• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should animals have more rights/protection/etc

Should animals have more rights/protection/etc

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 39.0%
  • No

    Votes: 27 45.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 15.3%

  • Total voters
    59
This issue is very important to me, and I would like to hear others opinions. I think this is a very important issue that doesn't get the attention that it deserves.
i'm with you in spirit..legally that isn't going to happen.
 
No, animals should not have rights in the same way we do, but there should be anti cruelty laws and penalties should be more severe than they are. I am against things like gestation crates, forced feeding (for foie gras), battery cages etc. However, I do eat meat and dairy and I believe it is our natural diet. If you choose to be vegan, that is your prerogative but please do not deny it's not natural and don't come down on people for eating meat.
 
This issue is very important to me, and I would like to hear others opinions. I think this is a very important issue that doesn't get the attention that it deserves.




This issue is very important to me as well, especially the protection of wolves, which certain states are once again trying to exterminate.
 
Do you have any animals? They are not as dumb as you think.

I have two lizards, a snake, 5 frogs, a scorpion, a bunch of fish and a turtle. They're dumb. I tried explaining the concept of rights to one of my my girlfriends beagles. It went and sniffed the butt of her other beagle. I tried to get one of the stray cats I've befriended to read On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, it meowed at me. Sure, some animals can display complex emotions, but none are up to understanding the concept of rights.
 
I have two lizards, a snake, 5 frogs, a scorpion, a bunch of fish and a turtle. They're dumb. I tried explaining the concept of rights to one of my my girlfriends beagles. It went and sniffed the butt of her other beagle. I tried to get one of the stray cats I've befriended to read On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, it meowed at me. Sure, some animals can display complex emotions, but none are up to understanding the concept of rights.

So, you must also be against voting rights for our animal friends.
 
Define "cruel". I grew up in the chicken farming business and let me tell you something about chickens man. Chickens are some of the dumbest ****ing animals in the world. Well at least at night. In the day time they are fairly crafty. If you have a chicken farm with about 70,000+ chickens how do you think you gather them all up in less than 6 hours to take to the slaughter house? You turn off the lights. If you turn off the lights they are so dumb that they think they are asleep. They won't even move. If you are in a sea of chickens with the lights off you literally have to kick them out of your way to get out the door. I made that mistake once when I was a kid. Other than that farmers do everything they can to protect them and be humane. They have to constantly worry about chicken hawks, wild cats, dogs, the heat, the cold, disease, tornados, hurricanes, etc. My thing is, actually do it be a farmer, and see how hard it is to raise these things then preach.

And chickens are smarter than turkeys.

I do think that all animals should be protected from human cruelty and that the beef, chicken, and etc. sellers and processors should be held to strict humane codes. But we're talking about animals here, and until they can register at DP and join in this discussion....
 
Is a 5 or 6 year old dumb? Because the smartest animal on planet earth is about that smart. Has nothing to do with a "different type of understanding." The vast majority of what we call animals are quite stupid or dumb by human standards. I will use the alligator for example. Here is an animal that can grow up to 12 feet long. It's brain is the size of a marble. Not much going on there but instinct.

Actually no, I don't think they are dumb. Shoot, my friend's son is two and I think he's a genius. Even if he was "dumb" or developmentally delayed or whatever, that doesn't suggest for me that I shouldn't have compassion for him or that I think it would be ok for him to suffer just because I'm convinced of my own superiority or something.
 
Actually no, I don't think they are dumb. Shoot, my friend's son is two and I think he's a genius. Even if he was "dumb" or developmentally delayed or whatever, that doesn't suggest for me that I shouldn't have compassion for him or that I think it would be ok for him to suffer just because I'm convinced of my own superiority or something.

Nothing but a strawman. I never said anything about not having "compassion" or anything even close. Also said nothing about wanting anything to suffer.

You might want to go back and read what I actually said or at least address my comments.

So far you have mixed my comments up with at least 2 other posters.
 
