The Animal Rights Movement
The idea that animals, like people, have the right to be free from abuse and human use is known as the "animal rights" movement. The majority of animal advocates believe that animal rights are based on the rejection of speciesism. The concept that animals have sentience serves as another foundation for these liberties. Since Ireland passed the first animal protection law in Europe in 1635, there has been a problem with animal cruelty. (Rowlands 60). The first piece of animal protection law was enacted in North America in 1641. (Rowlands 60). The rights of animals continue to be a hotly debated topic in today's society, particularly in light of the growing trend of keeping pets. Some of the ways which animals are exploited by human beings include being used to provide eggs, fur, meat and milk for human consumption. Animals are also exploited through hunting, circuses, plowing and animal experimentation. In this paper, I will discuss the issue of animals’ right using natural law and act utilitarianism theories.
Ethical Theories
Natural Law
Natural law is a theory which asserts that certain rights are inherent by virtue of human nature which was endowed by nature and such virtue can be understood universally by human reason. The law of nature exists independently of a given political order, positive law society at large or the legislature. Natural law implies that all laws should be based on ethics and morality. It holds that the law is discovered by human beings through reasoning and it is based on what is ‘correct.’ The law asserts that human beings have the right to choose between evil and good. As such, natural law sources its power from discovering particular universal standards of ethics and morality. Natural law plays a significant part in animals’ rights. One of the arguments given for animals rights based on natural law is the resemblance of animals with people in particular elements. One such element is the ability of an animal to have sentience.
Like human beings, animals feel pain, sadness or joy. This applies to some animals and not all living things. For instance, dogs are very emotional which is similar to what human beings feel. Elephants have also been noted to mourn one of their dead. These facts have shown that animals and human beings are more similar than previously thought. It is therefore wrong for human beings to exploit animals without considering what they feel r undergo in such hard circumstances. Human beings are the only living thing that has been endowed with the capability to act or think morally. Killing an animal or exploiting it is therefore morally wrong. Human beings have the ability to transcend their self-interest. In this case, human beings have the ability to stop taking products with meat or fur. Using natural law, human beings should be a servant of the other creatures and should always act in an ethical manner rather than subjecting another creature to torturous ways. Therefore, human beings should treat animals in a fair way rather than the common exploiting that is witnessed in the current world. By following natural law, humanity can establish a positive and fulfilling relationship with animals.
Act Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism is a utilitarian theory of ethics. The theory states that an individual’s act is morally right if that act produces the best possible result in a particular situation. Act utilitarianism has its basis in utility whereby it is summed as the greatest happiness for the greatest number. The decisions based on act utilitarianism are determined by calculating the amount of suffering or happiness that one's actions may cause. The right action will be the one where it results in the happiness of the majority. Applying this theory to animal rights, one can identify that the exploitation of these creatures is wrong. In most first world countries, people take meat which is the products of animals. These individuals do not lack anything since they have enough food. One can argue that the people act in their self-interest. Their actions do not result in the happiness of the people since many can do without meat. On the other hand, it leads to the suffering of the animals.
The rights of animals should, therefore, uphold when act utilitarianism is applied to this situation. Researchers have provided that animals have emotions and can feel pain. The action of human beings, in this case, does not result in the happiness of the animals; it, however, results in a great suffering. The case cannot apply to all the situations. Ina case where society does not have anything for consumption, the act of killing an animal for food can be seen as a right decision. It may not be morally right, but at least it results in the happiness of the majority. The community in such a case cannot do away with meat since they will starve to death. In most societies, this situation does not exist as exemplified by Chinese killing dog for its meat or Japanese killing whales for its blubber. All these are decisions that should be reversed, and the rights of animals should be upheld. One can, therefore, argue that animals have rights and human beings should follow.
Opinion
In my opinion, animals endure great suffering from human beings. Some animals have been caged for the satisfaction of humanity. Others are killed for food. Some animals are killed for their fur and hides. All these are things that human beings do not need. We can survive on vegetables and other crops to sustain us. Killing animals is not necessary. A strong law should be drafted which will help in protecting animals from human abuse. Animals deserve better treatment than what is currently seen around the world. We have the ability to reason and see what is wrong or right. Animals should be respected by people and laws should be enforced to protect them against the vices of humankind.
Closing
Animal rights continue to be one of the controversial topics in this modern world. Animal product lovers have not shown any sign of reducing their consumption. The governments have been reluctant to help animal rights activists from banning certain animal products. Looking at act utilitarianism, one can identify that animals should have their rights and should be considered an indispensable part of nature. People do not have a good reason for exploiting animals for their personal gain. In this case, the act of killing an animal does not result in the greatest happiness for the people especially those in developed countries. Regarding natural law, human beings have the capability to think morally and ethically. Therefore, the rights of animals should be respected by human beings. Animals should be able to live without exploitation from humanity.
Work cited
Rowlands, Mark. Animal rights. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2013.
