Abstract
This paper examines the issues of slavery and animal rights. It reflects on the relationship between the moral reasoning supporting the abolition of slavery and the protection of animals from cruelty. It makes persuasive arguments that the distinction between animal rights and human rights is untenable when it comes to issues of ethical treatment just as the distinction between whites and blacks was untenable.

From the Paper
"According to an essay published online on the Teaching American History website on July at the Rochester Ladies Antislavery Society, Frederick Douglass gave a speech in which he reminded the audience that the Fourth of July, during which the nation celebrated freedom and liberty, was not a day for celebration for slaves. The United States that Frederick Douglass knew was a nation of contradictions. There were people opposed to slavery but the position of the United States government was that slaves were property rather than people. The speech..."

Tags:Frederick Douglass, rhetoric and persuasion, animal rights, suffering, mercy, nonhuman, civil rights, slavery

Abstract
This paper examines the similarities of outlook and points of departure between environmentalists and animal rights activists. This includes a literature review which evaluates the background for the differing perspectives of these groups. The author points out similarities between environmentalists and animal rights activists, but concludes that these groups still have distinct opinions. The paper concludes by stating the two groups should be aware that they are fighting the same battle.

From the Paper
" The facts of the matter are this: there are some people who believe that environmental ethics and animal rights are two different and disjointed genres, there are still who believe that animal rights and the conservative or backward morals/principles have more in common then environmental ethics and animal right, it is also true, perhaps based on the most sound facts, that both the advocates of environmental health and animals rights have the exact identical foe, for example, an environmentalist and animal rights activist would both equally care about the hazardous effects of cutting down rainforests to evenly space the luxurious demand of lifestyles of the ever growing population, they would equally be concerned about the poisonous waste dumps in the oceans and rivers that has been one of the causes of the endangerment of whales, etc. In fact, when looking at the records of the environmental fights and debates that have been fought in the past, it is no surprise to see the aspect of animal suffering and extinction being given its due attention. It is also interesting to note that fights fought by the environmentalist and animal rights activist before the World War II took place were all based on the selfish and ruthless destruction of one of the nature's most bounty resources and the extinction of the other in order to better insure the development of weapons or forces equipments, and treating both the natural resources and animals (humans and non-humans) as expendable and insignificant goods. Both groups refused to believe in the utmost faith given to science as the solution to all the problems and it is no surprise that both these revolutions began with very little space between each other. There are people now who support both the groups; environmentalist and animal rights, and feel that there is no distinction or apprehension between the two concepts, and feel that both are concerned about the greater good of the same thing: nature (Jamieson, 1997). "

Tags:animal, rights, environmental, activists, environment

Abstract
This paper discusses the pros and cons of animal rights, taking the side in defense of such right. The paper cites a number of sources to support that contention. It also offers the arguments of supporters of animal right's movement.

From the Paper
"In a world increasingly filled with abuse, violence, neglect and lack of regard for the lives of human beings it becomes ever more difficult to uphold the rights and ethical treatment of other species as well as babies-both at the embryo ..."

Tags:animal rights, suffering, ethics, speciesism, pro, con

Abstract
In this paper, the utilitarian philosophy of Singer provides a limited vision of the human perspective on modern animal rights, as the self important conception of the human self often overrides the greater good of Nature. This insular view of Nature and of human relationships with animals is a major problem for utilitarians, as they suggest that animals must invariably not have a say in regards to their equal right to in the natural order.

From the Paper
Thank you for purchasing a customized research paper from Essay Experts LLC. We strive to deliver to our customers the most accurate and up-to-date research each and every time we prepare a custom work. Your Writer ID: #255 Order ID: 12665 Topic: Ethics Disclaimer: This document should be used in precisely the same way you would use any article you might find in your local research library. Remember, you must cite it properly just like you would any other source listed in your bibliography. If you have any questions regarding citing

Tags:singer, animal, rights

Abstract
This paper briefly looks at the evolution of the Western world's views on the treatment of animals and how the lack of a agreement on what an animal precisely is causes difficulties in addressing the issue of animal rights. It goes on to present a debate on the issue of animal rights through three different perspectives: ethical relativism, utilitarianism, and ethical egoism.

Sentient Rights in a Solitary World
The Essential Problem of the Definitions
Framework of the Debate within this Context
Taking A Position -- Modified Personal Responsibility
Ethical Traditions Within The Framework
Summary

From the Paper
"In recent years, the ethical issue of animal rights has seriously entered into the realm of philosophical debate. This in itself shows a change in perspective, for until relatively recently the issue was not even seriously broached by philosophers, save maybe in sport or to highlight the absurdity of a line of reasoning. However, increasingly within modern philosophy, the issue may be broached. While one would think that the demands of such philosophies as egoism and utilitarianism would subjugate the position of animals, it seems historically that the reverse has somewhat been true. The question then becomes, within a humanistic mind-set, what potential exists for a healthy construct of the rights of animals? The answer lies in comprehending the individual focus of these philosophies, and treating this issue not as one of social or legal mandate, but as one of personal cognizance."

Tags:soul, sentient, beings, animal, equality, theories, animal, cruelty

Abstract
This paper presents the position that unbalanced animal rights policies have an unfair and detrimental effect on some human rights. The paper presents arguments that support its position and suggests that, in order to balance the rights and safety of men and the rights of animals, the government must develop a means testing approach to wildlife protection, which could be assembled to measure economic impact of proposed animal rights declarations.

