How is it that we think it is morally and ethically correct to cause pain and suffering to those animals? This paper will show you both the positive and negative aspects of animal research and how in the end it benefits humans. It will also show you how there are many people who think that there are other ways to research the new medicines and products for humans. How is the scientific research done on animals accomplished and how can they be improved, this paper should answer that question and hopefully open the eyes to those who do not have any moral misgivings about animal research. Another issue that pertains to animal testing is how the animals are treated while in the care of the research facilities and lastly, what is done with those animals when the testing is complete.
Should they be allowed to do that because they are human? Many organizations, such as PETA, will help protect animal rights. Others can be strictly against them. Lawmakers have even tried to discuss animal rights and are trying to pass certain laws, but where do we draw the line in deciding animal rights? Do we even have a right to decide their rights?
When using someone from our own kind, we see it as cruel. But when using someone from another species, it is perfectly fine. “All the arguments to prove man's superiority cannot shatter this hard fact: in suffering the animals are our equals.” The significance of this novel is to open the eyes of the reader to the harsh realities of what is happening to animals in today’s society. Scientists perform harsh experiments that are often unnecessary and result in more experimentation. The United States government censors the cruelty from everyone in society, but they target
Weather the animal’s purpose is companionship or work, it still deserves to be treated in the most humane way possible. As an animal’s owner, a person has more say in the treatment to an animal and he/she is given the opportunity to make a decision of what happens to the animal when given various options to choose from. The freedom to the people is a nice idea but it comes along with more ethical disputes. The veterinarian informs the owner of which decision would best in the situation at hand, but the owner does not necessarily have to choose that option. The owner may choose an option that is inconsiderate to the pet’s life, especially if the owner is emotionally distraught or
From difference perspective animals are the most suitable research subject. For utilitarianism, everybody get counted equally in the calculation of happy and painful consequences, happiness is not only related to the behavior of that parties, in this case is the suffering animals, but also involve everyone affected by this act, (Banner, 1968), The case for animal experiments is that they will produce such great benefits for humanity that it is morally acceptable to scarify the lives of a few animals, this is where support animal testing is morally
Causey argues that hunting has the potential to be considered moral and ethical, as long as those who hunt display a more humane attitude toward the animals they kill. Also, she makes it quite clear that hunting for sport and reducing an animal to nothing but points and pounds is an activity that can never be argued as moral. Over all, Causey does an excellent job looking at both sides of hunting. She understands the reasoning and thoughts from both hunters and non-hunters. Her opinion consists of both arguments.
Animal testing is wrong, and knowing this it should be stopped. Animals are still enduring the torture of experiments for cosmetic research. Some people know that there are organic, healthy, and non-animal testing methods you can use to get the same results. For starters, the testing process for animals is cruel and unusual punishment. They will test the value of new shampoo products by using rabbits as their tests subjects usually.
If people are willing to be educated of breeding demands and the care of dogs this will lower the risk of pets ending up in shelter to be euthanatized. Euthanizing animals in shelters and answer to what mankind created. To what extent should the control of supply of pets and education be minatory implementation to reduce to the amount of euthanasia of dogs? Breeding of pets should be controlled by authorities to prohibit over breeding. Over breeding of exotic pure breed animals is proven to produce offspring that have neurological problem and pets with undesirable traits.
Simple signs like wagging tails and other body language. A few signs are the tail wag means happy and when the fur sticks up on the back of their neck they are suspicious. A whimper means sad or hurt, a growl means angry, and if they are scared they will just sit down by their owners. Labs are available in many different places. You can buy a dog from a reliable breeder and the advantages to that are you know the dogs background and know it is usually healthy.
Although Animal Activists claim it's cruel and painful, the truth is that animal testing should be continued because rules are in place, it benefits mankind, and ensures public safety. For starters, there are rules in place that protect the animals in testing facilities. Laws are in place in countries all across the globe, not just in the US alone. In all countries that use animal testing, you must be licensed to test on animals before you can legally start. Specifically in the US, there are multiple laws, acts, and groups that supervise the facilities and their handling and treatment of test animals.