Animal Rights

I know in the past it has been debated around here. I basically want to understand why animal rights are a bad idea (atleast that is what I have garnered from being on chaz). And if they are a bad idea, what exactly do you think should be promoted?

I am not really looking for pages of reading and quotes from random people... I am actually really hoping someone can dumb it down for me a little :lol-sign: A summary would be nice

Thanks!

Well, Animal Rights, in the beginning, sounds good. People want animals to have the Right to be taken care of properly, to be loved, and to have happy lives. But, when you really stop to think about it, it gets sticky. Do they also have the Right not to be eaten? The Right to keep all their body parts (in reference to spay/neuter, docking/cropping, etc.)? The Right not to be "used" for fur, eggs, work, etc.?

You see, animals can't have rights, or our lives with them as we know it, would end. Those who believe in Animal Rights believe that animals have the Right to live their lives without being "exploited" by humans, and, along with using them for food and clothing and such, pet ownership falls under the definition of "exploitation". Animals get Rights, pet ownership is out the window.

We have animal cruelty laws on the books, many states have toughened them up, along with their dangerous dog legislation (without turning into BSL), if these laws would only be enforced, and people held accountable for their illegal behaviors, many problems due to animal abuse/neglect/irresponsible ownership could be solved, no Animal Rights required.

Animal rights is about giving animals 'rights' according to extreemists.

Ie no breeding, no dog sports, no horse shows as you are exploiting animals. There would be ways to determine that according to those who made the law that you aren't simply being an 'animal guardian' and would take your animal away.

No eating animals, as that would infringe upon their right to live... you get the picture.

Animal welfare is basically making sure people feed, house, and don't abuse animals.

I think the phrase "animal rights" sounds good if you take away all the connotations it has. I believe animals should have rights. The right to be free from abuse, to have proper shelter, to be happy, etc.
But animal rights is basically what extremists like PETA fight for. They think dogs should have "rights" not to be owned by people because it's cruel and humiliating. In their view, horses should have rights not to be ridden or corralled and dogs, cats, etc. are being exploited by being pets.
PETA's president, Ingrid Newkirk, has said that their goal is for the elimination of domestic animals.

Because of that, I don't believe in animal rights. I strongly believe in animal welfare, which regulates the treatment of animala in regards to being treated kindly, being fed, having shelter, etc.

I don't think its as black and white as animal rights=bad, animal welfare = good.

Take each person/situation as it comes. I'm very interested in animal ethics and there is usually no right or wrong answer, extremists will be extremist no matter what they label themselves. And what defines extremist anyway? Someone extremely passionate? or someone that will endanger others to get their message across? or someone that has compeltly lost their way and is now doing more harm than good?

Honeslty, it all comes down to ethics, and nothing is cut and dry in ethics, every one question you think you have developed an answer for or an opinion on will create ten more questions that need solving.

Beautifully said, and I agree with this.

no its about giving animals 'rights' which puts them on the level of other humans. Animal welfare is about making sure animals don't suffer and are looked after properly.

Personally I don't want Dekka given rights lol!

I was going to write a big long thing, but I'll just ask this instead:

Those who propose any sort of animal rights, which specific rights do you propose and which animals are entitled to them?

Maggie, I'm interested in hearing your POV on this. I'm not picking on you, I promise. I'm genuinely curious.

The really dumbed-down version is that animal rights advocates want all domesticated animals six feet under to avoid evil animal welfare advocates from exploiting them by making sure they live healthy, well-cared for lives.

I think I deserve a cookie for getting that down in one sentence.

I'd love anyone's opinion, including yours

You said:
Which animals? would be my remaining question.

Whisper
since you think animals have a right to be happy....
do you kill all the wolves so the deer & elk can be happy OR do you let the wolves eat themselves into starvation so they can be happy?
do you let pit bulldogs fight so they can be happy?
do you just let the dogs run loose so they can be happy?

free from abuse....

is it abuse to strike dog w/ a stick?
what if it's padded?
what if it is part of training the dog to protect people or catch criminals?
is it abuse to train a dog to do a job that could (and probably will) get it killed?

now think of the tens of thousands of different issues to be debated w/ any ONE animal. it's slippery slope that ultimately leads to a world of feral uncontrolled domestic animals or the extinction of all domestic animals. which option do you prefer?

