"Researchers claim that animals are unlike us, so that we need have no moral concern about our exploitation of them." (Francione G) However, it is not only scientists who ignore the feelings of animals and see them as the "other
Further, depending on the specific animal, there may also be behavioral or psychological concerns in captivity. For instance, captive animals, particularly those that are not domesticated, may develop repetitive and what appears to be random motor behaviors called "stereotypical behaviors," due to their abnormal environment (Bostock 88)
For example, they worked with Russia to preserve the Saiga, an antelope-like mammal. Captivity has also helped a number of different animals that were becoming extinct due to predators and the billion dollar poaching black market (Claggett)
As with the polar bears, captivity is frequently seen as a means of benefitting the health and well being of animals if extinction is a major concern. Although the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Park has taken its hits due to keeping animals in captivity, it lists a number of what it calls "successes" (Eakins)
Although certain extreme individuals entirely oppose keeping wildlife in captivity, including zoos and aquaria, most recognize that this practice has continued for thousands of years' time and will continue to do so in the future. It is necessary, therefore, to do whatever is possible to ensure that these animals are maintained in a professional, humane and human manner (Martin, Wilson and Carpenter)
That is, the two opposing sides should be able to agree to the following without abandoning their basic positions: 1) Sentient animals do have sensations, such as pain, and emotional states, such as fear or suffering. Most recently, strong support has been growing for the proposition that at least vertebrate animals are very likely sentient (Rose and Adams); 2) In addition, many animals, at the very least mammals, are capable of having a variety of other mental states, such as distress and discomfort
However, they nevertheless support the use of animal experiments where necessary because of historical precedence. In effect, they point out the many beneficial medical breakthroughs that have emerged from experimenting with animals such as kidney transplants, cardiac surgery, and drugs for diseases ranging from hypertension and manic depression to polio, small pox and other dreaded infectious diseases (Goodwin & Morrison, 2000)
In addition, they argue that animal experiments can be misleading since the organs of animals react differently to that of humans. As proof, animal rights activists point to examples such as the failure to find anything similar to the cholera process in animals or the fact that all tests on animals failed completely in the case of the drug Thalidomide (Mather, 2003)
The modern zoos do not certainly understand the needs that these animals have which are the main aim of the arguments given by the author in the article. One of the most important examples in these cases as given by the author is that of jaguar whose total required wild land equals ten times the land of the zoos where these jaguars are held captive (Acampora, 2005, p
Importance of the book is based on the arguments that have been placed by the author in favor of animal rights. In these cases, two important questions have been explored which are an important part of the moral theory (Regan, 2000, p
Importance of the book is based on the arguments that have been placed by the author in favor of animal rights. In these cases, two important questions have been explored which are an important part of the moral theory (Regan, 2000, p
A number of arguments have been given by Singer as to why meat should not be used as food by people. Firstly, the animals must not be slaughtered for the production of meat; and secondly, the land being used for the rearing and management of animal farms must be used for the cultivation of crops (Singer, 2001, p
The Moral Equation: Observations of animals, whether in the wild, in captivity, or in experimental cages reveal undeniable evidence that they perceive physical pain and discomfort as well as pain as acutely as we do (Tangley 2000). Anecdotal evidence of numerous well documented instances seems to suggest that many animals also experience emotions such as grief from of loss of companionship (Moussaieff-Masson 1995)
The basis of our moral responsibility to animals is not that human life and interests are more important than those of animals; that conclusion is flatly conceded by many who oppose the unnecessary infliction of acute pain and suffering, even on a lower animal (Tripp 2003). The Moral Equation: Observations of animals, whether in the wild, in captivity, or in experimental cages reveal undeniable evidence that they perceive physical pain and discomfort as well as pain as acutely as we do (Tangley 2000)
However, there is a fundamental difference between using pigs to advance medical science and for the purposes of manufacturing non-essential products (like cosmetics) at maximum profit. The same fundamental principle morally differentiates slaughtering animals humanely for consumption and deliberately slicing the testicles from a hog before slaughter to (supposedly) "tenderize" the meat by virtue of a last-second surge of testosterone in the throes of agony (Tripp 2003)
Aside from the inherent insensitivity of perpetrating cruelty on helpless animals, modern criminologists have identified cruelty to animals, particularly among youths, as one significant predictor of pathological criminality and serial violent offenders (Schmalleger 1997). At the most extreme end of the criminality spectrum, criminal profilers who have interviewed serial killers have also concluded that there is a strong link between cruelty to animals and predisposition to serial murder of human beings (Innes 2007)
Nevertheless, animal cruelty legislation still varies widely from state to state, defining cruelty to animals as a felony in some states but only as a misdemeanor or violation in others (HSUS 2007). Aside from the inherent insensitivity of perpetrating cruelty on helpless animals, modern criminologists have identified cruelty to animals, particularly among youths, as one significant predictor of pathological criminality and serial violent offenders (Schmalleger 1997)
Dogs are left outside, chained to tree without adequate shelter or food, and cats are allowed to roam neighborhoods freely, where, at best, they reproduce uncontrollably; at worst, they become injured or killed by other animals or automobiles. Only relatively recently have we begun to realize that many animals share complex feelings and emotions that are similar to human emotions, which is especially true of the more highly-developed species like elephants and large-brained marine mammals like whales and dolphin (Moussaieff-Masson, 1995)
More importantly, their criminal records could also be checked for domestic violence, because, in general, people with histories of violence toward other people are much more likely to abuse animals as well. The relationship between insensitivity toward animals and violence toward other humans is so direct, that criminal profilers have long-considered any history of animal abuse in childhood and adolescence to be one of the most reliable predictors of future violence toward other human beings (Schmalleger, 1997)
Another conceptual difficulty is defining abuse in the context of animal ownership, when we routinely raise and process animals for human consumption. Granted, some animals (like dogs and cats, for example) are not consumed in this country, but they are in others (Tangley, 2000)