When you think of animals you always think about how much you distaste them or how cute they looked in a video you saw on Youtube. You never would think about the mistreatment animals face whether it is in their own environment or in a laboratory. Some people refuse to acknowledge the mistreatment of animals, but that does not make the problem go away. That is why animals need something to protect them from the unjust they face.Animals need a Bill of Rights to protect them from neglect, unnecessary experiments and humiliation, and have a right to live freely in their natural habitat.
In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” Jeremy Rifkin includes ideas that support the argument that a Bill of Rights will protect animals from being neglected and uncared for by their owners or caretakers. When discussing studies regarding pigs’ social …show more content…
In the introduction of the article Braithwaite expresses, “ Every year, sportsmen around the world drag millions of fish to shore by barbed hooks.” (Braithwaite, 1).
Fish are taken out of the bodies of water they call home to either be eaten by people or just to be used for sport in sportfishing. Instead of being able to swim peacefully fish are taken out of their natural habitat for other people’s benefit. Towards the beginning of the article Braithwaite claims, “ Incredibly, no one ever seems to have asked before whether fish have neuroreceptors around their mouths.” (Braithwaite, 1). Fish are used as sport because a lot of people tend to believe that fish do not feel pain, but they actually do. People take animals for advantage because we do not know everything about them and their environment. Fish and other animals deserve the right to live freely in their own environment without being disturbed for unjust
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Kathryn on the other hand, feels the pressure or desire to leave, but she seems to push back against her current. The fish merely drift along with “passive grace” forcing nothing, and Kathryn “feels wise” as she observes them. Feeling “wise,” as defined in Merriam-Webster online, means Kathryn feels that looking at the trout gives her the capacity for sound judgement. Hence, the trout’s passive drift and trueness to the current is what Kathryn feels is right. This reveals her desire to “drift” or move on with the
The documentary “Blackfish” focused on killer whales in captivity, specifically Tilikum; a wild orca who was caught and exposed to captivity and its environment which eventually lead him to violently turn on his trainers at SeaWorld and even took some of their lives. This documentary examines how the difference from living in sea life to captivity can cause these whales and orcas to live up to their names. Blackfish discusses and argues how life in captivity for these whales is cruel and dangerous, not only for the whales but for their trainers as well. The information throughout this documentary was all painful to watch in my view, but it also had a positive approach.
In the article titled "A Change of Heart About Animals," (2003), author Jeremy Rifkin addresses that contrary to previous research and discovery, new breakthroughs in science are finding that animals are more comparable to humans than we once thought, and as a result, human empathy should be extended towards them. Rifkin supports his claim by providing numerous examples of studies that show capabilities of animals to make tools (crows), develop complex language skills (Gorilla), and present signs of self-awareness (Orangutan); things once believed only to be human characteristics (Rifkin 7, 8, 10). The author's purpose is to inform and convince the readers that empathy should be inclusive to all animals by providing a multitude of studies,
In “Indian Horse,” the act of capturing and releasing fish back into the water is used to symbolize the loss and reconnection of Indigenous culture. During one afternoon, Saul and a dozen of other kids escaped from the residential school and made their way to a ridge, in which they used burlap bags to capture and release fish. Through this experience, they were reminded of their past and how much they’ve lost, which is shown in the quote, “We fell asleep that night with our noses pressed to our hands and as the days went by and the smell of those suckers faded, there wasn’t a one of us that didn’t cry for the loss of the life we’d known before” (Wagamese, Pg. 54). The memories associated with this event showcase the emotional impact of the loss of cultural heritage and traditional ways of life due to trauma caused by residential schools. Additionally, the act of capturing and releasing the fish relates to the process of reconciliation as they reconnect with and reclaim their Indigenous culture, which are necessary steps towards reconciliation.