Last edited:
Nothing but a strawman. I never said anything about not having "compassion" or anything even close. Also said nothing about wanting anything to suffer.

You might want to go back and read what I actually said or at least address my comments.

So far you have mixed my comments up with at least 2 other posters.

Entirely possible. What's the point of saying that animals are "dumb" again? What does that conclusion justify or make acceptable with regards to our actions toward them, and does the same apply to humans who might be considered "dumb"?
 
Entirely possible. What's the point of saying that animals are "dumb" again? What does that conclusion justify or make acceptable with regards to our actions toward them, and does the same apply to humans who might be considered "dumb"?

You might want to read the thread.
 
I think another important issue is the rampant abuse of innocent apostrophes.

Animals don't have rights, they're animals. They should be protected from cruelty, and it should be enforced that all animals are to be kept in a way that ensures they are not subject to preventable pain, stress, injury or disease.

Indeed. Nothing more than this is needed. As observed, we can't even get to this circumstances, so arriving and achieving this set of circumstances would be progress in the right direction.

It's foolish to anthropomorphize animals on this point and most every other point as well.
 
Because there is, or was, the potential to understand rights. Animals are dumb, there's no point giving them rights.

So what actions/behaviors towards animals are acceptable based on your determination that animals are "dumb"? What does that justify?
 
So what actions/behaviors towards animals are acceptable based on your determination that animals are "dumb"? What does that justify?

:roll:

I think another important issue is the rampant abuse of innocent apostrophes.

Animals don't have rights, they're animals. They should be protected from cruelty, and it should be enforced that all animals are to be kept in a way that ensures they are not subject to preventable pain, stress, injury or disease.
 

Yeah, that's inconsistent. If animals should have no rights and, then how can you say there should be laws protecting them? What's that based on? Can you be cruel to a table or a toaster? Does a car have an "right" to no be treated cruelly? No and you're saying animals are no different.

Whatever. I don't think my dogs are dumb at all. I don't think my friend's two year old is dumb or that 5 and 6 year old are dumb and even if I did, that would not make me think it's ok to treat them badly (or whatever it is you're using this determination that they're dumb to justify that you won't tell me. :lol:).
 
Yeah, that's inconsistent. If animals should have no rights and, then how can you say there should be laws protecting them? What's that based on? Can you be cruel to a table or a toaster? Does a car have an "right" to no be treated cruelly? No and you're saying animals are no different.

Nothing inconsistent about it. Humans have rights. We understand and defend those rights. You do not need to have a "right" to be protected by the law. Illegal immigrants do not have certain "rights" under our laws, and yet they are still protected by laws. Convicted felons lose certain rights and yet are still protected under the law.

A right is always the law. The law is not always a right.

Whatever. I don't think my dogs are dumb at all. I don't think my friend's two year old is dumb or that 5 and 6 year old are dumb and even if I did, that would not make me think it's ok to treat them badly (or whatever it is you're using this determination that they're dumb to justify that you won't tell me. :lol:).

What part of this...

Animals don't have rights, they're animals. They should be protected from cruelty, and it should be enforced that all animals are to be kept in a way that ensures they are not subject to preventable pain, stress, injury or disease. - Spud

needs to be explained to you?
 
Last edited:
Animal rights is the idea that some, or all, non-human animals are entitled to the possession of their own lives, and that their most basic interests – such as the lack of suffering – should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings.


I wouldn't go nearly that far, but I would agree that animals should be protected from unnecessary suffering or needless cruelty.... with the exception that animal needs always yield to human needs.
 
I think another important issue is the rampant abuse of innocent apostrophes.

Animals don't have rights, they're animals. They should be protected from cruelty, and it should be enforced that all animals are to be kept in a way that ensures they are not subject to preventable pain, stress, injury or disease.

Precisely. It's not so much a matter of rights as it is a matter of should's.
 
Back
Top Bottom