Animals Rights Essay Example for Free

Animals Rights Essay Animal rights are benefits that humans give to animals, including the right of protection from user and abuse by people. Do you agree or disagree? For decades, the question â€Å"Do animals have rights?† has been examined from many different angles. People contend that animals do or do not have rights based on several factors, including whether animals can learn, can use language, are conscious, are able to suffer, and are ethical beings. Whether and which animals have rights depends on which characteristics are considered. For many years, there has been a major debate regarding animal rights. So, what are animal rights? Animal rights is the idea that animals have the same rights as humans, to live free of suffering, are just as important as living individuals, and have the same moral status as humans. Also, as Doris defined animal rights â€Å"The right of animals is to be free of oppression, confinement, use and abuse by humans† (721-725). There are people think that animals need rights to be protected. They think that animals should be treated as humans. Moreover, they believe that animals should be protected from people. On the other hand, there are some other people who think that animals should not be treated as humans. These people believe that they need to use animals to live. In addition, they use them for every aspect of life. Now everyone wonders which group is correct. In my point of view, animals are not even close to being in the same league as humans. True, animals can feel pain and emotion, but that does not give them the rights to freedom that humans have. As Carroll said, â€Å"Scientists claim that the cardinal difference between animals and humans is that humans have a capacity for moral judgments and thought. We are ethical sentient beings whereas animals are only sentient beings.† Humans can consider aspects in making decisions that animals cannot. For example, in deciding whether to shoot a bear that is pregnant or has young cubs in tow, a hunter can consider ethical reasons not to kill it, such as the bear’s responsibility to its cubs. Animals, on the other hand, have no concern to the lives, responsibilities, or feelings of other living things, as is the case when a bear attacks and kills a person whose family is nearby. When was the last time someone wanted to eat or kill his or her children? For humans, that is something unbelievable. On the other hand, animals eat and kill their own children. Mother dogs will kill or push out their young ones if they are sick or cannot keep up with the rest of the bunch. It also happens with fish, birds, cats, rodents, and many other animals. If we were to give animals the same rights as humans we would have to kill or punish the animals if they were to do such acts. It is obvious that animals cannot be responsible as humans so they should not have equal rights as human. Humans need animals to feed themselves. There is huge number of people who are vegetarian but it cannot be compared with the number of people who are not. Some people like vegetarians and philosophers, believe that people should not eat animals because animals have the right to life. In fact, if animals have the right to life then why do animals kill each other for no reasons? Many of us have seen a house cat killing rabbits or rats just to kill them. They would not eat them, just kill them and walk around with the dead animal in their mouth. If you watch some Discovery Channel shows on young animals, especially meat eating animals, the same thing applies. In addition, some animals eat plants as humans do, so do plants have rights too? Plants are live creatures just like humans and animals, so should we prevent animals from eating plants? Of course not because this is the nature of the life of all creatures; humans eat animals and animals eat plants and life continues with this conce pt. Humans have been evolving and will continue to evolve through time. To learn we must experiment and use trial and error. This involves the animal testing issue. This is where it starts getting hard to define the rights of animals. It is true that there are some unnecessary experiments, but the most are important. For example, there are a huge number of women who suffer from breast cancer; through testing on animals, humans are provided two medicines that have saved the lives of women with breast cancer. Another example of diseases which was fixed by testing animals is lung cancer. Lung cancer has been killing more people than breast, colon and pancreatic cancers. Through relying on mouse models of lung cancer and focusing on understanding, preventing, and detecting lung cancer, scientists are developing new therapies for treating this disease. These examples prove that testing animals has significant positive impact on human lives. It prevents human from death by different disease; therefore, when human use animals to find a way to prevent themselves from death there is nothing wrong about it. For instance, when you driving down a road and a small animal crossed it, would you run over it for your own safety or you will out yourself in a dangerous situation to just save that animal. Most people will choose their own safety rather than the animal’s life. This applys on testing animals to save humans lives. In conclusion, it is true that humans should respect animals, but that does not mean that animals have the same rights as humans. When humans kill animals to feed themselves, they should kill them as painlessly as possible so that animals do not suffer as Michael mentioned â€Å"animals do not suffer and that their deaths are swift and painless† (374). Also, although it is correct thought that some animals are treated poorly, animal testing is for the better overall as it saves humans lives. Animals should not be given the rights that humans have because humans can think, judge, and behave, but animals cannot. Work Cited Lin, Doris. â€Å"Protecting Animals Moral Status and Moral Rights.† Animal Rights 9:6 (2008): 721-725. Print. Carroll, Jamuna. â€Å"Gale Cengage.† Do Animals Have Rights? (2004): 209-217. Print. Polloan, Michael. The Norton Reader. London, NY: W.W. Norton Company Inc, 2012. Print.

