In Defense of the Animals: They have rights, too

Its been quite some time now since animal protection legislation was passed. I am specifically referring to the Animal Welfare Act!

animal_welfareUndeniably, the ultimate overriding objective of this measure is the prevention of the cruelty and unnecessary suffering of animals and corollary to that, the promotion and advancement of the rights and welfare of animals.

Indeed, “we have the laws for animal welfare, we have established bodies for enforcement of these laws and we are living in a civilised world. So what could have gone wrong?”

Why up to now, various horrendous and shocking news of animals violations are still rampant?

Clearly it has something to do with the hardened heart of our fellow “human beings”.

I hold the strict view that the moment a person commits an act of cruelty or subjects a fellow creature to violence and pain; that person cease to be a person, loses his/her humanity and becomes an animal himself/herself.

In fact, those heartless creatures (who are violent and inhumane to the animals) are worst than the animals by virtue of their hideous and nefarious acts. The animals that they’ve hurt is more human than those culprits who are the true beasts and monsters in our civilized society.

It is not an exaggeration to state that those freaks and heartless fiends who hurt and abused poor and helpless animals are the genuine beasts of the worst kind!

It is my fervent view, that those barbarians are guilty of inhumanity, apathy, animal rights violations and indeed, speciesism.

According to the noted British psychologist Richard D. Ryder:

I use the word ‘speciesism’, to describe the widespread discrimination that is practised by man against other species … Speciesism is discrimination, and like all discrimination it overlooks or underestimates the similarities between the discriminator and those discriminated against.

As a humanist and an animal rights advocate, it is my ardent argument that it is irrational or morally wrong to regard sentient beings (beings who are lower than us humans) as objects or property.

Animals are also creation of Mother Nature. They have their rights, too. Like us, they also have feelings and they also want to live.

As a philosopher myself, I would like to highlight Professor John Rawl’s seminal work, A Theory of Justice (1971) and the eminent Charles Darwin’s monumental work, The Descent of Man (1871) to magnified my contention and fierce objection against animal rights abuse. Indeed, professor Rawl’s book is one of the leading readings and required texts in any course in both Moral and Political Philosophy!

I also subscribed to Gandhi’s view that, “the more helpless the creature, the more entitled it is to protection of man”.

The philosopher Tom Regan also argues that:

All animals have inherent rights and that we cannot assign them a lesser value because of a perceived lack of rationality, while assigning a higher value to infants and the mentally impaired solely on the grounds of being members of a specific species.

The Australian ethical philosopher, Peter Singer in his book, Animal Liberation (1975), argues against what he calls speciesism (as already noted, this term was coined by the British psychologist, Professor Richard D. Ryder in 1970): discrimination on the grounds that a being belongs to a certain species.

Professor Singer holds the view that the interests of all beings capable of suffering to be worthy of equal consideration, and that giving lesser consideration to beings based on their species is no more justified than discrimination based on skin color. He argues that animals should have rights based on their ability to feel pain more than their intelligence.

Hence, to restate my central thesis:

We, as the so-called highest member of the animal kingdom do have the moral and not merely the legal responsibility to take care of those creatures below us. To fall short of this duty is to descend to the level of the animals themselves.

I hope the authorities concerned will bring all of those animal rights violators and speciesists to the bar of justice, so that those true bloodied animals and good for nothing creatures will pay and answer to their immoral, sinister, heartless, inhuman, utterly unethical, undeniably animalistic acts and palpably evil deeds!!!

In my conclusion, again to cite Gandhi in one of his moving words:

The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.

[Photo courtesy Eco Friendly Kids.]
 

About benign0

benign0 is the Web master of GetRealPhilippines.com
This entry was posted in Civics, Culture, Society and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to In Defense of the Animals: They have rights, too

  1. Paul Farol (@paulfarol) says:

    Good one!

  2. Hector Gamboa says:

    Prof, would animal consumption by humans be ethically exempted? Why or why not? Thanks in advance!

  3. Libertas says:

    The way people treat animals acts as a mirror of their own values and character.
    Animal abusers an indicator of wife beaters.

    ” the emotional “motivators” behind domestic assault and
    animal cruelty are virtually the same. These include the
    inability to control internal impulses, a limited tolerance for
    frustration, unresolved rage that builds up to an explosion
    point and seeing violence as an acceptable solution to life’s
    problems. In these cases, the victim is almost immaterial – it is
    the act of violence that is important to the abuser.

    The connection between animal cruelty and interpersonal
    violence is so profound that the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation and other law enforcement agencies consider it
    one of the leading indicators of a potentially dangerous person.”
    Humane society

  4. mcalleyboy says:

    Most of neighbors are happy to sell off the many dogs that are all over the streets. I know a there are a few people that worry about animals but it’s only those that have money.
    Notice no articles posted on Chinese vessel reef grounding, money saved for the pedi cycle, tricycle and jeepeny goofy slogan music for the favored Chinese backed candidate, thank God.

