Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Registered: November 05, 2004
Posts: 6100
|
Animal right? Animal wrong! Sorry, couldn't help myself. Anyways, animals will never have any qualms about killing humans if they need (or want) to, so why should we worry about killing them? As long as we don't go overboard or kill pointlessly, I see nothing wrong with it.
The more you know, the less you don't know.
|
Registered: January 15, 2006
Posts: 484
|
I have no moral issue with using animals for food, clothing and experimentation, as long as the animals are treated humanely while they're alive and aren't killed excessively for no reason. Personally I think wearing fur is a bit excessive, but then again we use leather in shoes, cars, jackets, furniture etc and it's just higher quality than some of the imitation. quote: Is it morally acceptable to use animals as sources of entertainment in the context of zoos, circuses, horse racing etc.?
I find this stuff barbaric and completely unentertaining. And horse racing is not a sport for the jockey's who ride - I don't understand the athleticism of racing if your not the one running.
~*The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds; and the pessimist fears this is true.
|
Registered: January 15, 2003
Posts: 3904
|
quote: nudering
NEUTERING. NEUTER. NEUTERED. Comes from the word NEUTRAL.
|
Registered: April 14, 2007
Posts: 79
|
quote: Originally posted by y2phang:
The claim that animals have ?rights? was first put forward by the Australian philosopher Peter Singer in the 1970s and has been the subject of heated and emotional debates ever since. There are many contexts in which the question of ?animal rights? comes up. Should we farm animals? If so by what techniques? Should we eat animals? Should we hunt and fish them? Is it morally acceptable to use animals as sources of entertainment in the context of zoos, circuses, horse racing etc.? Often the same organisations that campaign on environmental issues (e.g. Greenpeace) are also concerned for the welfare of animals: both sets of concerns derive from a commitment to the value of Nature and the Earth. The question of animal rights might well come up in a debate on biodiversity, and is one with so many political and social implications that it is also worth having in its own right. This debate is about the ethical principles at issue; the separate debates on biodiversity, vegetarianism, zoos, blood sports, and animal experimentation deal with more of the concrete details.
 Well about that one saying should we eat animals?Yes and No Should we experiment aniamls Yes and No I think, we need to make a law about nudering animals if were not breeding them!!  We should take care of our animals,That goes 4 people who say that but don't at all mean it!!!
RECYCLE PLEASE!!!!
|
Registered: May 29, 2007
Posts: 2
|
Animal are overlky treated nowadays and generally they have right!! there are some statutes that provide protection towards the canine, however, it is too feeble to impose any sense of deterance.
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
