Animal Controversy

Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.

In the visual argument that I created I wanted to portray the idea of deforestation and how it affects the animals and the wildlife living in these forests and other habitats.So In my image I included an endangered red squirrel leaving its destroyed habitat while carrying a bindle. This visual argument's purpose is mostly to inform but can also be persuasive so that people may take action in trying to save wildlife.

The statement by Paul McCartney rings true, “If slaughterhouses had glass walls everyone would be a vegetarian.” Animal rights is a concept which people hardly ever consider in a serious light. Being born as a human being, having a superior mental capacity and sense of times makes people think that they can rule this world and use other living beings as they see fit. This mentality leads to people say things like “animals are born to eaten” or how Aristotle claimed “all of the nature exist specifically for the sake of men” and “that animal are merely instruments for humankind.” (Pg. 495). This way of thinking often leads to overconsumption of animals, cruelty to animals and loss of species.

Denotes the Man as the underdog, however, he carries all the attributes idealised of Australian. This

Purpose Formula: To persuade my fellow classmates, who are consumers of animal based products and supporters of zoos and wildlife conservation efforts, that animals deserve the same rights as humans and should not be used for profit.

A quick comparison to Vicki Hearne’s “What’s Wrong with Animal Rights?” to Peter Singer’s “Speciesism and Moral Status”, might indicate Hearne’s argument is stronger due to her strategic and effective use of emotional appeals (i.e. pathos). These appeals allow Hearne to connect quickly and easily with her audience. Hearne is also quite clever in terms of stressing her occupation as an animal trainer. However, after a swift comparison of the two articles, it is evident that Singer’s “Speciesism and Moral Status” offers readers a stronger and more valid argument. Both Singer and Hearne are arguing their position on animal rights and the extent of human involvement. Since Hearne’s article is primarily based on her attempt to persuade her

In 1945, George Orwell publishes the novel and political satire, Animal Farm. Animal Farm had many controversial themes that which made the novel banned in countries such as the Soviet Union. Although these themes stirred up a mass amount of controversy in some countries, Animal Farm became one of George Orwell’s most successful novels. The novel reflects the events in the Soviet Union during the Stalinist era. Throughout the novel, themes such as corruption, a naive working class, and the use of propaganda negatively affect Animal Farm.

Some of Hunt’s most eloquently used rhetorical devices are diction and imagery. Diction is an author’s word choice. Imagery is a rhetorical device used to appeal to the senses of the readers. Diction is seen throughout the article, such as Hunt’s describing the beauty of the colors of nature as Nature’s way “to show the dullest eye how she loves color.” This quote provides a selective choice of words which express how bright and joyful the colors of nature must be if Nature can show how much she loves color without providing any explanation. A masterful piece of imagery in the article is Hunt’s use of “as if Nature herself has been making some

Richard Louv uses imagery as a means of showing the difference of engagement with nature a long time ago vs now. When he is speaking about the past the image of a kid looking out the window of a car soaking up everything they are seeing in their boredom is used and conveys how attached to nature they were. When speaking on the present, the image of kids in the back of a car looking at screens and playing video games while the world passes by them is clear. The kids on their

By eliminating that grey area they can convince more of the audience to their way of thinking. The logic is pretty simple, “If you don’t pick it up, they will”. It directs the text straight toward individuals and by showing the dead bird and the manmade objects eaten by it helps solidify the truth to the word “they”. The evidence is shown in the picture with the objects in the bird and they know that the audience has seen how bad pollution is around them and this helps solidify or convince the reader into the author’s way of thinking. Makes you ask yourself if you would have made better choices in the past how much that would have changed your

Regan, Tom. "Animal Rights, Human Wrongs." Forming a Critical Perspective. Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2010. 336-40. Print.

In “The Case for Animal Rights,” Tom Regan emphasizes his philosophy on animal and human equality. After reading further into his work, he illustrates a societal system that belittles animals and their significance to our own existence. Regan conceptualizes that animals won’t have real rights unless we change our beliefs. We need to acknowledge a problem. After identifying the issue, we must recognize that there is a need for change in society. In addition, he also reiterates the importance of the populace changing the way they view animals. The way society views animals will create a snowball effect that will influence politicians to also believe in animal rights.

Seems rhetorical, but the fact is animals live through this everyday, without even given the choice. As humans, we establish our authority among all living beings, but for what reasons? Are humans better than all other species? Or is it true that we should hold a precedence over nonhuman animals? The ultimate question then remains, should animals have as much or equal to the same rights as humans? Their are endless arguments for and against this question, and many sub arguments that go hand in hand with each side. In this paper, I will discuss the definition of what animal rights entails and expand on the history that developed it’s meaning. Furthermore, I will thoroughly discuss, reason, and explain each opinion presented by our current society as well as the positions held by previous philosophers. Lastly, I will draw a conclusion to the opinions presented by discussing my personal position on the argument of animal rights.

The killing of animals is a topic that can spawn much controversy. Many people believe that because animals are living creatures, they deserve similar rights as people. Vegans even go so far as to stop eating or drinking things that come from animals because they want to defend these rights. While animals live, breathe, and feel like humans, there are many ethical aspects that occur when deciding whether to kill an animal. What may be acceptable in one case may not be in others. Killing of animals can be good, bad, or both depending on the intentions of the killing are.

The study of good and bad, right and wrong, moral principles or value held by a person or society, promoting human welfare, maximizing freedom minimizing pain and suffering is called ethics. The discipline that studies the moral relationship of human beings and also the value and moral status of the environment and its non-human contents is called environmental ethics. It considers the ethical relationship between the humans and the environment. Animal and animal rights are the highlighted topic in the environmental ethics.