  5. eduardo says:

    Arroyo, during her regime also allowed animal rights to be abused.

    tinyurl.com/cnrz3pb

    • Johnny Derp says:

      LIES, where’s your real proof then?
      Face it eduardo, your propaganda is FAILING.

      TROLL HARDER

    • Libertas says:

      p-noy chinoy aquino who is the great human rights abuser
      not to mention his role in hacienda luisita massacre and subsequent cover up. clearly a low life and a criminal.
      now helping his malaysian business friends rather than his countrymen. just like his traitor grandfather.
      no wonder his only followers are uneducated and ill informed and unemployed.

      • eduardo says:

        Marcos and Arroyo have their share on human rights abuses, example is Jose Burgos. How about now? Almost no news.

      • WinterSoldier says:

        Farce. There are human rights violations during Marcos’ time but your totally nuts since you love to overrate his atrocities. Yet many claimed before finding out the truth about him that his time was actually a time where society was disciplined. Two sides of the same coin. People demonize Marcos but take away what he did for the country.

        Arroyo being responsible on Jonas Burgos’ disappearance is more based on HEARSAY and you’re totally insane about it. The very reason why there is no news about human rights abuses on the Aquino administration because it was buried by media outlets like ABS-CBN, Inquirer, etc.

    • WinterSoldier says:

      So eduardo is indeed a murderer. Don’t you know that PNoy got away with that?

      Two words: HACIENDA LUISITA. :p

      • eduardo says:

        He is not a murderer. Paninira lang yan.

      • Johnny Derp says:

        Yes he is, only idiots like you are blind to the truth.
        Troll Harder

      • WinterSoldier says:

        Yep, he is. He is the administrator of Hacienda Luisita during his tenure as congressman. And since the crisis is our of control, he had a solution: he pulled the trigger.

        Yellow Propaganda is actual PANINIRA if you ask me.

    • Johnny Derp says:

      Eduardo has convieniently forgot about the numerous human rights abuses during cory and panot’s time. Hacienda luisita, Mendiola MASSACRE, Luneta hostage massacre and now the SABAH Crisis.
      You really are a retarded twat, eduardo.
      TROLL HARDER

      • eduardo says:

        Mendiola massacre = according to reports ang mga nagpoprotesta ang nauna. Walang kasalanan si Cory.

        Luneta massacre = still credited to Arroyo kasi wala pang 100 days. Walang kasalanan ang pangulo.

        sabah massacre =matitigas ang ulo ni kiram. Walang kasalanan ang pangulo

      • Johnny Derp says:

        Wrong again faggot,
        Mendiola Massacre: it was cory’s forces that killed the protesters
        Luneta Massacre: it was aquino’s inaction that killed the hong kong tourists
        Sabah Massacre: another inaction of aquino caused it in the first place

        Your “facts” are invalidated
        TROLL HARDER

      • WinterSoldier says:

        1. The victims of the Mendiola Massacre are none other than the poor farmers of Hacienda Luisita.

        2. Luneta hostage taking wasn’t actually Arroyo’s fault. It was still the president himself since he doesn’t take responsibility. So he lost his mind by putting the blame on Arroyo instead. So you’re praising COWARDICE. That’s because “Real leaders never play the blame game.”

        3. Sabah crisis is also the president’s fault. Due to his “hopeless cause” speech. Since the Kirams are Muslims, they took it as an insult. Hindi lang ang mga Kiram ang matitigas ang ulo, kundi si Noynoy din. If he never said that and instead came up with another solution, the better.

        I’m still disproving your Yellow Propaganda comments. Since I want to tell you how stupid you are.😛

  6. Legati says:

    Overheard from a woman: “You can tell a man from the way he treats his dog.”

  7. Libertas says:

    Eduardo’s arguments are as impotent as p-noy and as devoid of facts, intellect, or wit as one of p-noy’s badly delivered speeches ( a good cure for insomnia)

    p-noy is an animal hater. he certainly treats humans worse than normal people would treat animals. must be his chinese blood – they eat dogs and abuse children.

    P-noy’s grandfather lived a hypocrite and died a traitor. Therein lies the family resemblance

    P-noy sleeps more than any other president, whether by day or night.
    Nero fiddled , but aquino only snores.

    “He would kill his own family members just so that he could use their skin to make a drum to beat his own praises, which in reality were none, only on par with his lack of achievements, and bad manners”
    Margot Asquith

    • Johnny Derp says:

      Aquino SNORES while Sabah BURNS.
      Aquino SLEEPS while Hong kong tourists get killed.
      Aquino HIDES while Chinese vessels invade the Spratlys.
      Aquino BLAMES while everything in the country is going to HELL.