king :: essays research papers

Patriotism   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Patriotism. The very sound of the word brings to my heart feelings of loyalty and pride. I feel loyalty for my country and my country's ideals, and I feel pride for those before me who fought and sacrificed much for the freedom of my beloved country. I love and honor my country. I feel a sense of duty to this country that has been my home since my birth. As I turn the pages of our country's history, I am inspired by those who have spoken out and fought against those who have threatened our country's security and ideals. Our forefathers had dreams of a nation with liberty and justice for all. They gave all they had, every single ounce of strength, to make that dream a reality. They waged war against one of the most powerful empires of the time so that they could remain true to their ideals. Martin Luther King Jr. was willing to lead a movement against segregation in our nation. He had the courage to tell our nation that its policy of segregation was wrong. To me, that is true patriotism: not only being willing to fight for our country but willing to try to change it so that our ideals are preserved. I implore upon you, the youth of America, to fight to keep the flame of patriotism alive. We are the authors of our country's future. We must dig dip inside ourselves and find the courage and determination to dream of a greater and nobler country. We, as the future of this country, must dedicate ourselves to this cause and stay true to the ideals of those before us. Patriotism is defined as a love for or a devotion to one’s country. With the events that happened in America on

Research Ethics Stanford Prison Experiment Summary Essay

The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) was conducted in 1971 at Stanford University in the basement of the psychology building. Philip Zimbardo as lead researcher headed the research team to study the impact of situational variables on human behaviour. Zimbardo and his team advertised for volunteers to a social experiment offering $15 in payment per day. Wanting to examine the â€Å"dark side† of human nature, applicants were required to have no criminal record, no psychological issues and no major medical conditions. Each of the 70 applicants were psychologically tested and the 24 most â€Å"normal† were selected to take part in the SPE. The 24 selected participants were then divided into two groups randomly, with one half being prisoners and the other half being guards. The guards were taken to the mock prison before the prisoners arrived to help in the final stages of the prison’s construction and to help select their military style uniforms, this was to give the guards a sense of ownership over the prison environment. Alternatively the prisoners were surprised with real police and authentic processing before being incarcerated into the prison. Despite it being an artificially created environment the guards and prisoners quickly altered their behaviour in response to the situational variables of the experiment. Prisoners were dehumanized and their individuality stripped away, while the guards became increasingly more sadistic and degrading towards the prisoners. After the guards crushed an early attempted rebellion by the prisoners, one prisoner was released for acting irrationally to a point that seemed pathological. After this some of the prisoners became super-conformist, following rules to the letter. While other prisoners began to act crazy in an effort to passively escape like the first released prisoner. The guards fell into three categories with some acting sadistically and degrading towards the prisoners, others going completely by the book and some guards acting kindly and doing small favours for the prisoners. None of guards ever intervened or questioned the actions of other guards however no matter what kind of guard they were. The experiment was terminated early after just six days when an outsider, a recent PhD graduate came in from the outside and saw how out of control the experiment had become. Ethical issues that arose during the SPE were the harm done to the participants. Guards were allowed to inflict real pain and humiliation on the prisoners over an extended period of time. The experiment was allowed to continue for longer than it should have because the participants and observers fell too deeply into their roles. There was also little or no regard for the participants’ confidentiality during the SPE.

William Shakespeare s Romeo And Juliet - 1638 Words

William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet tells the tragic story of two â€Å"star-crossed lovers† whose deaths bring about peace between their families in the denouement of the play. To a great extent Romeo and Juliet portrays to the audience the need to control their emotions through the tragic events. However, not only the characters excessive emotions compromise their intentions, but it is the manner in which they respond to their emotions. Shakespeare conveys how the characters respond to their motions through the use of different characters and their misadventures which are ultimately driven by a strong emotional stance. The tragic events that take place ultimately occur due to the characters not being able to control their emotions, through†¦show more content†¦Shakespeare portrays how the tragic events rise because of the characters ill-consideration of the causes of their actions when their emotions take control over their reason. Shakespeare first explor es one’s actions leading to a tragedy when Romeo slays Tybalt. Shakespeare uses the contrast of natural and violent motions when Romeo slays Tybalt to show how he cannot control his emotions when he is violent, but shows how his emotions are expressed through the natural motion of the people around him in Verona, hatred drowns the values of love and peace in Verona. This is expressed through Shakespeare’s use of Mercutio as a symbol of the tragedy that can arise from hatred â€Å"a plague on both your houses† and signifies the disease and death imagery that is present every day in Verona. The cause of this loss is primarily the lack of one’s ability to control their emotions, thus their inability results in them lashing out in violence. Shakespeare’s use of Juliet when she takes the potion is significant as her ‘death’ is a tragedy to the people of Verona, this signifies people of Verona are caught up in a daydream of fantasy, and whe n they realize that they have lost something so important, they find it impossible to control their emotions. This is revealed through the mourning of all the Capulets and Paris but most significantly Lord Capulet, â€Å"O child! O child! My