Animal cruelty comes in many forms and has many grave consequences. Therefore it should be acknowledged and stopped. Neglect and abandonment are the most common forms of companion animal abuse in the United States. “Other dogs and cats are deliberately abandoned by their guardians to fend for themselves in the wild or on the streets” (Regan, 84). This statement
My understanding was that we were not supposed to be mean to animals. Little did I realize back then that unethical treatment to animals was so much more than just being nice but that the zoo’s and petting farms I loved so much are
One lab costs around $36 million dollars, this money can be used for many purposes other than torturing animals for selfish reasons. One animal dies in a laboratory every second, in Japan only two seconds and in the UK every twelve seconds, if we add Canada to the list how many poor animals will be killed then? Not only does Vivi-section violate animal rights but it can also be misleading since animals don’t have the exact same DNA makeup. So why are we killing 100-300 million animals each year, and not just killing them torturing them while they are alive and getting inaccurate results? Vivi section is not right there are many alternatives to find Vivi-section, to find out about their internal make-up scientists could always experiment after natural death instead of killing the animal in such a cruel
In contrast, animal welfare takes the position that it is morally acceptable for humans to use non-human animals, provided that the testing minimizes animal use and suffering. The debate between those who support animal research and those who don’t is often portrayed in such a way that one group appears to care about animals while the other group doesn’t. This isn’t the case at all. Fundamentally, the issue is about how to reduce the total suffering for both humans and animals and it can be done by raising concern over
I understand medication being tested on animals but the cosmetic industry should not test on animals because its animal cruelty, the testing is not accurate, and there are other ways to test products. First reason they should not test on animals is because it’s animal cruelty. In America animal abuse is illegal. Testing on animals is abuse! Everyday millions of animals are locked in small cages giving them only enough room to turn around, and they have makeup put on them, and thousands die from it everyday.
Although this sound good for us humans, think about the hundreds of animals killed a month, just so a major cosmetic company such as Maybelline can test a new batch of lipsticks. The conditions that the animals are kept in are appalling, and not to mention unethical. In some cases, the animals are kept in cramped cages and often go without food.
Although those who seek to end animal research – either because they choose to reject its well established usefulness or because they believe the life of a rat is equal in importance to that of a child – persist in their efforts to sabotage medical research with break-ins, thefts, arsons, harassment and intimidation of researchers, there can be no question that there is a great need for animals in medical research to prevent deadly diseases, to ensure the safety of the general public of unstable cosmetics and household products that are used every
Animal Experimentation Thesis: Experimenting on animals should be stopped because it is inhumane. I. Experimenting on animals is cruel. A. Draize Eye Test 1. Rabbits are held down and scientist put chemicals into their eyes to see how they react to it.
The definition for animal rights is the idea that animals are entitled to the possession of their own lives, and that their most basic interests is not suffering and that they should be afforded the same consideration as the similar interests of human beings. With this definition in mind, I believe that animal testing is wrong. We have no right to value an animal’s life over our own. What gives us the right to use animals in such a way for our own wellbeing? Just because we have a higher intelligence, it doesn’t necessary mean we are better than other animals on the planet.
As a moral theory primarily concerned with well-being, utilitarianism grants moral protection to most non-human animals, given that they have interests related to pleasure and suffering. However, it is not clear how these interests apply to the morality of killing when no suffering is involved. This has led some to suggest that we have grounds to oppose the mistreatment of animals but not their killing (Singer, 2011). However, many find this conclusion puzzling as we normally regard death as worse than mild suffering (McMahan,