A Change Of Heart About Animals Analysis

526 Words3 Pages
In the articles of Jeremy Rifkin, Victoria Braithwaite, and Ed Yong, there's a deep research and debate whether animals should be given the right to have human rights or not. All authors include their perspective on the issue and provide scientific evidence. However, I believe that there should be a separation of rights between animals and humans because there is no biological basis for drawing the line. Giving the right to apes, what factors exclude other mammals like dogs, cats, and birds. In Jeremy Rifkin’s article, “A Change of Heart about Animals”, proves his statement that many of our fellow creatures also “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love..”. I agree that animals share similar feelings as us, and I believe that they should be treated in a way that they can feel comfortable and care in their surroundings. Just because animals may not be completely the same as us, that should not give the right to a human to mistreat and abuse of an animal’s life. Animals can be well treated and cared for without giving them the right to be treated as a human. In Victoria…show more content…
Yong includes the viewpoint of a Primatologist, Frans de Waal of Emory University, which states that, “ ...but if we give rights to apes, what would be the compelling reason to not give rights to monkeys, dogs, rats, and so on.” I strongly agree with Frans de Waal’s opinion because there is no clear place to draw the line. If one mammal is given human rights because, “they feel pain” and “share similar human qualities as us” then, many other mammals should have the same authority to receive those human rights. Therefore, I believe there should be a line drawn between the distinguishment of human and apes, because were are similar but not completely the same
Open Document