Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Non-Human Animals Rights and Moral Standing. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This is a 5 page paper discussing the moral standing of animal rights. The arguments for the moral rights of animals covers a great many aspects in regards to moral obligation, natural rights of man and animals, utilitarianism and man’s exploitation of anything or anyone it considers inferior to himself. While many argue that the distinction between species is a cognitive one, others argue that if a distinction should be made it should be in a species’ capacity to feel pain in which case animals are equivalent to humans and should not be treated poorly. Additional arguments show that humans are hypocritical in their actions. While many humans treat their domestic animals well and they fight for the protection of these animals, they still allow for inhumane treatment of animals to occur in regards to agriculture, medical experimentation and entertainment environments. Morally and ethically, humans do seem to believe in animal rights; however their actions do not reflect their morals ideals. By all accounts, non-human animals should have protection rights and should be morally equivalent to humans in nature but however sound the argument may be, the utilitarian aspect of the human actions seem to override this conclusion.
Bibliography lists 8 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_TJnonhu1.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
or anyone it considers inferior to himself. While many argue that the distinction between species is a cognitive one, others argue that if a distinction should be made it should
be in a species capacity to feel pain in which case animals are equivalent to humans and should not be treated poorly. Additional arguments show that humans are hypocritical in
their actions. While many humans treat their domestic animals well and they fight for the protection of these animals, they still allow for inhumane treatment of animals to occur in
regards to agriculture, medical experimentation and entertainment environments. Morally and ethically, humans do seem to believe in animal rights; however their actions do not reflect their morals ideals. By all
accounts, non-human animals should have protection rights and should be morally equivalent to humans in nature but however sound the argument may be, the utilitarian aspect of the human actions
seem to override this conclusion. In the United States alone there live over 60 million domestic dogs with an equally large number of
domestic cats. These household pets are treated well and given elaborate gifts within their lifetimes and the families who own these pets largely protect them from pain and suffering. Animal
rights advocates argue that because of this many American live hypocritical lives as while they treat and believe their domestic animals should be treated well, they at the same time
allow for many other animals to be treated poorly and have short lives and painful deaths (Sunstein, 2001). In this way, animal rights need to be viewed from a moral
and/or a utilitarian perspective on order to understand how this cross purpose treatment of animals occurs. Many philosophers, such as Kant, believed that animals were "mans instruments" and deserved only
...