  8. Sometimes man’s cruelty to animals(especially dogs)is an act of greediness. To earn a few peso some people are willing to sacrifice the lives of these animals. This holds true to the recent event that took place somewhere in the southern province where Korean nationals were apprehended for masterminding and taking bets in dog fights.

  9. Libertas says:

    ban cock-fighting

    and dont be cruel to dumb animals – eduardo can’t help it, his mother repeatedly dropped him on his head when young.

  10. Libertas says:

    Only just noticed that gay septegenarian and dog lover ( he has a golden labrador) cliff richard was in manila recently.
    P-noy’s favorite cliff richard song – “batchelor boy”

    “When I was young my father said
    “Son I have something to say”
    And what he told me I’ll never forget
    Until my dyin’ day.
    He said “Son you are a bachelor gay
    And that’s the way to stay.
    Son, you be a bachelor boy until your dyin’ day”

  11. Despair says:

    Amoebas are still animals, right? And we are taught that we should be kind to animals no matter what their natures are. Mr. Lacierda here is an amoeba, with no brains. Therefore we can conclude, that we must still be kind to this, educated troll. Let’s not be too rude, maybe flushing him out of this site would suffice since his empty threats galore in one thread here in GRP.

    Honestly, I want to point out the natural sincerity of humans to these creatures. Especially for their pets, they treat their tamed animals as a fellow human – they get hurt, thus they must be taken care of. They have feelings, thus they must be loved.

    That picture of the dog above brings me to some degree of “feelings”, though.

    • Johnny Derp says:

      Calling eduardo “educated” is an overstatement since he doesn’t seem to be educated with his lame posts, flawed logic and stupidity overall. I do agree that he should be flushed out of GRP like the insignificant worm that he is.

    • MidwayHaven says:

      Amoebas are not animals; they’re single-celled organisms. They can be abused at will.

  12. MidwayHaven says:

    I hope I won’t get flak for going against the central thesis of this article; I tend to believe more in Animal WELFARE rather than Animal Rights.

    http://www.animalscam.com/rights_vs_welfare.php

    This is also the main reason why I do not support “animal rights” groups such as PETA, which has recently been discovered KILLING animals for profit (disturbing photos in link:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-j-winograd/peta-kills-puppies-kittens_b_2979220.html

    Animal Rights is the belief that animals and humans are equal, and that no animals should be used by humans for any reason, including pet ownership, because this is (to animal rights activists) a form of exploitation.

    But as a proponent of Animal WELFARE, I believe that, indeed, man has responsibility over animals, and that this stewardship should involve humane care and treatment. We as humans are responsible for the human support and care we give to animals; but we also have to admit we use them for food, fiber, service and companionship. Animal WELFARE abhors and therefore denounces the inflicting of any unnecessary pain or suffering on animals.

    • Hector Gamboa says:

      I agree with you, MidwayHaven. We do use animals as means for a human end and I don’t see anything wrong with that per se. What matters, I think, is how we use the means (i.e. how we handle the animals) and for what kind of end (i.e. greater human purpose) we use it for.

  13. Libertas says:

    Don’t insult monkeys, they have feelings too!

    A woman gets on a bus with her baby.
    The bus driver says:
    ”Ugh, that’s the ugliest baby I’ve ever seen!”
    The woman walks to the rear of the bus and sits down, fuming.
    She says to a man next
    to her: ”The driver just insulted me!”
    The man says: ”You go up
    there and tell him off. Go on, I’ll hold your monkey for you.”

  14. Glenn says:

    if if if, it is true that one can judge the greatness of a nation by observing how that nation treats its animals. Well, the the Republic of the Philippines is not a great nation, nope. The vast numbers of mangey-ass, stray, un-vaccinated, public health risk dogs roaming around virtually everywhere in the entire country testifies to that.
    I applaud the fact that ‘dog-catchers’ are not employed to round them all up and send them to the ‘pound’ to be gassed, but if that is only because the LGU’s do not want to spend the money it would cost to get rid of, or give health care to, the ‘strays’. That makes the problem even worse. Seeing a dog actually get up, after thinking it was dead from being run over and flattened like a peso, and have insects jump off of it as if a cloud of smoke had risen from that poor dog was one of the more hideous things I’ve seen. Wondering why anyone would not put the sufferring animal either out of its misery or feed it back to health was just a matter of realizing that no one nearby had the money to do it.
    at this point it may be a better idea to help the poor of the country get out of the poverty that crushes them and denies them ‘their daily bread’, than to worry about dogs and other animals left out in the cold as sad as that is.

  15. Trosp says:

    “As a philosopher myself, I would like to highlight Professor John Rawl’s seminal work, A Theory of Justice (1971) and the eminent Charles Darwin’s monumental work, The Descent of Man (1871)…”

    Darwin has not prove or disprove anything. He is a fraud.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s