Introduction to the ESA
The Cougar's Plight
The Problem of Protection
Protected Species vs. Protected Species
Conclusion and Research Proposal

From the Paper
"According to Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law (1996), the Endangered Species Act (ESA) obligated the government to protect all animal and plant life threatened with extinction. Included in this category are endangered species, which is defined as any species "which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range." Also protected are threatened species, which are defined as any species "which is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range." The wide brush of this act is creating problems for those who are granting the rights to the animals. Unlike humans, who have been granted certain unalienable rights by their creator, (US Bill of Rights) animals receive the rights they enjoy from the highest species on the earth, man."

Tags:activist, group, citizen, communities, harm, rights, klammath, falls, fish, cougar, panther

Abstract
This paper briefly discusses the moral and legal issues to do with animal rights in the United States. A short history on the American Society of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) is included in the paper. The author also points out the link between cruelty to animals particularly amongst youths and serial killers. The author singles out Hawaii as the most recent state to adopt stricter criminal penalties for animal cruelty and at the same time, urges other states to progress in their cultural attitude and impose stricter penalties on barbaric torture of animals.

Outline:
Background and History
The Current State of Criminal Legislation and Future Recommendations
References

From the Paper
"Throughout history, man has used animals for food, for their strength to
accomplish mechanical tasks and for the raw materials for everything from winter clothing to tools and weapons. Man, unfortunately, also has a long history of inhumanity to his fellow man, and of cruelty to animals. In much of the rest of the world, cultural attitudes reflect a continuing insensitivity to animals, working them to death, and hunting them to extinction for decorative ivory and superstitious uses of their ground up bones, or harvesting one part such as by hauling them from the water to slice off their fins before tossing them back into the water to sink to the ocean floor and drown."

Tags:animal, cruelty

Abstract
This paper examines the animal rights movement as presented in literature published by animal rights activists. It first presents the negative attitudes within the animal rights movement towards science and scientists. Next, it examines the animal rights movement's position in society in order to show how this movement is infiltrating the current paradigm of both scientific and lay society. The paper then examines each of the three areas of animal experimentation (biomedical research, product testing, and education). Surveying each of these three, the paper presents the argument posed by the animal rights activists against the use of animals and then presents examples of scientific and technological alternatives currently in use.

Paper Outline:
Introduction
Negative Attitudes Towards Science and Scientists
Animal Rights in Society
Biomedical Research
Product Testing
Education
Conclusion
Bibliography

From the Paper
"Pressures to accelerate legislation concerning the use of animals in scientific experimentation have resulted in legislative mandates under discussion in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Bills introduced in both 1988 and 1989 (known as the Consumer Products Safety Testing Act) would require Federal agencies to promulgate regulations specifying that non-animal tests be used whenever possible. When specific non-animal alternatives are found to be less valid, agencies would be required to publish explanations and justifications of continued animal use."

Tags:vivisection, dissection, product, testing, TOPKAT

Abstract
In this article, the writer explains that the nature of animal rights necessarily converges upon the modern debate of animal experimentation. After all, the writer points out, if it is morally acceptable to experiment upon animals, then one has said something important about the extent to which non-humans can have rights within society. Additionally, the writer notes that one can make further claims as to the type of experiments that are morally justifiable and precisely which animals may be afforded any rights. Overall, the writer maintains that the case for animal rights must center upon what types of organisms can reasonably be protected under the law -- if they can voluntarily act under the confines of law.

From the Paper
"First, it must be established that human societies have been formed for the mutual advantages of those within them. Each person, as a member of society, is required to contribute something to its overall functioning, and in doing this, they are allowed to receive the contributions of others. So, the criterion for becoming a legal member of a society is that you are able to freely choose to make a contribution or not. So, despite the observation that animals may be able to contribute something to human life that is mutually beneficial--like a puppy providing us with happiness and us providing it with food--it is irrational to assert that animal species should be allowed to choose whether to enter into this bargain or not. Society is not designed, and cannot be designed, for animal benefit in general; only specific examples of mutual advantage can be found. Therefore, not all animals can have legal rights as citizens."

Tags:experiment, organisms, species, relationship

Abstract
Serious questions have been raised about the ethical justification of the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings. Moral condemnation for the use of animals to benefit humans, however, is not the principal point of such questions. The issue of the use of animals in research is an integral part of the framework of animal rights/animal liberation within the larger structure of environmental ethics. This research defends the ethical framework of animal rights/ animal liberation. The primary focus in this defense is on the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings

From the Paper
"ANIMAL RIGHTS/ANIMAL LIBERATION: AN ETHICAL DEFENSE

Introduction
Serious questions have been raised about the ethical justification of the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings. Moral condemnation for the use of animals to benefit humans, however, is not the principal point of such questions. The issue of the use of animals in research is an integral part of the framework of animal rights/animal liberation within the larger structure of environmental ethics. This research defends the ethical framework of animal rights/ animal liberation. The primary focus in this defense is on the use of animals in research designed to benefit human beings.

The Ethical Basis of Animal Rights/Animal Liberation ..."