Argument: Animal rights are connected with the broader human rights movement
|Revision as of 21:13, 6 May 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
← Previous diff
|Current revision (16:03, 29 May 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
|==Parent debate==||==Parent debate==|
|-||*[[Debate:Animal Experimentation]]||+||*[[Debate: Animal testing]]|
|==Supporting quotations==||==Supporting quotations==|
Tom Regan, an American animal right philosopher. "10 Reasons AGAINST Animal Rights and Their Replies". Retrieved May 6th, 2008 - "10. Even if other animals do have moral rights and should be protected, there are more important things that need our attention -- world hunger and child abuse, for example, apartheid, drugs, violence to women, and the plight of the homeless. After we take care of these problems, then we can worry about animals rights.
Reply: The animal rights movement stands as part of, not apart from, the human rights movement. The same philosophy that insists upon and defends the rights of nonhuman animals also insists upon and defends the rights of human beings.
At a practical level, moreover, the choice thoughtful people face is not between helping humans or helping other animals. One can do both. People do not need to eat animals in order to help the homeless, for example, any more than they need to use cosmetics that have been tested on animals in order to help children. In fact, people who do respect the rights of nonhuman animals, by not eating them, will be healthier, in which case they actually will be able to help human beings even more."
Abraham Lincoln - "I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being."