Opposing sides of Animal rights Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Opposing sides of Animal rights - Research Paper Example As might be readily noted, such a sharp stance with regards to the issue of animal rights necessarily encourages many individuals to be categorically against further animal rights. This is of course due to the inherent belief that many individuals have that animals cannot be considered as sentient beings; therefore, extending any form of rights or the expectation thereof, is tantamount to extending rights to an unconscious object. Ultimately, the debate is somewhat circular due to the fact that neither animal rights activists nor their counterparts who advocate a reduction in animal rights rules and practice can definitively prove that consciousness exists within animals and therefore is worthy of a level of respect. With respect to this brief analysis, the author will propose an opposing viewpoint with regards to the inherent belief that animals should engender further rights and protections under law. Whereas it should not be noted that this analysis will take a contrary in view of the fact that animals are important, should be respected, and preserved for future generations, it will be the express intent of this author to engage the reader with an understanding for the fact that many of the fundamental arguments that animal rights activists put forward as evidence for why further animal rights should be manifested within the current world are fundamentally flawed. Firstly, it must be understood that humans are most certainly the most evolved creatures that exist on earth. By means of the process of evolution, humans have a degree of power and control with regards to their environment. For many years, individuals of a religious persuasion believed that God had given mankind â€Å"dominion† over the earth. However, whether or not one believes in evolution or whether or not one believes in intelligent design is not the issue; rather, the issue is the fact that the overall intellects and functional capacity of humans necessarily places them in a situation that they are able to make a discerning judgments and determine value based upon the needs and rights of the environment around them. Said one author, â€Å"There are a lot of people in the animal rights movement who can be very passionate and aggressive, and I applaud people's passion, but when people are judgmental and aggressive, all they end up doing is getting other people to turn away in irritation† (Monastersky 12). For instance, many individuals point to the fact that further rights should be extended to animals. However, an understanding of rights and how these rights originate ultimately is derived from philosophical the value and the means through which a level of inequality is represented. For this very reason, it was not until the 20th century that individuals within society began to take note of the fact that a moral and ethical interpretation of the world necessitated that rights and privileges be