Good point! We've given them rights, and I think this is important to note given the phrasing of the original question.
This discussion is not necessarily so much about whether animals should have any rights or not (although we are certainly discussing that too), but also about how much in the way of rights, or in what way we should think about animal rights.
We should continue killing animals because it is not viewed as wrong
Actually, poaching is "viewed as wrong". THe human race is viewed as intelligent, and by some even considered the most dangerous animal. That should be enough reason for us to look at the outcome/consequenses of our acts. We have the brain to figure out what is "natural" and what is not, and we should be able to see if something causes pain, and if it should be that way. Just because human have somewhat conquered the world does not mean we can do whatever we like. That is why both human and animal have rights to have a good life. But it seems that both of these requirements is hard to meet.
That is why both human and animal have rights to have a good life.
My idea of a good live involves eating meat. That animal probably doesn't want to die. Are you saying that I shouldn't eat meat? Because with this statement:
We have the brain to figure out what is "natural" and what is not
you should be able to make the connection that yes, humans are naturally supposed to eat some meat, just like any omnivore.
I am not saying you should not eat meat. I am saying that the cow or what ever creature you might want to eat (as long as it is legal) should have a good life and a good death, without pain or stress. Chicken being fed up so they cannot even walk, pigs in stalls too small for them to even turn over, cows standing in their own crap. All these things should be prevented by giving animals the right to live a good life.
I really don't think animals should have rights because animals aren't people they are well, animals. I mean I can see people not shooting certian animals because there are low population of them but no, animals should not have rights.
Who is talking about the same rights as human? A human right would be 'right to free speech', not a thing an animal would have any use of. I think the question is if animals should have some rights, rights of, as you said, being protected from pain and stress, especially caused by humans.' But what do I know.
I just simply do not think that animals are capable of even useing rights. I think that they should be protected from un-wanted abuse by humans but I doubt that a bill of rights for animals would be very smart. Therefore, it is impossible to even compare animal rights to human rights.
I think I called it Ethical Obligation to Humanity some posts ago. It makes it a bit more clear what this is about, and should stop the discussion about animals not being human.
Part of the reason Darwin was brushed off and and theories disliked by the small minded was, obviously his proof of evolution, but also by proving that humans weren't that special. This really pissed people off. By someone saying that hey we're not that special and aside from a few flukes in evolution we'd still be swinging from trees, it was saying that we had no grand purpose. We are literally just smart monkeys. People thought humans were the ultimate thing and saying we're nothing special really drove them nuts. Similar to the people that got pissed off at Galileo for proving that the wonderful awesome earth was not the center of the universe. Another human invented arrogance.
We are not special, we are just smarter. Our pain is not more important then a dogs pain or a horses pain. Anymore then my pain is more important then a babies pain because I can articulate it. Does the lion beat an ox before she kills it? Does she keep its baby tied up so it can't ever walk? When we speak of rights we do need to give a cat the right to free speech, as Cenere pointed out because they are not human. But the right to live a painless existence without torture and fear? Why are we the only species that deserves that?