In the article “A Change of Heart About Animals” by Jeremy Rifkin published in the Los Angeles Times on September 1, 2003 Rifkin advocates for the ethical treatment of animals and discusses how people perceive, and at times underestimate, animals and their abilities. Two letters were written, one by Lois Frazier and the other by Bob Stevens, to Rifkin in response to “A Change of Heart About Animals” and were published in the Los Angeles Times editorial section. Each letter expresses the author’s individual opinion on Rifkin’s convictions. Rifkin uses scientific studies, such as the ones conducted at Purdue University on pigs’ social behavior (Source #1 par. 4), to support his belief that
Many Americans blindly believe that animals deserve the same rights as humans, but little do they know about the differences between the welfare of animals and the rights of animals. In the article A Change of Heart about Animals, Jeremy Rifkin cleverly uses certain negative words in order to convince the readers that animals need to be given same rights as humans, and if not more. Research has shown that non-human animals have the ability to “feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love” (Rifkin 33). Animals may be able to feel emotions, however this does not necessarily mean that they are able to understand what having rights mean. While humans must accept their moral responsibility to properly care for animals,
Therefore, we can easily surmise that the fishing is more than a trip to catch fish, but instead it's a trip for the patients to realize what means to be human
Reynolds compares the fish struggling to survive outside of its habitat to “those of us from raging waters and crashing waves, beached, but trying desperately to breathe.” He is comparing humans to sea life essentially, using symbolism in order to evoke empathy from the graduates in order for them to understand what life might feel like for people who are less privileged. Overall, he is teaching the lesson that whether humans see it or not, there are often people who struggle with poverty, inequality, or a variety of issues, but are commonly neglected. This is why Reynolds is using his speech to spread awareness that humans need to step up and help those in need, using their privilege that others may not have. Continuing with this message, Reynolds uses the analogy of a bird to describe those who are less fortunate, saying, “There are those of us whose wings have been clipped.”
As a society there should be a continuation of proceeding to develop new laws. Animals have rights that are not being protected or considered when they are not given the chance to live without suffering or harm. Additionally animal rights are violated when they are used as products for experimentation. Animal experimentations
We are not alone on this Earth. We, humans, have animals by our side. We share this inhabitable planet together with animals, and they should have same right as we do on this beautiful planet. Animals are pure instinctual living creatures who never think before following their instincts. They won’t think otherwise before killing a person.
There’s an element of second-hand embarrassment felt while walking to a job provided by the cosmetics empire and you notice the streets filled with people herding together like the atrocities they are protesting for: animals. These protesters, wearing makeup on their own, in order to not be mistaken for the ugly testing animal themselves, have allowed for the empire to grow into the untouchable powerhouse it is today, but it is suddenly not ok to get rid of these monsters whose only purpose is to take up space. The protests that are arguing for animals to have basic human rights are not interfering with the animal testing, but with the simple basic human rights of being able to get to one place to another. Think about it: have you ever been in a situation where you are stuck behind someone going slowly and there are other people surrounding you, making it impossible to get around that one slow person?
How animals are treated can also affect daily human life. Animal rights are rights given to animals to be free from exploitation, cruelty, neglect, and abuse and enumerates further rights for laboratory animals, farm animals, companion animals, and wildlife. Some animals should have a Bill of Rights. This law does go against centuries of human culture. This law would increase the cost of food.
In the op-ed piece “A Change of Heart about Animals”, Jeremy Rifkin emphasizes the similarities between humans and animals by providing results on scientific research studies to illustrate that humans should be more empathetic towards animals. In addition, he further explains how research results have changed the ways humans perceived animals and indicates solutions that were taken by other countries and organizations to help improve and protect animal rights. Rifkin provides examples that demonstrate animals have emotions, conceptual abilities, self awareness, and a sense of individualism just like humans. For example, Pigs crave for affection and get depressed easily when isolated, two birds Betty and Abel have tool making skills, Koko
A letter written by Lois Frazier consists of additional opinions, on Jeremy Rifkin’s article “A Change of Heart about Animals.” Rifkin is an animal rights advocate, he conveys his belief that animals are quite similar to humans. Frazier supports Rifkin’s humane ideas and voices several novel opinions of disproportionate rights, such as confinement, affliction, and depletion. In the letter, she sheds light on concerning topics that Rifkin does not address. She first concentrates on an animal’s right to be free and live in a safe environment.
One topic that many scholars are debating right now is the topic of animal rights. The questions are, on what basis are rights given, and do animals possess rights? Two prominent scholars, Tom Regan and Tibor Machan, each give compelling arguments about animal rights, Regan for them and Machan against them. Machan makes the sharp statement, “Animals have no rights need no liberation” (Machan, p. 480). This statement was made in direct opposition to Regan who says, “Reason compels us to recognize the equal inherent value of these animals and, with this, their equal right to be treated with respect” (Regan, p. 477).