That about sums up what I think and believe as well.

Welfare=living a life without suffering, and all the base necessities (food, shelter, medical care when needed) provided FOR that life.

Rights= putting them in (at the very minimum) the same category as we do our human children. On the surface, that doesn't sound so bad does it? But I believe if you left your CHILD in a 'cage' all day (or even tethered in the backyard) while you went to school or work you'd be in some trouble and probably have that child taken away from you, LOL That is most definitely the direction "Animal Rights" would take........and eventually end up with something like 'owning pets = slavery' and then be outlawed completely. Given they had their way of course.

Honestly, if you talk to the 'average joe' on the street, they are under the impression that 'animal rights' means NO ABUSE towards animals. I have a very good friend who owns 5 kitties, she feeds and leaves water out for every bit of wildlife on her 9 acres you can imagine, squirrels, chipmunks, quail .........even has salt licks out for the deer. She donates to several different animal charities every year as well (has the mugs and calendars to prove it, LOL) but we had this discussion not long ago because she *thought* she was all about/for ANIMAL RIGHTS.........but what she was actually for was ANIMAL WELFARE. Some talking and googling got her to understand the difference She is now converted

Hard questions!

I'm talking about domestic animals.

First of all, I'm not in favor of PETA, ALF, etc. AT ALL.

I should have said I would hope that animals are happy, but I don't think it should be a law.
I guess what I was trying to say is that the phrase "animal rights" sounds (deceivingly) nice. Can't we all agree a cat has the "right" not to be lit on fire?

No one really agrees when it comes to what is abuse. That's a whole other can of worms including training methods, ways of containing dogs (chains, crates,) etc.
I wasn't really thinking of those kinds of things. I was thinking of dogs getting beaten, starved, left to die from lack of medical attention. . .

I'm thinking, but I don't think there should be any new laws regarding animals, rather that animal welfare laws are better enforced. In some areas if you are abusing your dog (breaking the law as in neglecting a dog badly) they are not very good at enforcing it at all.

I'm sorry I'm not communicating well, I'm having trouble with the words today.

This is what I was referring to when saying animals should have a life free from abuse. I meant that their basic needs should be met. Lack of shelter, food, water, etc = abuse. I did NOT mean I support the principle of animal rights.

I'm for humane animal treatment. This means the animal has its needs met for food, water, companionship, shelter, space, and temperature. I believe when we must do things to an animal whether it be slaughter, transport, or basic handling it is done with speed and the animal's comfort in mind.

I believe in humane training and work. No domestic animal should be asked to bear more than it can but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be asked to bear something. I believe that an animal should be asked to perform a task and not compelled into that task unless that is the ONLY way the task can be learned.

I believe that some animals cannot be confined humanely in captivity by the nature of their being and to do such a thing would bring irreparable harm to that creature. Whales, dolphins, elephants, large sharks, and primates are prime examples of this.

I believe that every life deserves to live to the utmost of the moments its given. It doesn't mean I don't eat a steak, it does mean I want that cow to not live it's life in a feeding box, just as I want chickens I eat to not live in a crowded battery cage.

This doesn't mean leather and furs are bad. It doesn't mean we should all be vegan. It doesn't mean that we should free all the wee beasties. It does mean that perhaps we can and should do some things better to allow these animals to live their lives as pain free and naturally as possible.

but one person's abuse is another person's training tool
e-collar
hotshot
knotted rope

it's old fashioned but it's still a good way to teach pack dogs not to fight and that is laying into the whole crew w/ a knotted rope. after a bit the whole pack will shy away from a fight picking dog BEFORE a fight actually breaks out. so while it's "abusive" in the short run, it help keep dogs healthy & alive in the long run.
same w/ hotshots used for the same reason.
or e-collars used to break dogs off livestock or protected game in some states.
YET there are people that would ban these things or charge people if they witnessed them being used.

:hail::hail:

This, exactly.

I always said, when my pets can go out and earn their own living, then they can have rights.