• 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!

In U.S., More Say Animals Should Have Same Rights as People

Brother AJ

Brother AJ

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2014
Messages
560
Reaction score
101
Location
Fort Worth, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A recently taken GALLUP poll determined the following:

In U.S., More Say Animals Should Have Same Rights as People

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Almost a third of Americans, 32%, believe animals should be given the same rights as people, while 62% say they deserve some protection but can still be used for the benefit of humans. The strong animal rights view is up from 2008 when 25% thought animals' rights should be on par with humans'.
Click to expand...

While women and left leaning individuals lead the way in holding the titular belief, there has been a modest increase among men as well as the right since 2008. This is merely to illustrate that you don't necessarily have to be considered a "radical" to think that animals deserve the same protections and/or rights as people.

The fact that this percentage has reached such a plateau is truly interesting to me, but it also perplexes. Where is the outrage for this issue? Where are these people hiding? Do they lack passion? Do they not understand what this belief would really mean? Do they think this only meant cats and dogs for some reason?!

Let's think about some of the most basic rights that human beings hold such as the right to life and the right not to be treated as property. If we practiced this belief for animals there would be no conceivable way that things would be able to continue as they are now. Factory Farms, slaughterhouses, medical testing labs, fur farms, rodeos, zoos, etc. would all no longer be acceptable.

This is why this discussion needs to happen. This is why it needs to continue. People need to be introduced to what they truly believe in. The faster we do this the faster that this minority becomes the majority. Get enough public outrage about this issue and it's not going to go away. 32%?! We're sitting on a bomb waiting to happen.
 
Well, that "32%" has no idea the mess they will make if they get their way.
 
As passionately pro animal as I am, anyone claiming animals should have the exact same rights as adult humans has not thought it through.
 
Animals have 2 jobs. Taste good and fit right.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Well, that "32%" has no idea the mess they will make if they get their way.
Click to expand...
Yea okay. Here come the doomsayers... That's what they said about giving persons of color and women rights..

X Factor said:
As passionately pro animal as I am, anyone claiming animals should have the exact same rights as adult humans has not thought it through.
Click to expand...
Obviously not the same exact same. As other animals do not possess the capacities to truly benefit from many of the rights that humans enjoy. I imagine what is meant to be conveyed is that they should have the same rights as humans that they can actually benefit from. Such as the right to life and the right not to be property as I stated in the OP.

azgreg said:
Animals have 2 jobs. Taste good and fit right.
Click to expand...
I know that you are capable of using your brain on this one. Don't disappoint me!
 
I want to make two points on this.

I had an internship in high school in a brain research laboratory. They would basically record action potentials in memory centers of monkeys. Immediately, when I saw the first monkey, and I saw the apparatus, this is completely wrong. How did this get past ethics? What is more maddening, what they are learning can not be necessarily applied to humans, because well, they are studying monkeys. Basically the monkey's cranium was removed. The brain was exposed. Then there were screws placed around the monkey's face. They would screw the monkey in, to keep his head from moving. Electrodes would be placed at precise locations and depths. The monkey would do a basic task, over and over and over again, for 9 hours to 12 hours, with their positive reinforcement being sugar water. The monkeys didn't have an expansive place to be in. Their existence was in cages, then in a seat where they were screwed in, playing a game to drink sugar water. Techs would clean the wounds, because the monkeys would naturally start to regrow the cranium that they lost. This was cleaned away.

With that experience, I can say we have a huge problem with animal rights. Humans are animals. We are all a part of this ecosystem of Earth. We would not exist without the food chain below us. Every animal should be respected, and we should give thanks for what that animal provides. We shouldn't waste. We should use what we kill. Let me say this.

In order to feed a nation of 230 million and climbing, you have to mass produce meat. Essentially, city states require that animal rights (we are animals) be waived in order to mass produce the food. There's so much I could say from here, but I'll keep it short. With our current philosophies, this will never occur, but America has an obesity problem. We could change our diet. We could slow the slaughter of animals, and continually to slow it, and promote fruits and vegetables. There would be meat, but a lot less, and more expensive. As I think that's the way it should be.

The difference in views stem from the idea that humanity is separated from nature. This view, is also apparent in debates over the environment. This has roots, to a philosopher De Carte, who took the Platonian view of nature and basically turned nature into something completely understandable. Only humanity has the capacity to learn of these systems. This is true. I'm not debating if a cow can learn the secrets of the universe. However, that statement brought an attitude that we are separated from everything else. It has cost us dearly. We are right now putting conditions on this planet that has never been experienced. And, as I shared above, there's a lab here that studies monkey brains in hopes that it will enlighten them on the human mind. How they are going about doing it, is horrific. Instead of being in the lab, and reading a book on the human brain, I went to the medical library, got exposed to Scientific American, and read a study on why we age. I had such a more impactful experience reading in a library than watching people with PHD's do experiments, while they explain it to me when I don't even have a diploma.

If people realized they are a part of nature, we would have a hugely different populace.
 
