This House Believes That Animal Have Rights (+) Affirmative Team - Animal Rights Is Fundamental Principle About Moral and Legal Right Reason

1.
This house believes that animal have rights

(+) Affirmative team
-
Animal rights is fundamental principle about moral and legal right

Reason : : (Britannica.com) Animal rights is a fundamental principle modern animal right movements is that many non-human animal right
have basic interest deserve recognition, condiseration and protection.in the view of animal rights these basic interst that their have them both moral
and legal right
They have ability to feel pain, joyfull, pleasure, loneliness, motherly love, and fear in the same way and same degree like human do.
Reason :
As PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk has said, When it comes to pain, love, joy,
loneliness, and fear.
-
They have rights free from suffering and exploitation

Reason : Overexploitation is the over use of wildlife species by people for food, clothing, pets, medicine, sport and many other purposes The
hunting, trapping, collecting and fishing of wildlife at unsustainable levels is not something new. The passenger pigeon was hunted to extinction
early in the last century, and overhunting nearly caused the extinction of the American bison and several species of whales.
Today, the Endangered Species Act protects some U.S. species that were in danger from overexploitation, and the Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) works to prevent the global trade of wildlife. But there are many species that are not protected
from being illegally traded or overharvested.
exploitation can make the population extinct and make the ecosystem broken.
Reason :
for exaple Fish and other aquatic species As fishing gear and boats have improved, the fishing industry has become very efficient at harvesting fish
and shellfish. The industrialization of the fishing industry and the increasing world demand for seafood have people taking more fish from oceans,
lakes and rivers than is sustainable. Prized fish, such as swordfish, cod and tuna, have undergone dramatic declines. In the Great Lakes overfishing
has caused whitefish, walleye, and sturgeon populations to decline. Beyond their role in the food supply, freshwater and marine fish are also trapped
for the aquarium trade and fished for sport. you know if the little fish are died the ecosystem can ruined.
Slowly, most people came to accept Bentham's idea. Maine adopted the first modern anticruelty law in the United States in 1821, and every other
state eventually enacted similar legislation. To encourage the police to enforce these laws, private organizations such as the American Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) were created throughout the last third of the nineteenth century. In addition, since World War II, a
number of federal animal-rights laws have been adopted. These laws regulate animal experimentation and the treatment of animals by medical
research facilities, slaughterhouses, and circuses, as well as people such as animal dealers who use animals as a source of livelihood.
Protection of animals.
Many groups concerned with the treatment and welfare of animals still believe in the superiority of humans and the right to use other living creatures
to meet human needs. However, in 1975, the Australian philosopher Peter Singer argued that animals are entitled to live free from the infliction of
pain and suffering, whether from animal experimentation, the raising of animals for food, or other causes.
Eight years later, the American philosopher Thomas Regan argued that every individual animal has an inherent value and thus has moral rights that
should not be violated even if to do so benefits society. The ideas of both Singer and Regan provide the basis for those who argue that animals have
rights that must be observed and protected as opposed to those who believe that it is all right to use animals so long as it is done without cruelty.
(-) Negative team
Animals don't think
Animals are not really conscious
Animals were put on earth to serve human beings
Animals don't have souls
Animals don't behave morally
Animals are not members of the 'moral community'

Animals lack the capacity for free moral judgment
Animals don't think
St Thomas Aquinas taught that animals acted purely on instinct while human beings engaged in rational thought.
This distinction provided the frontier between human beings and animals, and was regarded as a suitable criterion for assessing a being's moral
status.
Animals are not really conscious
Orangutan washing clothes
The French philosopher Rene Descartes, and many others, taught that animals were no more than complicated biological robots.
This meant that animals were not the sort of thing that was entitled to have any rights - or indeed any moral consideration at all.
Animals were put on earth to serve human beings
Animals aren't 'moral'
Some of the arguments against animal rights centre on whether animals behave morally.
Rights are unique to human beings
rights only have meaning within a moral community

only human beings live in a moral community
adult mammals don't understand or practice living according to a moral code
the differences in the way human beings and adult mammals experience the world are morally relevant
therefore rights is a uniquely human concept and only applies to human beings
Animals don't behave morally
Some argue that since animals don't behave in a moral way they don't deserve moral treatment from other beings.
Animals, it's argued, usually behave selfishly, and look after their own interests, while human beings will often help other people, even if doing so is
to their own disadvantage.
Not all scientists agree: Jane Goodall, an expert on chimpanzees has reported that they sometimes show truly altruistic behaviour.
Animals don't have rights against other animals
Another reason for thinking that animals don't behave morally is that even the most enthusiastic supporters of animal rights only argue that animals
have rights against human beings, not against other animals.
For example, as Mary Warnock put it:
May they [animals] be hunted? To this the answer is no, not by humans; but presumably their rights are not infringed if they are hunted by animals
other than human beings.
And here the real difficulties start. If all animals had a right to freedom to live their lives without molestation, then someone would have to protect
them from one another. But this is absurd...
M Warnock, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Ethics, 1998
Why this might be relevant to the question of whether animals should have rights becomes clearer if you rephrase it in terms of duties or obligations
instead of rights and ask - why should human beings have obligations towards animals, if animals don't have obligations to other animals or to
human beings?
Modern Movements
2. This house would restrict media reporting on violent crimes
(+) Affirmative team

-
child view televison more often
The results of the study of Indonesian Child Welfare Foundation, for example, noted
that the average primary school aged children between 30-35 hours of television
viewing per week.
This means that on a typical day they are watching television more than 4-5 hours a
day. While on Sunday could be 7-8 hours. If the average of four hours a day, meaning
about 1,400 hours a year, or 18,000 hours until the child graduated from high school.
Though the time spent in children ranging from kindergarten to high school just
13,000 hours. This means that children spend more time watching television than for
any activity except sleeping.

This House Believes That Animal Have Rights (+) Affirmative Team - Animal Rights Is Fundamental Principle About Moral and Legal Right Reason

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This House Believes That Animal Have Rights (+) Affirmative Team - Animal Rights Is Fundamental Principle About Moral and Legal Right Reason

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

This House Believes That Animal Have Rights (+) Affirmative Team - Animal Rights Is Fundamental Principle About Moral and Legal Right Reason

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.

This house believes that animal have rights

Animal rights is fundamental principle about moral and legal right

They have rights free from suffering and exploitation

Animals are not members of the 'moral community'

Animals aren't 'moral'

rights only have meaning within a moral community

Animals don't behave morally

Animals don't have rights against other animals

For example, as Mary Warnock put it:

M Warnock, An Intelligent Person's Guide to Ethics, 1998

2. This house would restrict media reporting on violent crimes

(+) Affirmative team

child view televison more often

You might also like