All Animal Rights Are Equal Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

All Animal Rights Are Equal - Essay ExampleThis is selfsame(prenominal) to what Martin Luther King Jr. argued for when he said that people should be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. Singer also argues that still because there exists certain factual differences between groups of people (i.e., women be generally physically weaker than men), that this doesnt justify any difference in the amount of contemplation we give to their call for and interests (1977). Singer then relates racism and sexism to a concept known as speciesism. Since racism means that a person believes their race is infract than another race, and sexism means that a person believes their gender is superior to the opposite gender, speciesism similarly means that a person believes that humans are superior to animals and provide therefore treat them as they please. Speciesism is therefore as morally unlawful as racism and sexism. However, a person may ask, why should we treat animals with the same consideration and respect as humans if they cant reason or talk? For the answer to this question, Singer points to a statement made by Jeremy Bentham, who wrote, The question is not, can animals reason? Nor can they talk? But, can they suffer? (1977). The fact that both humans and animals suffer, he believed, shows that both deserve to have their needs and interests considered. In this article, Singer argues that most humans are speciesists. By eating animals, we are using them for our own selfish ends and not considering the violation of rights which we have committed against that animal. If humans had to eat animals to survive that would be another matter, but since we are capable of getting the same nutritional value from things like vegetables and beans, humans normally only eat animals for pleasure. Singer argues that this is unnecessarily cruel and therefore morally wrong. He also writes that many scientific experiments involving animals are also wrong because of they are cruel and the animals are often killed. Here, he says, the benefits to mankind from many of these studies do not outweigh the costs of the inflicting pain on and the killing of animals. Speciesism and the Idea of equivalence Although Bonnie Steinbock also writes that we should give consideration to animal suffering, she refutes Singers claim that animals and humans have equal rights. But Steinbock does not focus on animal rights in her article because she argues that even if people and animals dont have equal rights, that doesnt mean we are justified in treating them poorly. For instance, puff on a cats tail is wrong not because cats have equal rights, but because doing so is simply a morally wrong and cruel action intended to hurt another sentient creature. Of course, Steinbock argues, unnecessary cruelty toward animals in wrong. Yet she could see certain scientific experiments involving animals as excusable and not morally wrong. If an animal experimen t saves human lives, for example, she argues that such an experiment is morally justifiable. She also writes that it is not reasonable to say that animals and