Brother AJ said:
Yea okay. Here come the doomsayers... That's what they said about giving persons of color and women rights..


Obviously not the same exact same. As other animals do not possess the capacities to truly benefit from many of the rights that humans enjoy. I imagine what is meant to be conveyed is that they should have the same rights as humans that they can actually benefit from. Such as the right to life and the right not to be property as I stated in the OP.


I know that you are capable of using your brain on this one. Don't disappoint me!
Click to expand...

I am extremely pro animal, to the point of being irrational about it (depending on who you ask), but, I'm sorry, you cannot make a solid argument that this is the exact same type thing as giving humans civil rights.
 
X Factor said:
I am extremely pro animal, to the point of being irrational about it (depending on who you ask),
Click to expand...
Do what extent are you pro animal? What does that even mean to you?

but, I'm sorry, you cannot make a solid argument that this is the exact same type thing as giving humans civil rights.
Click to expand...
Why not?
 
X Factor said:
As passionately pro animal as I am, anyone claiming animals should have the exact same rights as adult humans has not thought it through.
Click to expand...

I am a vegan and I don't think it even makes sense to use the word "right" when dealing with non-humans. It is a human construct. Animals can neither have rights nor violate rights. If you shoot me in the head you have violated my right to life. If a lion eats my face off he has not violated my rights any more than cancer or a tornado can violate my rights.
 
My dogs have insisted they should have the right to vote on numerous occasions. Pickles, the lab, is outside right this second insisting on the right to fetch sticks. There's no end to it once you open this door.
 
X Factor said:
At least get some new material. :2razz:
Click to expand...

I believe it was Milton Berle who once said "Don't miss an opportunity to retell a good joke."



Or something like that. :mrgreen:



Anyways, animals don't have "rights". However, they should have protections against cruelty.
 
sookster said:
I want to make two points on this.

I had an internship in high school in a brain research laboratory. They would basically record action potentials in memory centers of monkeys. Immediately, when I saw the first monkey, and I saw the apparatus, this is completely wrong. How did this get past ethics? What is more maddening, what they are learning can not be necessarily applied to humans, because well, they are studying monkeys. Basically the monkey's cranium was removed. The brain was exposed. Then there were screws placed around the monkey's face. They would screw the monkey in, to keep his head from moving. Electrodes would be placed at precise locations and depths. The monkey would do a basic task, over and over and over again, for 9 hours to 12 hours, with their positive reinforcement being sugar water. The monkeys didn't have an expansive place to be in. Their existence was in cages, then in a seat where they were screwed in, playing a game to drink sugar water. Techs would clean the wounds, because the monkeys would naturally start to regrow the cranium that they lost. This was cleaned away.

With that experience, I can say we have a huge problem with animal rights. Humans are animals. We are all a part of this ecosystem of Earth. We would not exist without the food chain below us. Every animal should be respected, and we should give thanks for what that animal provides. We shouldn't waste. We should use what we kill. Let me say this.

In order to feed a nation of 230 million and climbing, you have to mass produce meat. Essentially, city states require that animal rights (we are animals) be waived in order to mass produce the food. There's so much I could say from here, but I'll keep it short. With our current philosophies, this will never occur, but America has an obesity problem. We could change our diet. We could slow the slaughter of animals, and continually to slow it, and promote fruits and vegetables. There would be meat, but a lot less, and more expensive. As I think that's the way it should be.

The difference in views stem from the idea that humanity is separated from nature. This view, is also apparent in debates over the environment. This has roots, to a philosopher De Carte, who took the Platonian view of nature and basically turned nature into something completely understandable. Only humanity has the capacity to learn of these systems. This is true. I'm not debating if a cow can learn the secrets of the universe. However, that statement brought an attitude that we are separated from everything else. It has cost us dearly. We are right now putting conditions on this planet that has never been experienced. And, as I shared above, there's a lab here that studies monkey brains in hopes that it will enlighten them on the human mind. How they are going about doing it, is horrific. Instead of being in the lab, and reading a book on the human brain, I went to the medical library, got exposed to Scientific American, and read a study on why we age. I had such a more impactful experience reading in a library than watching people with PHD's do experiments, while they explain it to me when I don't even have a diploma.

If people realized they are a part of nature, we would have a hugely different populace.
Click to expand...
I agree with a lot of what you said here. What happens in medical facilities as well as farms is truly horrible and is basically the stuff of nightmares. I should note that animals do not actually "provide" us with anything. We take it from them. We rob them of their lives and their autonomy. I could understand showing respect if we "had" to these things, but the fact remains that we don't. It is not necessary. Especially considering what is available to us in this modern age in terms of food, nutrition, entertainment, science, etc.

Van Basten said:
Wouldn't be the first time a huge wave of people pushed for something stupid....
Click to expand...
Please explain why it's stupid.
 
azgreg said:
Anyways, animals don't have "rights". However, they should have protections against cruelty.
Click to expand...
This much is clear, but we're discussing what "ought" to be not what "is." Why SHOULDN'T animals have rights?
 
