Animals don't have rights, stupid
Animals cannot, and should not have any rights whatsoever, and that is a good thing to. The whole concept of ‘animal rights’ is a pathetic fallacy perpetrated by groups and individuals who have an overblown sense of kindness towards animals. In fact, animals that exist in society are the property of humans, which is why they do not deserve to have legal status. Imagine if animals did have legal status – all hunters whether in the Amazonian jungle or the Scottish highland could be charged with murder, a road kill would be a ‘hit and run’, or worst, manslaughter, pet ownership would be viewed as an illegal slave-market.Humanities rational reasoning has conceived of what we know today as the concept of rights, for itself – not for any other living entity. The notion of rights is a moral concept that humanity needs in order to live our lives the way we see fit. Indeed, it is humanities right to use animals like any other resource around us – we have the right to eat animals for food, we have the right to kill certain animals for clothing, we have the right to experiment on animals, and yes, we have the right to use animals for our entertainment if need be.
Proponents of rights for animals say they want to put a halt to the sadistic treatment of animals by torturers (aka scientists), but the truth is the aim of animal-rights activists is to sacrifice and subjugate humanity to the level of animals. This is the logical conclusion of the idea of animal rights. You cannot attribute rights to dumb animals that are amoral and nonrational – to do that would turn rights from an important tool that preserves humanity to a tool that would liquidate humanity.
It comes as no surprise that some animal rights activists turn to terrorism to pursue their aims of destroying humanity, from digging up dead bodies to the attempted murders of scientists and lab technicians (including their families). Locking up the lunatic fringe of the animal-rights movement is not enough – what is needed is a new war against the very notion of ‘animal rights’. It needs to be confronted by a principled and intellectual war that will condemn ‘animal rights’ for what it is – logically false and morally, deeply repugnant.
Picture: V. I. Lenin in Gorky. Sept 1922. http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/photo/1922/036.htm
posted by Courtney Hamilton @ 10:54 AM
23 Comments:
read peter SINGER ANIMAL RIGHTS
EVEN IF YO DO NOT AGREE perhaps you can see that whilst you claim animals have no rights, there is a human obligation to live with compassion.
If you read Zymund Bauman Moderneity and the holocaust you can see that the human death factory comes directly from the example of the industrialized slaughter factory.
The way we kill animals today is beyond any normal human need. In fact humans can live and choose to live without killing, simply out of choice.
The matter of choice is distinct from the animal world you describe.
Also many primates, animals subject to scientific research, do have a moral and social life.
Further you ignore the argument of sentinent beings. All animals with a central nervous system avoid pain and can be afraid. In the ancient groups such in the Amazons you describe, I have seen a Nat Geo featire whereby the sharmans pray to teh world of spirits each time they have killed. They do that because they say it is not good to kill and are aware of it at bestr bein a necerssity. Whilst this is just one example of one group, we know that Native American Tribes share such care, and similar ideas exist in Hinuism and Buddhhism. In Islam and Judaism strict laws exist that for the time they were made were quite ellaborate on the relation between human kill and avoidance of suffering and asking God for forgiveness.
The point is if humans do not need to live of animals, or for some only very little, and if we know that killing causes pain and suffering (including the whole process of raising farm animals often cruely) , we have the choice to choose otherwise.
This is at the core of my believes. Animal rights are rights in so far that they constitute a moral opssibility by humans. It does not affect how animals behave in the wild and even that they kill and get killed. It merely relates to us as human beings and how we relate to those creatures weaker and more help-less than us. This should if properly thought through also relate to how we behave to weaker members of the human society.
The animal activists on radical side may not make that link towards humans. Their position is one of animal rescue. They feel that by scientific research, much of which is unnecessary , sentinent animals are being violated and they must stop and prevent that. They feel that because other humans act with cruelty against defenseless creatures, they must act against those humans who do so. The Animal Liberation People like most radicals have lost one essential skill namely to negotiate their position with the community.
A philospher's account I read recently raised another interesting question.
He poses a scenario. A house is burning. There is a person inside and a dog. You can only rescue one. Whom do you go for. The natural instinct is to go for the human. But the philospher argues, what if the person is the worst of your enemies, and the dog your pet, what if the person inside is a mass rapist or otherwise despised by community.
If we could, we would of course want to rescue both. Why? Because we assign some dignity and value to each life and we do not like either to suffer, especially if we have the ability to safe. This is especially important on the dog question. Some argue that it is ludacrist to make a distinction between dog and cow for example. In Korea dogs are eaten and slaughtered just like cows, and in India cows are sacred.
Therefore, the choice of treating the cow like the dog out of choice and as a sense peaceful existence that does not require killing under normal circumstances, or less killing in any regard, on the basis that we know that animals are pain feeling sentiment creatures is an important philosphical principle.
It is acceptable for you not to agree to it if you so wish, but you should not disregard its value entirely.
You say, read Peter Singer, I have - if anything, the phrase he coined, speciesism, is extremely popular now. Apparentely, people like me, who think humans beings are special and unique, are really no better than a racist like Adolf Hitler. According to Singer speciesism is defined as 'a prejudice or attitude of bias toward the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species'.
So, now it's a holy sin to elevate humanity over and above any other species. That to say humans are better than animals is percieved as being backward 'prejudice', is in itself, a backward prejudice. To equate humans with animals you would need have an extremely low opinion of human beings to begin with.
You say 'many primates, animals subject to scientific research, do have a moral and social life.'
Are you trying to say that animals have morals? Is this not new-age political misanthropy? There are no studies to support such claims. On the contrary, studies that do try to find out if fish can feel pain, find out, that well, they don't - or at least, they can't prove it. Whether fish have a morality or not cannot be fully proven.
I will come back to these important questions in due time - one, thing I'd say is, there is a false assumption that it's somehow wrong to put humans first and foremost, over and above animals. Ok, call me a 'speciest', I'd don't mind. What's wrong with supporting the human potential and scientific progress?
Peter Singer is a jerk and if you have read his idiotic book then your a sucker i mean animals dont understand what basic rights are so they cant have rights the whole thing is based mostly on ignorance and its acuialy the hunters and fishermen who pay for wildlife conservation programs not the blabbering idiots like singer and his ilk
If you don't agree with something, instead of putting the people who do agree with it down and calling their views 'stupid', maybe you should try nicely and calmly explaining your point of view.
And why do you want to start a 'war' against animal rights activists? You want to kill people who stand up for what they believe in? I don't know if saying you wanted to start a 'war' against animal rights activists was some weird metaphor. But if you were serious, you have issues FAR beyond thinking that humans have the right to torture innocent animals.
Of course it's not bad to think that human beings are special and unique, I agree. But I also think that all god's other creatures are special and unique, too. All the creatures on this earth are important and serve a special purpose. In fact, the only species the earth would probably be better off without is humans.
Like it or not, humans are members of the animal kingdom, too. We are mammals, and in the same classification as dogs and cats and dolphins and manatees and giraffes and monkeys and millions of others. It's a scientific fact. Just because people are the smartest, doesn't mean they're the best.
And I don't think Daniel has a low opinion of people. I think he has a high opinion of all animals, of LIFE. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with loving the planet, loving all god's creatures? What's wrong with thinking that NOTHING deserves to suffer? What's wrong with seeing the earth's animals (people included) as a whole, instead of people like YOU dividing it into amaaazing people, and stupid animals put here to serve people?
Face it, animal rights is only getting bigger. Especially in young people (elementary school, middle school, and high school). About 80% of the girls and 30% of the boys in my middle school believe animal testing is wrong. Almost ALL the people in my middle school NEVER wear fur. Half of my friends are vegetarians, the other half is trying to be. When the all us kids grow up, the world will be a much different and better place for animals, I'm confidant in that. All you old people won't be around soon, and the future will be in our hands. You won't be around to whine and mope about how people are amazing and everything else sucks. Animal rights is getting bigger and bigger, and theirs nothing you can do to stop it.
Sorry if I have sounded mean. I guess what I am trying to say is, people are members of the animal kingdom, too, so why should we be any different??
Animals dont have rights becuase they dont understand the concept the animals need to be protected from those animal rights freaks becuase last year some animal rights freaks wanted to kill a little polar bear cuband for those PETA idiots to have one memeber wearing a stupid rat costume and carry a stupid sign reading RATS HAVE RIGHTS prove their all stupid
nice, youre stupid article made a young girl cry! have you ever owned a pet or are you just another asshole who thinks he owns the world and his opinion is the only one that matters. Haha, laugh it out when a poor innocent animal is hurt. People are cruel. One family got their dog taken out of their yard, eyes gouged out, and head cut off. The criminal then left the dog's head in a gift box on their porch. Their daughter opened the box because it was their birthday. Was that funny to you! Depending on your article, I wouldn't be surprised if you're the one that had done it. ANimals are like babies, would you think it ok if a baby got abused. If you do you obviously have no emotions and deserve no friends family or belongings. People like you ruin the world.
ANIMALRIGHTSLOVER might i suggest you stop getting your nature and wildlife facts on the DISNEY CHANNEL or from OPEN SEASON or BAMBI
Wonderful Read! Thank you Courtney Hamilton for speaking up! I have been accused of animal abuse and I loved my dog. I did not have the money to take him to a vet and was doing the best I could to take care of him at home. A freind called the police and they came into my home and took my dog and charged me! I had a to choose between feeding my son or paying a vet. I choose my son and now my life has been ruined because of animal laws! The law cared nothing about my truth and I loved my dog. I showed the officer the fur coat I had purchased when i did have money and he slept with me each night. None of it mattered to him. My life has been changed forever and now I feel like I should never own a pet again even though I did the best I could.
wow i toatly agree with you courtney everything you said is true I dont see why people are wasting their time protecting animals. i mean olny domestic animals should be protected and they allready are right. Also i am a hunter and thats right, if i killed an animal wdith laws protecting it then i would be charged with murder. anyways thanks for suporting us who dont belive in animal rights
thank you courtney for sticking up for us hunters and telling those animal rights activist whos who. you are awsome.
i don't think when people say 'animal rights' all of them mean the right to vote, get a license etc. I think they mean the right to live a respected life, a happy life, a life regarded as something more than dirt or a nuisance. We're alone people. There are no aliens as of yet, and there is no other planet we can turn to when this ones full of trash so wake up and stop being self righteous, because I'm sure if animals found an alternative to eating each other they would turn to it. Also, all of those who use God as their excuse to kick a dog or throw rocks at a bird, grow up and stop ignoring the true word of God, such as proverbs 12:10.
The human brain is an evolutionary trait. An evolutionary trait thats no more unique then the size of a whale, or the fact birds can fly. You live in an anthropocentric world, chances are christian world. If a wild animals stomped, should someone go to jail or be fined for animal cruelty? I think so, yes. There is no god, grow up.
Wow, you hunters are special arnt you!? why the heck would you wanna inflict pain on a poor animal. Heres the facts: ANIMALS DO HAVE RIGHTS AND POBALLY ALWAYS WILL! so ha to all the people who think killing an animal is great. Animals shouldnt be considered as 'property' what makes us so great to be able to take away a life for u pleasure?
Animals are a resource nothing more we are apex predators its only natural that we use animals as a resource because that is what they are plain and simple
If humans are nothing but animals, and animals kill other animals to survive, then why can't we? On the opposite end of the spectrum, why don't we condemn animals for killing each other? If they have just as many rights as us, then that means they have just as much social responsibility as us. If they have "morals", then why do they choose to kill each other?
1. Go to wikipedia
2. Type in Animal Altruism, Press enter
3. Click on 'Examples on Animal Altruism'
4. Enjoy reading a list of animals that are better than you.
Cheers!
Thank you for speaking up, Courtney as I too see that the Animal Rights issues have gone way too far. These people are wondering why animal ahelters have so many "unwanted animals". People are NOT going to get any animal if they are fined or if circumstances go beyond ones control that they let it go out onto the streets. More people should SPEAK OUT and go after these self rightyeous fagins that fail to see both sides of this issue as it has gotten uttertly ridiculous. END ANIMAL RIGHTS! The next thing that they will do is to ban the sell of meat, poultry and fish!
Thank you for writing your article accurately describing how outlandish animal 'rights' really is.
Another point is that all liberty comes from property rights. we own ourselves, land, and animals. Property rights are absolute. In their attempt to force unconstitutional laws down our throats the illogical animal 'rights' people want to classify owners as guardians.
Wake up America! You can love your dog but sentiment doesn't belong in law.
The problem is far worse in Romania.There are milions of dogs on the street,that you cant kill,you can go in jail for 3 years if you defend yourself from a attack of agressive dogs .Hundreds of thousand of people have been bitten and some have been killed.Thats becouse animal rights extremists say that human are guilty for every act of cruelty done in history and must be punish by being bitten.Its like saying that all man must be killed becouse 1000 years ago women had a loewr status.Thank you very much dog lovers.
So animals shouldn't have rights, but humans should, because we're more important and are doing better things to the world? I don't think so. We're ending the world as we type.
idiot person stfu! i hope you get beat up and expiremented on. i'd like to see you enjoy that jerk!
animals are just mere toys. start with animals, then escalate to human. spread your hate
Bauman's comparison to slaughterhouses is shallow. Slaughterhouses were not the cause of the Holocaust. It's a mere detail that they used the streamlined industrial processes of the slaughterhouse. It's like blaming Zyklon B (a pesticide) for the Holocaust. No, the cause of the Holocaust were people and their ideas, not some banal industrial process. In the future, let us ignore such superficial, dishonest poser crap intended to confuse others to gain power in debates and ultimately politics. It's sophistry all over again.
The idea of rights is a shaky one altogether. But to speak of animal rights is beyond stupid. This is how much the Western intellect has defiled itself. Without rights, we have no sense of morality these days. And I suppose it is for this reason that animal rights activism exist at all. Sadism is not the same as human slaughter. I propose we increase our hunting practices to spite those spoiled, middle class white kids known as animal rights activists. We should sell fresh blood sausage on every corner, and gallons of animal blood for cooking. Slaughterhouses should be installed in every town so that the meat is fresh (bleh on that refrigerated meat from Kansas).
Post a Comment
<< Home