Issues Facing the Animal Society in the Todays World - Essay Example

Saeed Almarar Dr. Gillete ENG 108 MW 9:AM 4/20 Animal Rights Introduction The world holds a strong position with regard to rights and respect. Advocates and lawyers hold high positions and stands pertaining to the rights of a human being in the public world. Little however is known concerning the rights of animals. Scientists and the general public bridge the power of most animals in varied research and extensions. Human beings tend to overlook the point that the general human race form pargt and parcel of the animals in the globe. The inflictions of pain, subject to stress, or even murder in the name of research are all issues facing the animal society in the today’s world. In that regard therefore, awareness on the rights of both human beings and animals need to be brought to the attention of the world. After shedding light as to what right entails, the general public then automatically holds the responsibility of asking why. Here, it is realized that the rights of humans are well found on the basis of the animals rights. It is clear that animal rights establish what is termed as a philosophical stand for the human rights, just as is put clear in Reagan’s theory where he considers life as the body of integrity and argues that it is to be protected. The theory further argues on the study by Tuskegee that the liberty of individual beings has to be protected. The moral theory extends this same protection to all sorts of life forms out in there globe. It beats one’s sense of reason when one tries to consider animals in the category of subject of life. Animals are subject-of-life. In reality, common sense should apply in such instances. Firstly, the behavior of both human beings and animals are the same; human beings and animals have a psychological supportive linkage that explains the similarity between the two. Firstly, the behavior of both humans and animals are the same; human beings and animals have a psychological supportive linkage that explains their similarity. It should be noted that if the rights of human beings are founded in the rights of who they are, then the rights of animals are also rooted in the sense of belonging that the human beings share. It is realized that individuals with experimental mind sets have their warfare aspects directly affects matters of their personal character. This sort of interest tends to override the common sense that supports the real aspect of rights. The science of judgment and ethical evaluations are blinded by the struggle to make an outcome from their internal element of success. In the experiment, world’s scientists have a role to fulfill and at instances save a life. In these cases, the animals are portended as part of the laboratory materials and thus face the harsh environment. The primary focus during a crisis is saving human life, and people feel threatened in instances of untreated diseases like syphilis for the sake of animals rights (Tylor & Francis 2007). This on the other side bridges the subject-to-life principal and overweighs the options. What fails to click in the minds of the general public is that animals too have a different aspect of life and have a voice of their own. Regan demonstrates the importance of how it matters whatever happens to a subject-of-a-life because length and quality, how long we live depends on the day-today activities and whether or not this is of importance to anybody else. So whether other people value an individual or not, the life of that individual will be better or worse for that individual whose life it is. As a result, everyone is owed their rights whether they are aware of it or aware that they are violating them (Tuskedee & Willowbrook). Therefore, whether animals are aware of their rights or not, they are still owed their rights. Animal behavior can be correlated to human behavior; their ability to understand, intend, many other behaviors that are goal-directed. Their inability to speak is similar to that of a small a baby who can’t speak but still posses rights as a human being. Therefore, despite the inability of animals to speak, they are entitled to rights especially important to protect them against the cruel acts of human beings against them who most often consider themselves powerful than them and as a result subject them to unnecessary pain. Their rights therefore, need to be well defined and stipulated and the public made aware of them so as to keep them safe. Anomaly experiments have indeed revolutionalized the world of medicine in the past few years. The close association between animals and human beings form of the basis for application of animals in the laboratory work as well the work of the drug test. The process has seen so many ethical issues encrypt which in reality hold the right position of expression. In these cases researchers have been implicated in careless infliction of harm of these laboratory animals. Despite so many pleas from the few bodies to help stop the cruelty done to animals, very little has been done pertaining to the issues. Evidences point out that the cases are even getting worse that redemption (Roman 2006). For example, in the case of the EU member states, a record 10 million animal vertebrates were used for experimental purposes in the year 2003 alone. The figure has been on rise, leading a recorded figure of 21 million vertebrate animals in the year 2013. This growth means that at least each year an incremental one million animals are used for experimental purposes. The experiments bridge the nobility of life in the animals and end up treating such animals as objects lacking capability to life. It should be remembered that just like human beings, animals have feelings. Furthermore, animals have a right to protection from pain (Roman 2006). They have a right to live and express all the aspects of life as well as receive all the necessary care and attention that pertains life. Animals in this case should be protected from diseases and not being infected intentionally for the purposes of the experiment. In another experiment, a scientist from Northern Carolina points out that for any case involving a human into an experimental approach, commonly the consent of the individual is sort. In the consent, the individual being recruited into the study is made fully aware of the empirical implication and adverse effect that might accrue following the interaction of the experimental procedures, Human beings are given all the freedom to back out of the study in case they felt that the process was inhumane and painful, the part of which animals are denied. Animals will in most cases be put in controlled cages and their freedom to normal life cycle deprived of them including the freedom of mating and giving birth to offspring, all cruel acts which need to be discouraged at all costs. Animals should be viewed to have an independent life, and should therefore be permitted to function independently and as not subjects of any individuals. A group of scientists in 2006 raised a concern pertaining to the issues of a scientist treating laboratory animal with dignity. In their argument, the researcher pointed out that the ethical team had to come up with a new model of evaluating a moral issue. Looking at the practical aspect of the laboratory animal in the research grounds, the group argued that the animals are an important aspect of the research and that the public