Do Animals have Rights? If so are they equal for all biological entities or is the right of an animal based upon an arbitrary scale of intelligence or sentience?

Is it not illogical to declare animals have rights when there is no way of stopping predators from infringing on the rights of prey etc?

How far do Animal rights extend in comparison to Human rights, Is there ever a point where the life of an animal can be said to be of equal importance to a Human one, For example About 20 million animals are experimented on and killed annually, three-fourths for medical purposes and the rest to test various products. But thanks to animal testing Open heart surgeries, coronary bypass surgery, Insulin for diabetes, life saving antibiotics, etc were created saving countless human lives in the long run.

Overall is the pain and suffering that these animals went through justifiable because they are of lesser value than us and therefore more expendable?

Discuss.

I don't really think animals have "rights" in the strictest sense. I don't feel they should be unnecessarily tortured or abused. But the lengths activists go to to protect certain 'rights' are insane, especially since they often seem to care less about infringing on human right's.

I dunno. But I know I'm mad that Michael Vick fucked up all that money over a damn dog.

So what is your opinion of PETA?

I believe that they have rights, they should be treated humanely.

I don't agree with animal testing for trivial things, but I do think testing for medical stuff that is life saving for humans is justified, however I still believe the animals need to be treated as humanely as possible.

They should be treated with compassion and made as comfortable as possible.

thepossiblepolice wrote:

I believe that they have rights, they should be treated humanely.

I don't agree with animal testing for trivial things, but I do think testing for medical stuff that is life saving for humans is justified, however I still believe the animals need to be treated as humanely as possible.

They should be treated with compassion and made as comfortable as possible.

Chris wrote:

So what is your opinion of PETA?

PETA = Whackos!

I agree that animal testing for things like beauty products should not be allowed, but for medical purposes, I feel better about it.

Animals have rights, but I don't agree with people who are against kill shelters. The sad fact is that there are too many animals due to careless owners, and the cost is huge to keep them all alive to be adopted out. The life they lead in a cage waiting for adoption is not a good life. I think it is much more humane to put them down. And as long as people know they can discard pets in a no kill shelter, there will still be too many folks who think they can just get a puppy or kitty and surrender it guilt free when the cute puppy/kitty stage is over and they don't want to expel the energy to train it properly.

Chris wrote:

So what is your opinion of PETA?

Quote :

PETA Senior Vice President MaryBeth Sweetland on her use of insulin, which was tested on animals:


"I'm an insulin-dependent diabetic. Twice a day I take synthetically manufactured insulin that still contains some animal products -- and I have no qualms about it ... I'm not going to take the chance of killing myself by not taking insulin. I don't see myself as a hypocrite. I need my life to fight for the rights of animals."
--Glamour, January 1990

PETA President Ingrid Newkirk -- in a Machiavellian moment -- explains how killing more than a thousand animals PETA accepted for shelter in 1999 is "ethical," because it frees up more money to mount offensive "press slut" campaigns:


"It is a totally rotten business, but sometimes the only kind option for some animals is to put them to sleep forever... It sounds lovely if you're naïve. We could become a no-kill shelter immediately. It means we wouldn't do as much work."
--The Virginian-Pilot, August 1, 2000

Chris wrote:

So what is your opinion of PETA?

PETA cracks me up when they go after celebrities for wearing fur.

I don't agree with PETA at all. I've heard too many crazy things about them. I mean, I am all for a good cause, but they remind me of eco-terrorists.

thepossiblepolice wrote:

I believe that they have rights, they should be treated humanely.

I don't agree with animal testing for trivial things, but I do think testing for medical stuff that is life saving for humans is justified, however I still believe the animals need to be treated as humanely as possible.

They should be treated with compassion and made as comfortable as possible.

I agree! There is some good news though, more and more testing is being done using microbes rather than higher form animals. Sure, microbes are animals too but I don't feel bad if millions die!

RedBedroom wrote:

I agree that animal testing for things like beauty products should not be allowed, but for medical purposes, I feel better about it.

Animals have rights, but I don't agree with people who are against kill shelters. The sad fact is that there are too many animals due to careless owners, and the cost is huge to keep them all alive to be adopted out. The life they lead in a cage waiting for adoption is not a good life. I think it is much more humane to put them down. And as long as people know they can discard pets in a no kill shelter, there will still be too many folks who think they can just get a puppy or kitty and surrender it guilt free when the cute puppy/kitty stage is over and they don't want to expel the energy to train it properly.

I totally agree Red. Kill shelters are sad and grim, but what can you do? Just let unclaimed and unwanted roam the streets until they are hit by cars? I don't know how long they keep these animals alive after they are picked up, and hope that they are given a fighting chance to be claimed or adopted, but after a while something has to be done.

thepossiblepolice wrote:

I believe that they have rights, they should be treated humanely.

I don't agree with animal testing for trivial things, but I do think testing for medical stuff that is life saving for humans is justified, however I still believe the animals need to be treated as humanely as possible.

They should be treated with compassion and made as comfortable as possible.

I don't agree with PETA! They pick and choose their animals and always go for the cute furry little animals in their campaigns. When was the last time you saw the Panamanian golden frog as the star of one of their campaigns? No - it's the cute little harp seal pup or some other furry critter. Their campaigns are extremely manipulative and contain only a fraction of the truth. The cute little white coated babies they use in their campaigns are NOT the ones that hunters go for. They're not allowed to go for seals that young, at least in Canada. Once they loose the white coat, I think they're fair game, though.

I think PETA members are a bunch of nuts. However I do believe animals have the right to be fed, treated with kindness , and pets should have the right to medical care the same as people. Wild animals unfortunately have to go it alone. Right now our deer and Moose are having a very rough time of it, its been very cold , and a huge amount of cold so food is very hard to get. We have deer pass through here often, and I wish we could afford a big bale of hay, the problem is once you start feeding them it would be criminal to stop and they would invite all their friends to the feast. This was taken last summer here in our Senior park.

Despite my liberal status, even I have consider PETA kooks.

Chris wrote:

If so are they equal for all biological entities or is the right of an animal based upon an arbitrary scale of intelligence or sentience?

say wat? come again?