Peter Singer's Utilitarian Theory On The Ethical Treatment Of Non-Human Animals

Animals have feelings and lives too. “Like people, animals want to live, they also love and feel pain. Animals shouldn’t have to die just because some humans consider hunting to be fun.” (¨There Are Still People¨) Why would we take away a life just to use it as an award, especially since it’s against the law?

Hunting is defined as the act of killing or taking down a creature. Killing is a synonym of murdering, and murdering is a crime. Some may say that hunting can provide food, which is a necessity for humans, or that is one way for them to make money. Despite these facts, some people are selfish enough to exceed their wants and hunt down animals for pleasure. That is why, sport hunting should be made illegal because hunting destroys animals ’wildlife habitats and hunting contributes to their extinction.

The number one problem with trophy hunting is that animals are being endangered. Hunters don't pay attention to what they hurt. “ They prefer to kill the most beautiful, the bigger, and the rarest.” ( In defense of animals) In defense of animals Hunters don't take in consideration for these rare and beautiful animals.

The speaker is also justified in killing the snake because he/she was threatened after making the first attempt into killing the rattlesnake, but he only tried to kill the snake because it would be an inconvenience to anyone or any animal on the ranch. Some people may argue that if the speaker just kept themselves and didn’t bother the snake everything would be ok, but think about it this way say you were in the speaker's shoes and you decided to keep walking instead of trying to kill the snake. Later on that day you find out that an animal or person was harmed by the same rattlesnake that you could’ve chosen to kill earlier, but you didn’t. Wouldnt you feel guilty because you could’ve had the power of preventing the whole situation from happening if you decided to annihilate the rattlesnake earlier?

We need to be aware of the issue so we can make an informed decision, and not play a part in Animal Cruelty. I’m not saying that we should stop all Live Exports but we should do everything we can to reduce the amount of Animal Cruelty during the

The trophy part is the animal itself or a part of it that is usually displayed, like elephant tusks, lion heads, etc. Some people think trophy hunting should be legal because it helps control the environment, while others believe trophy hunting should be illegal because hunters are killing endangered animals. , One reason people think trophy hunting should be legal is because it helps out the environment. If you ban trophy hunting it could just make a larger threat to the environment and other ways. “There is a risk that

Animals deserve better. This does matter, I don’t want animals to die. People need to acknowledge their actions. Don’t let vets test your pets with medicine without permission. This does matter.

When a person beats an animal, that animal has no clue what they did wrong, in most cases, they probably did nothing wrong, and they’re afraid of that person now. So they have to live in constant fear, and don’t get to enjoy the short life they’re given. Humans live longer than most of these animals, and no one should feel as if they have the right to control and waste that animal’s life by beating and killing them. They should get to live a happy

Are animals as important as human beings? Peter Singer answers this question in his article “Animal Liberation.” Singer supports the idea that animals are as important as human beings. People should stop seeing animals as a means of satisfying human wants and see the animal as equals. Exploitation of animal will stop when humans will accept that it is unnecessary.

The validity and even humanity in animal testing is something on the margins of morale, it is not something done out of joy, it is not pleasurable for the testers or the tested themselves. So there, we are given a reason to submit the simple question of whether animal testing should be permitted at all. Why not simply cut our losses and move on to greener pastures, after all it is indeed the definition of grotesque to experiment on living beings and people may have been right to protest and raise awareness for such cruel misconducts. There must be something that can be done.

People say that if u test on the animals nobody would care if they died. The also say that it won’t harm the animals but it really does. Some people also say that animal testing is bad because of the danger you are putting the animals in. The animals are going extinct because of the testing.

This helps implement the idea there is an anthropocentric view for not torturing animals for it can lead to harm with humans. Premise 4 shows that any suffering is characterized as unnecessary. Premise 5 believes all animal for foods use unnecessary suffering, which is a false premise for not all use suffering on animals to make food. An example would be a slaughter house for cows that use euthanasia to kill them to avoid suffering. The conclusion then states human consumption of any products is justified.

The passage is saying that we should treat the animals that we normally eat just like we treat puppies, which are normally treated like family. Morality comes into play and presents that if we don’t torture puppies for our eating pleasures then we should not support factory farms since they torture animals, which end up being eaten for our pleasure. The author is unable to find a morally relevant difference between Fred and people who eat factory raised meat, at least ones that consume the meat that know what the animals have endured to end up on their plates. The passage relates greatly to the view of the author. The author explained that if we condemn Fred’s behavior, which was only to heighten his gustatory experience then shouldn’t we condemn

Animals are living things and should not be tested on as an object or inhumanely killed as a source of food. According to HFA’s Campaign to Stop Slaughterhouse Abuse, in slaughterhouses, animals are put on conveyer belts to speed up the butchering process. The farmers take into consideration not the well being of the animals, but only the efficiency of how many can be killed in a day. Pigs are dumped into boiling water so if they don 't burn, they drown.

It is not like we kill these animals for health reasons or survival we do it mainly because it tastes good. As stated by Gary Yourofsky: “The problem is that humans have victimized animals to such a degree, that they aren’t even considered victims. They aren’t even considered at all. They’re nothing. They don’t count, they don’t matter, they’re commodities like TV sets and cellphones.