should consider and evaluate the value of human beings to the life of animals. In their argument, the scientist pointed out that if a right of an animal will be a bridge in a move to save a life of a human being, then the action is justified. The question arises though, what if the life of a human being is terminated to save an animal’s life, can that be justified? The common sense in this aspect tries to depict that the second case is cruelty to the human beings. What the human race tends to ignore is the fact that life is equal, and that it is noble. Just like the human right states that no human life should be sacrificed to save another, the case should be equally applicable to animals. No animal life should be sacrificed to save another. More cruelty in animal life has been experienced in the biotechnological team where the bridge for the Solveig nature of creation has been missed. The team has bridged the rights of animals in selfish moves to protect their ventures. In a descent revelation, laboratory animals that lack sentiments have been engineered. These types of animals have been denied the chance to express the feeling (Tylor & Francis 2007). Their sense of feel has been snatched out making the animals a model of human research. The animals are now cast open while a life in Quach to understand the life system of animals and humans. Human beings should thus stop the greed of being in possession of all powers on earth and respect the rights of animals. Take, for instance, a case where animals had the ability to capture human beings, take them into the laboratory and technically experiment on them. What sort of feeling could that be? The rights and privileges enjoyed by humans are equally worth noble when applied to animals. Just like the bill of rights for animals states; if one is not able to protect and also provide for a pet sufficiently, then they’d rather not keep one. Similarly, if a scientist can’t find a solution to respecting the rights of animals they’d rather not structure the experiments in this direction. Most legislation in the sense of the animal research also fails in the definition. Such registration holds definitions that in some manner t end to support the cruelty on the animals. For instance, the legislation that tries to define what an animal experiment is puts it open that the definition only apples to animals that are alive, meaning that dead animals are not counted on the list of experimental animals. The point explains the experiments performed on the animal in the colleges and schools don’t fall in the category of experimental animals. Further legislation makes it worse by depicting that the use of animal tissues and organs for experimental use is not a bridge in the animal rights. This puts some freedom to areas such as the Basic (biomedical) research, Applied (biomedical) research and Regulatory testing of drugs. The legislation makes all the research practices in the laboratory feel justified in the killing of animals in order to make experimental methods work in their favor. It is therefore clear that the laws on animal protection need to be reformed, and should always target to resolve three aspects of life in the protection of animal rights; the fact that animal suffering may occur in the context of experimentation during medical practices. The sufferings are portended to occur following unjustified practices. The legislation should highly hold ground for any research to be justified for tests on the animals, the study protocol should be well justified scientifically. The grounds should hold that any experimental practical that is not well designed and that cannot warrant any productive outcome, should not at any instance risk or order any animal suffering. If in such cases pain results are down or the case of benefits accruing to such an experiment is high, then considerable concern can be given to that approach. In another incident to be considered in the legislation, cases of unnecessary amount of pain may pertain. When the amount of pain caused on an animal’s by the experiment surpasses the necessary in the experiment, such pain should be considered illegal (Stephen 2012). As in the case where numerous animals are used than necessary, such cases should be highly discouraged and the cases for such ventures highly implicated as a breach of the law. On the third aspect, unnecessary pain that is infringed on an animal as a result of protocols that are outside the usual research protocols such as those realized due to proper handling of the animals, inadequate housing and poor feeding practices, the legal regime that seeks to protect against such malpractices should seek dictate standard modes of operation that are human, less cruel and that express the will depict explicit, humane approaches to the being of the animals. Human beings, on the other hand should understand animals are not human property, and should treat them as such. Instances of patenting animals should be highly condemned and looked at as a breach of the law. All animals including the home owned pets are free to live in entities and should be treated with courtesy as such. Technology on the other hand should as well be regulated to ensure that animals are not manipulated for the sake of human interests (Stephen 2012). The thought that human beings have the final say in the activities that are held in the lives revolving around an animal should be discouraged. Animals should be genetically modified to meet the human goals. For instance, the cases of genetically modified broilers to an extent that they grow so fast for their legs to support them should be highly discouraged. The cases of a pig being genetically engineered to an extent that they become too loose and end up developing cases of blood pressure and breathing complications should be discouraged. Despite this negative attributes of animal research however, if well conducted, animal research can be very useful. Animal research has helped in up keeping of human nutrition in varied ways. For example, through animal research and feeding of birds with diets that contained components of polished rice led to the discovery that the cause of polyneuritis in birds and beri beri in humans was a diet with over-milled rice, hence devising a control mechanism by avoiding the diet. Also the research led to the discovery that rickets was a disease due to nutrient deficient when it was introduced in dogs and that it was caused by lack of vitamin D. The feeding of pellagra producing agents to dogs around the age of 1915 and 1920 led to the discovery that pellagra could be treated with yeast. Thus, animal research can also be very useful to the environment and bigger still to the human health. Conclusion In conclusion, a human being should learn to identify animals as equally noble as humans. The approached in the treatment of animals should be in courtesy and the sense of life of animals should be respected. All animals are equal and have an equal right to life and freedom. Animal rights should therefore be protected and animals are human property. Works Cited Roman Kolar. Science and engineering ethics. Animal welfare academy Neubiberg, Germany: Greenwood Press, 2006. Print. 111-222 Stephen R Latham. U.S. law and Animal Experimentation, a critical primer. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Internet resource. 35 Tylor and Francis. The journal of human rights. , 2007. Print. 273-277 Read More