Brother AJ said:
This much is clear, but we're discussing what "ought" to be not what "is." Why SHOULDN'T animals have rights?
Click to expand...

Because they're animals, and as such they are predominantly food.
 
Brother AJ said:
A recently taken GALLUP poll determined the following:

In U.S., More Say Animals Should Have Same Rights as People



While women and left leaning individuals lead the way in holding the titular belief, there has been a modest increase among men as well as the right since 2008. This is merely to illustrate that you don't necessarily have to be considered a "radical" to think that animals deserve the same protections and/or rights as people.

The fact that this percentage has reached such a plateau is truly interesting to me, but it also perplexes. Where is the outrage for this issue? Where are these people hiding? Do they lack passion? Do they not understand what this belief would really mean? Do they think this only meant cats and dogs for some reason?!

Let's think about some of the most basic rights that human beings hold such as the right to life and the right not to be treated as property. If we practiced this belief for animals there would be no conceivable way that things would be able to continue as they are now. Factory Farms, slaughterhouses, medical testing labs, fur farms, rodeos, zoos, etc. would all no longer be acceptable.

This is why this discussion needs to happen. This is why it needs to continue. People need to be introduced to what they truly believe in. The faster we do this the faster that this minority becomes the majority. Get enough public outrage about this issue and it's not going to go away. 32%?! We're sitting on a bomb waiting to happen.
Click to expand...

Considering what a hopeless mess we make with human rights, it seems headless to start a new building site.
 
Brother AJ said:
I agree with a lot of what you said here. What happens in medical facilities as well as farms is truly horrible and is basically the stuff of nightmares. I should note that animals do not actually "provide" us with anything. We take it from them. We rob them of their lives and their autonomy against their will. I could understand showing respect if we "had" to these things, but the fact remains that we don't. It is not necessary. Especially considering what is available to us in this modern age in terms of food, nutrition, entertainment, science, etc.


Please explain why it's stupid.
Click to expand...

I get your point, but I respectfully disagree. I think Earth, as you would study nature, shows that many animals take lives, and their lives be taken. It's the dictatorship of nature with the food pyramid. I think it is perfectly ethical to kill an animal for food. Some animals, would kill me for food. Because of what we have, a really high brain to mass ratio, we are able to kill many and not fear consequences. So things are different. I get that. But if I was in nature, living in nature, I would kill animals for food, use their skin for clothes and coats, boots, and I'm sure back in the day they kept the bones. Used them. However, I think when you kill an animal, you should respect it, and thank it for what it provides. Needlessly killing bison on the rail road lines back in the 1800's, is a gross extreme to the depravity of this ideal. We view a cow as just another cow, it doesn't matter if it is wasted or not, we just don't care. Part of what I am saying, is when you kill something to eat, you should care, and by thanking the animal, you are essentially thanking the planet.
 
BrewerBob said:
I am a vegan and I don't think it even makes sense to use the word "right" when dealing with non-humans. It is a human construct. Animals can neither have rights nor violate rights. If you shoot me in the head you have violated my right to life. If a lion eats my face off he has not violated my rights any more than cancer or a tornado can violate my rights.
Click to expand...
I disagree. You can have rights even if you don't quite understand them. What if a toddler were to push you down the stairs? It's the same concept, yet toddlers are still considered to be worthy of rights.
 
Last edited:
azgreg said:
Because they're animals, and as such they are predominantly food.
Click to expand...
Humans are animals as well. What else you got?

joG said:
Considering what a hopeless mess we make with human rights, it seems headless to start a new building site.
Click to expand...
That isn't an argument against animal rights. We can easily do more than one thing at a time. At least most humans aren't still considered chattel property like animals are.

sookster said:
I get your point, but I respectfully disagree. I think Earth, as you would study nature, shows that many animals take lives, and their lives be taken. It's the dictatorship of nature with the food pyramid. I think it is perfectly ethical to kill an animal for food. Some animals, would kill me for food. Because of what we have, a really high brain to mass ratio, we are able to kill many and not fear consequences. So things are different. I get that. But if I was in nature, living in nature, I would kill animals for food, use their skin for clothes and coats, boots, and I'm sure back in the day they kept the bones. Used them. However, I think when you kill an animal, you should respect it, and thank it for what it provides. Needlessly killing bison on the rail road lines back in the 1800's, is a gross extreme to the depravity of this ideal. We view a cow as just another cow, it doesn't matter if it is wasted or not, we just don't care. Part of what I am saying, is when you kill something to eat, you should care, and by thanking the animal, you are essentially thanking the planet.
Click to expand...
This is an appeal to nature fallacy. It's faulty reasoning because we, of course, will only look to other animals as our moral guides when it's a behavior we want to practice such as killing other animals for food. Yet I don't see anyone talking about implementing matriarchies, excusing rape, or sniffing another human's ass in order to greet them. You can't have it both ways.
 
Will just have a ton of old ladies marrying their little dogs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom