Animal rights or animal welfare?
Discuss everything to do with animals and pets in here.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
| Please change your TSR password | 23-05-2013 | |
-
View Poll Results: Animal rights or animal welfare?
Animal welfare 13 59.09% Animal rights 9 40.91%
-
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- New Member
- Posts: 9
Animal rights or animal welfare?I'm animal rights - I regularly campaign for their rights too - but what do you guys think?
Animal rights
Animal rights, also known as animal liberation, is the idea that the most basic interests of non-human animals should be afforded the same consideration as the similar interests of human beings. Basically animals shouldn't be used for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation or for any other abusive purpose.
Animal welfare
The term animal welfare can also mean human concern for animal welfare. Basically it's perfectly acceptable to use animals for abusive purposes where it is conducted in a humane manner. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Location: Edinburgh
- Posts: 3,089
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?I'd say I would reluctantly be for welfare
I'm a scientist and will work in a lab (I hope) and while I don't agree with testing animals needlessly for make up or things like that, I agree with testing animals for drugs/other treatments until we figure out a way of getting them right without animals. I would however prefer if humans had the choice to consent to be used for testing instead - if they agreed and were of sound mind and consented obviously!
-
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 182
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?agree with you about the animal testing - its only alright for certain things. im a bit mixed about the whole issue though, im a sienctist and have done disections in biology lessons and things and would like to work in a lab but im also a Vegetarian.(Original post by Sprockette)
I'd say I would reluctantly be for welfare I'm a scientist and will work in a lab (I hope) and while I don't agree with testing animals needlessly for make up or things like that, I agree with testing animals for drugs/other treatments until we figure out a way of getting them right without animals. I would however prefer if humans had the choice to consent to be used for testing instead - if they agreed and were of sound mind and consented obviously!
-
- Reputation:
- Arise, Sir Frank Lampard
- Location: Edinburgh, UK
- Posts: 1,914
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?Welfare
When it boils down to it, animals are below us in the foodchain, and foodchains would exist whether or not humans were around. So it completely natural and part of life for us to exploit animals.
However, when it comes to animal abuse, it is absolutely disgusting and shameful and should be cracked down on forcibly. -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Location: Antwerpen
- Posts: 1,620
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?It's what goes on before you eat it, not actually eating it.(Original post by Alexier)
I would have to say Animal Welfare. I don't see eating an animal as abusive. But that's just how I look upon it. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Buckinghamshire
- Posts: 9,079
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?It is absurd to use what is 'natural' as a measure of what is 'right' or 'acceptable'. For one thing, defining what is 'natural' is problematic. For another, if you consider morality to be judged by how 'natural' something is, or whether it would occur anyway in some form without human intervention, you are compelled to judge all human behaviour in the same way. Is rape OK? Cannibalism? Murder? Infanticide? Both our own and other species do these things. They would happen if humans didn't exist.(Original post by Cannotbelieveit)
Welfare
When it boils down to it, animals are below us in the foodchain, and foodchains would exist whether or not humans were around. So it completely natural and part of life for us to exploit animals.
However, when it comes to animal abuse, it is absolutely disgusting and shameful and should be cracked down on forcibly.
What non-sapient animals do is not a guide for how we should behave. What other humans do - rational, intelligent individuals - is not a guide for how we should behave. Unless you're comfortable with a total abdication of moral judgement and happy to let anyone do whatever they want, no matter how much damage and pain it causes? After all, your position seems akin to 'might is right' and you don't seem to think there are compelling reasons to allow animals their own lives. Why should we treat humans differently? -
- Reputation:
- Exalted and Worshipped Member
- Location: England
- Posts: 1,266
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?I flip back and forth with the both of them. I can't stand animals being abused and tortured but I still eat meat and hope the animal had a quick and the least painful death possible.
Great, now I feel awful
-
- Reputation:
- Exalted and Worshipped Member
- Posts: 1,067
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?It's natural for animals to eat each other, so I wouldn't call using animals for food "abusive". I care deeply about animals, but have voted "animal welfare", mostly because with their help we have a chance of developing cures for cancer and other serious illnesses.
My personal belief is that it's natural to eat animals, but we should limit their suffering to an absolute minimum. This goes for animal testing too - animals should only ever be used when it is absolutely essential and the results are highly important (e.g. searching for a cure for dementia or cancer). -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Buckinghamshire
- Posts: 9,079
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?Do children have rights? They can't get married, vote or drive (in this country).(Original post by Devel)
Rights.
They should have equal employment opportunities, marriage rights and so on.
Defending rights does not mean giving everyone the same rights, only those applicable to them. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Buckinghamshire
- Posts: 9,079
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?It's natural for animals to kill each other, so I wouldn't call murder 'abusive'.(Original post by emilie18)
It's natural for animals to eat each other, so I wouldn't call using animals for food "abusive". I care deeply about animals, but have voted "animal welfare", mostly because with their help we have a chance of developing cures for cancer and other serious illnesses.
My personal belief is that it's natural to eat animals, but we should limit their suffering to an absolute minimum. This goes for animal testing too - animals should only ever be used when it is absolutely essential and the results are highly important (e.g. searching for a cure for dementia or cancer). -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Highway 61
- Posts: 4,873
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?If a post calls for employment rights for animals, it is best to assume it is not serious.(Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
Do children have rights? They can't get married, vote or drive (in this country).
Defending rights does not mean giving everyone the same rights, only those applicable to them. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Buckinghamshire
- Posts: 9,079
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?It is very common for people to challenge the notion of 'animal rights' by pointing out the absurdity of allowing animals to vote/drive/get married.(Original post by Devel)
If a post calls for employment rights for animals, it is best to assume it is not serious. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Highway 61
- Posts: 4,873
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?Fair enough, that wasnt my intention.(Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
It is very common for people to challenge the notion of 'animal rights' by pointing out the absurdity of allowing animals to vote/drive/get married.
It does seem like an odd challenge to use in taking part in a serious discussion. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Idol
- Location: Buckinghamshire
- Posts: 9,079
Re: Animal rights or animal welfare?A lot of people don't think you can have a 'serious discussion' about animal rights.(Original post by Devel)
Fair enough, that wasnt my intention.
It does seem like an odd challenge to use in taking part in a serious discussion.
I'm a scientist and will work in a lab (I hope) and while I don't agree with testing animals needlessly for make up or things like that, I agree with testing animals for drugs/other treatments until we figure out a way of getting them right without animals. I would however prefer if humans had the choice to consent to be used for testing instead - if they agreed and were of sound mind and consented obviously!
