle other humans differently from the way they treat other animals. The animal rights lobby group calls this speciealism. Reminiscent of racism, discrimination or sexism, speciesism describes the prejudice aligned with one faction by another.

Find Out How UKEssays.com Can Help You!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

View our services

In this case animals undergo intolerance for the reason that they are not human. As to why should animals have rights, we all acknowledge that apprehension for animal rights is rather comparatively new. Up until pretty of late, animals have been approximately taken for granted, but given that they can’t converse for themselves, we, as their masters, care takers or guardians, and protectors, must articulate for them and preserve their rights. It is for the reason that we use animals in different ways like for food, company, to assist us unearth cures for ailments, among others, that we comprise definite responsibilities and obligations toward them. Being the most influential animals on the globe, have a decent commitment to defend and implement their rights. Because they are so intimately similar to us. They are warm blooded animals, with souls like us, and we encompass an intuitive indulgence. We go through delight and distress, affection and abhorrence, starvation, dehydration, dread and reliance mutually. There are some special bodies that protect species in danger of extinction and facilitate sustenance of their rights. There are several organizations that strive to guard the scarce species. Some of which include, The World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Friends of Animals, and The Fur Conservation Institute of North America whose efforts have helped the USA and about eighty other countries institute customs to manage and supervise the trade in and sell overseas of imperiled genus enclosed by the agreement. This has in turn resulted in establishing the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1973 in places like Canada and another convention in 1977 where the term “endangered” has been defined as every species that is in threat of extermination, and as threatened any species that is liable to befall scarcity in the anticipated outlook.

Many countries have organizations to encourage animal rights. For instance, throughout Canada and the United States ,The society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) is the collective name for approximately 600 detached organizations that seek out to guarantee benevolent handling of animals through edification of the public, the preservation of animal shelters including implementation and enforcement of laws linking to animal


The most significant alarm of such associations is animal overpopulation. In order to lessen the quantity of destitute or discarded cats and dogs that are euthanized every year, these organizations advocates animal adoption, neutering, and spaying. On top of its effort with home pets, the institute places thousands of alien animals in zoos and wildlife preservations annually. Again, we seek to know if lab animals have rights or not, and if they do, what are those rights? Aspects of our connection with animals is laboratory sciences is one of the most sensitive and delicate issues when it comes to animal rights. One intense case in their apprehension are some people, called anti-vivisectionists who yearn for an elimination of all experiments on live animals. Conversely, there are those who articulate that it is reasonably fair enough for anyone to do whatever they like to animals. They base their argument on the Bible in the book of Genesis 1:26 whereby God gave man dominion over all creatures. If what is done to these animals may fabricate something enlightening and of educational worth, adds to scientific acquaintance, or can facilitate the improvement of human health, they dispute that it is worth slaughtering animals or subjecting them to excruciating experiments. Vivisection, another current concern specifically refers to surgical procedure carried out on live animals for the main reason of scientific and technical research. The phrase has also appeared to suggest any carrying out of tests on live animals. Scores of millions of animals are used globally annually in this approach. Humanitarian Societies question the necessity of some vivisection and sets restrictions on the use of animals in laboratories. In numerous cases uncomplicated organisms or tissue cultures can be used instead. In the US the Animal Welfare Act of 1970 deals with such issues.

As human beings we must stop to ask ourselves how we think of animals today and how we plan to handle them. We consider animals as items whose function in the category of things is to serve human ends. We discover a complete set of indisputable attitude and extremely specific expressions that hold us from realizing the brutality that non-human animals experience to gratify the ends. A cow that has been skinned, ground up, dismembered and killed or sliced is beef, rawhide (leather), hindquarter, hamburger (snack). A laboratory rat is a research device or replica. A deer or fox on a wildlife sanctuary becomes a reserve justifiable of maintenance. In as much as it is hard, if not impractical, to comprehend non-human animals as creatures like ourselves, experience hurting and anguish and have intricate expressive


Last but not least, the perception that animals contain rights and ought to be specified equivalent and just contemplation elicits an expected response from society as a whole. It brings to the facade individual dread of famine, ailment, deficiency, and distress if it means that animals must no longer be demoralized for food, string, and therapeutic research. Every hazard to entitlements as members of comparatively noticeably consumptive traditions evokes the affirmation of unsurpassed human rights. When we apprehend that situations, organizations, and people aren’t utterly what we considered them to be, it turns out to be worrying and overwhelming. We should be loyal to our fellow animals and not to associations or prominent figures or what we choose to believe. Sometimes this turns out to be more intricate particularly when we consider our human rights to wellbeing, health and contentment? Do we allow humans to die knowing too well that the solution to life lies on an animal? Is there a society nowadays that entails the misuse, torment and butchery of billions of animals annually? Just some food for thought!


Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on UKEssays.com then please: