7. ANIMALS RIGHTS
Estimated year of creation:
The veneration of animals can be traced to the year 00 BC 70.0 where Ribus t in Africa respected, cared for and worshiped certain animals. See the Python Ritual .
5,000 a. C. Certain animals, such as the cow in India, and cats and dogs in Egypt, receive some protection, as they are considered sacred.
1,500 BC Most of the tribes of America, especially those of North America, worshiped animals almost as gods. In general, it can be affirmed that these tribes respected the life of all living beings as their own, and also granted them a place of high hierarchy within their worldviews.
Formalization in the West in: AD 1635
Within Europe and North America, there were many precursors to the contemporary animal rights movement. The first legislation on animal cruelty was passed in 1635, prohibiting the pulling of wool from live sheep. In 1822, Richard Martin, known as "Humanity Dick", passed Martin's Law designed to prevent cruelty to livestock. Martin became a founding member of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the world's first animal welfare charity, in 1824.
Headquarters / Capital in the world: Europe.
Number of followers around the world: Unknown.
Top Authors: The animal rights movement was not started by one person. Women make up the majority of animal rights activists, and are less likely to support animal exploitation than men, but most of the credit for starting the animal rights movement goes to white men. Richard Ryder is among the best-known figures of contemporary times, having coined the term "speciesism" in 1970 to describe human chauvinism toward other species. In 1975, the philosopher Peter Singer's Animal Liberation was highly influential and praised, or Ruth Harrison, whose 1964 book, "Animal Machines," documented conditions on factory farms.
Main symbols of animal rights:
Brief description of animal rights:
Most people would agree that a dog has more sensitivity than a kitchen table, yet in the eyes of most contemporary legal systems, the two are essentially indistinguishable. While the words "animal rights" can be polarizing, at its core, the movement seeks to gain legal and public respect for the other species with which we share this planet. Not to be confused with welfare, which reinforces the concept that animals should be used for human purposes, the central theme of animal rights boils down to the difference between being a who and a what; a someone and a something. Are animal resources for human benefit? Or are they sentient beings who have emotions, preferences, and self-awareness? The animal rights movement strives to create a more equitable world in which animals are treated with more kindness, understanding and respect, regardless of religion or government.
Do animals have rights?
The question of whether animals have rights or not is complex. On the one hand, in most of the countries of the world there are no laws that protect the rights of animals, or laws that recognize the existence of these rights, therefore, it cannot be said that animals have legally recognized or protected rights. . Yet another way of looking at the existence of animal rights is to suggest that animals have inherent value, which is independent of their value to humans.
In today's world, there is widespread agreement that human beings have inherent value, although this value cannot always be applied equally, which is the result of racism, patriarchy, and other forms of oppression. However, generally speaking, inherent worth is what makes a being worthy of moral consideration. The inherent worth of human beings is calculated according to cognitive and emotional qualities, such as our possession of self-awareness, the ability to make conscious decisions and act in accordance with personal preferences, and the fact that we actively participate in the quality of our lives. own lives. Together, these qualities make us "subjects of a life", which means that we possess an active inner world along with an awareness of the outer. This awareness makes us particularly vulnerable to harm; since we care when they hurt us. Thanks to the qualities of our conscience, human beings possess natural rights that are legally enshrined in many countries, with the underlying understanding that it is wrong to harm someone who is conscious and therefore suffers for the harm caused.
In Western thought, it was long believed that animals weren't conscious enough to realize if they were hurt, that the damage simply wouldn't matter to them. Understandings have changed in recent decades. A wealth of established scientific discoveries and anecdotal evidence indicating that certain species are also the subjects of a lifetime, meaning that they possess the qualities of conscience that human rights protect, show that other species have inherent value, and therefore They also have natural rights. In this "factoring", it is not up to humans to grant rights to animals, but simply to recognize and respect these existing rights, through moral and legal frameworks .
When discussing the legal rights of animals, it is not suggested that a nonhuman animal be granted the same rights as humans, such as the right to education or to vote in elections. Instead, the rights referred to tend to be basic rights, such as: not to be confined, not to suffer bodily injury, the freedom to go about their lives as they wish.
Why are animal rights important?
It is increasingly understood that animals suffer psychological, emotional and physical pain. For example, killer whales can suffer from depression and boredom in aquariums leading to the use of antidepressant drugs. Animals in zoos frequently display stereotyped behaviors, signifying underlying psychological distress and are not seen in wild populations. The more we learn about the myriad ways our behavior, lifestyles, and attitudes negatively impact animals, the greater our moral obligation to them becomes.
In addition to the fact that animals can suffer, the scale of animal exploitation is another reason why animal rights are urgently needed now more than ever. It is estimated that approximately 200 million animals die for human consumption every day, with wealthy nations such as Australia, the United States and Europe leading the way with the highest per capita meat consumption, of which about 20% end up as garbage. The United States is also responsible for the rise of industrial animal agriculture, in which animals are forced to endure lives of harrowing abuse, fed GMOs and genetically modified.
Why animal's rights?
Most of us grew up eating meat, wearing leather, and going to circuses and zoos. Many of us buy our beloved "pets" from pet stores and keep beautiful birds in cages. We wore wool and silk, ate McDonald's hamburgers, and fished. We never consider the impact of these actions on the animals involved. For some reason, you are now wondering: Why should animals have rights?
In his book Animal Liberation, Peter Singer states that the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; requires the same consideration. This is an important distinction when it comes to animal rights. People often ask whether animals should have rights, and the answer is simply "Yes!" Animals certainly deserve to live their lives free from suffering and exploitation. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of the reforming utilitarian school of moral philosophy, asserted that when deciding on the rights of a being, "the question is not 'Can they reason?' Nor 'Can you talk?' But 'Can they suffer?' "In that passage, Bentham points to the capacity for suffering as the vital characteristic that gives a being the right to equal consideration. The capacity to suffer is not just another characteristic like the capacity for language or higher mathematics. All animals have the ability to suffer in the same way and to the same extent as humans. They feel pain, pleasure, fear, frustration, loneliness, and motherly love. Whenever we consider doing something that may interfere with your needs, we are morally obligated to take them into account.
Animal rights advocates believe that animals have inherent value, a value completely separate from their usefulness to humans. We believe that every creature with the will to live has the right to live free from pain and suffering. Animal rights is not just a philosophy, it is a social movement that challenges the traditional view of society that all non-human animals exist solely for human benefit and use, as noted, for example, in the Bible. Or, as PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk put it, “When it comes to pain, love, joy, loneliness and fear, a rat is a pig is a dog is a child. Each one values his life and fights with the knife ”. Watch a video with Ingrid Newkirk from the 2015 National Animal Rights Conference here.
Only prejudice allows us to deny others the rights that we hope to have for ourselves. Whether based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or species, prejudice is morally unacceptable. If you wouldn't eat a dog, why eat a pig? Dogs and pigs have the same ability to feel pain, but it is species-based bias that allows us to think of one animal as a companion and the other as dinner. (Note that this example works for the West, but not for Asia, where dogs are eaten, almost the same as how pigs are eaten).
Historical timeline of the animal rights movement
The main milestones, setbacks and achievements of animal activism, in:
By Doris Lin. Updated March 10, 2021
Fact verified by Betsy Petrick.
Animal Welfare and Animal Rights: Although not the first book written on animal rights, Henry Salt's (1892; rpt. Society for Animal Rights, 1980) is considered in relation to human progress. a remarkable classic worth reading today; his full range of concerns is shown in The Savor of Salt: A Henry Salt Anthology, edited by George Hendrick and Willene Hendrick (Centaur Press, 1989). James Turner, Reckoning with the Beast: Animals, Pain, and Humanity in the Victorian Mind (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1980) discusses the relationship of the Victorian era to the rise of the humanitarian, anti-survival, and conservation movements.
Australian philosopher Peter Singer introduced a serious consideration of the moral claims of animals about humans in his review essay, "Animal Liberation," in The New York Review of Books, April 5, 1973; the response to the article prompted Singer to expand his arguments in Animal Liberation (Avon Books, 1975). See also Jim Mason and Peter Singer, Animal Factories (Crown Publishers, 1980); and In Defense of Animals, edited by Singer (Basil Blackwell, 1985). Singer makes the case for careful organizing and targeting in Ethics into Action: Henry Spira and the Animal Rights Movement (Rowman and Littlefield, 1998).
Prominent animal rights philosopher Tom Regan presents his position in The Case for Animal Rights (Univ. Of California Press, 1983) and The Struggle for Animal Rights (International Society for Animal Rights, 1987). British philosopher Mary Midgley bases her most pragmatic position on animal welfare on compassion in Animals and Why They Matter (Univ. Of Georgia Press, 1984). For a particularly informative book on federal and state law, see Animals and Their Legal Rights: A Survey of American Laws from 1641 to 1990 (4th ed., 1990), from the Animal Welfare Institute, PO Box 3650, Washington, DC 20007 ; 202-337-2332. James M. Jasper and Dorothy Nelkin present a sociological perspective in The Animal Rights Crusade: The Growth of a Moral Protest (The Free Press, 1992). Another historical and analytical view is that of Lawrence Finsen and Susan Finsen, The Animal Rights Movement in America: From Compassion to Respect (Twayne Publishers, 1994). Law professor Gary L. Francione advocates for animal rights over animal welfare in Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement (Temple Univ. Press, 1996). For a conservative critic, see Harold D. Guither, Animal Rights: History and Scope of a Radical Social Movement (Southern Illinois Univ. Press, 1998).