Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A common misconception about animal rights is that its proponents want to grant nonhuman animals the same legal rights as humans, such as the right to vote. This is false. Rather, the idea is that animals should have rights that accord with their interests (for example, cats have no interest in voting, and so should not have the right to vote ...
In 2009, Bolivia became the first country to banish animal abuse and harm in circuses. [2] The United States of America is the only country in the world that has banned killing horses for consumption, [citation needed] and India have banned killing cows for consumption in some of its states. [citation needed]
Even the leading advocates of animal rights seem to have shrunk from basing their claim on the only argument which can ultimately be held to be a really sufficient one—the assertion that animals, as well as men, though, of course, to a far less extent than men, are possessed of a distinctive individuality, and, therefore, are in justice ...
Main Menu. News. News
Do Animals Have Rights? is a 2005 non-fiction book on animal rights by British philosopher Alison Hills from the University of Bristol.The book explores the ethics of factory farming, animal experimentation and other issues involving animals from a philosophical analysis.
Gary Francione questions the concept of granting personhood on the basis of whether the animal is human-like (as some have argued) and believes sentience should be the sole criteria used to determine if an animal should enjoy basic rights. He asserts that several other animals, including mice and rats, should also be granted such rights. [26]
Animal ethics is a branch of ethics which examines human-animal relationships, the moral consideration of animals and how nonhuman animals ought to be treated. The subject matter includes animal rights, animal welfare, animal law, speciesism, animal cognition, wildlife conservation, wild animal suffering, [1] the moral status of nonhuman animals, the concept of nonhuman personhood, human ...
He argued that non-human animals can reason, sense, and feel just as human beings do. [9] Theophrastus did not prevail, and it was Aristotle's position—that human and non-human animals exist in different moral realms because one is rational and the other not—that persisted largely unchallenged in the West for nearly two thousand years.