Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.
Debate: Hunting for sport
From Debatepedia
(List of links)
< Debate: Hunting for sportThe following pages link to Debate: Hunting for sport:
View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500).- Debate: Animal rights
- Debate: Gun control
- Featured Debate Digest articles
- Debate: DC handgun ban
- Debate: Right to bear arms in the US
- Argument: Animal testing wrongly involves sentient, human-like creatures
- Argument: Human and animal differences do not justify speciism/discrimination
- Argument: Animals are like vulnerable minorities that are voiceless to end abuses
- Argument: Animals deserve the same basic rights that humans enjoy
- Argument: Animals are independent creatures that don't exist to serve humans
- Argument: Animals are equal to humans in science as lifeforms on Earth
- Argument: Animal rights can be assigned according to animal psychology
- Argument: Humans must respect animal rights even if animals can't reciprocate
- Argument: Killing animals should be viewed as equivalent to killing humans
- Argument: Animals denied rights for human-unlikeness, but tested for human-likeness
- Argument: Humans are obligated to cause animals no pain or suffering
- Argument: Humans can do wrong so can be morally inferior to animals
- Argument: Animals should be treated as we would want to be treated
- Argument: Animals feel and suffer in very similar ways as humans
- Argument: Animals cannot possess rights because they have no moral judgement
- Argument: Evolutionary science debunks the idea of human dominion over animals
- Argument: Human life is of greater intrinsic value than animal life
- Argument: Humans have dominion over animals with a right to exploit them
- Argument: "Dominion" makes humans stewards; no right to harm/exploit animals
- Argument: Modern humans have lost touch with animals and our likeness
- Argument: That animals harm/kill each other does not justify the same by humans
- Argument: If humans are animals, why defy our animalistic instincts?
- Argument: Animal rights reduce humans to animals, not in God's image
- Argument: Animals cannot make moral claims so cannot claim rights
- Argument: That the retarded have rights does not justify animal rights
- Argument: Animals have emotions, personalities, and souls just like humans
- Argument: Humans and animals are of one family like brothers and sisters
- Argument: Utilitarian perspective counters idea of morality varying b/w species
- Argument: Animal life is equivalent in value to human life
- Argument: Granting rights to animals would damage human rights
- Argument: Animals can't uphold human rights; we are not obligated to uphold theirs
- Argument: Hunting is a good way of controlling widlife
- Argument: Hunting is no sport; it's not a competition between equal parties
- Argument: When hunting is unnecessary, it is barbaric; killing for pleasure
- Argument: Hunting is a barbaric form of torturing and killing for pleasure
- Argument: Differences of opinion on killing and hunting must be tolerated
- Argument: There is an inherent human passion for hunting
- Argument: Hunters are simply immoral, bad people
- Argument: Hunters are the tyrannical, genocidal, "mass-murderers" of animals
- Argument: Hunting makes animals fearful of humans; breaches trust
- Argument: Hunting need not be tolerated; it is cruel and can be made unlawful
- Argument: Hunting is cruel, inhumane, undignified, and uncivilized
- Argument: Proceeds of hunting industry go to wildlife sustainability
- Argument: Hunters help advance the interests of land preservation
- Argument: Hunters fully appreciate animals and the lives they are taking
