Some people are against animal rights because those people are crule heartless people. they only care about animals that can talk the way we talk. and the only animal that talks the way we do are humans. those people only care about humans. they know that animals cannot talk so they are all for people hurting animals. People who are against animal rights are cruel, heartless people.
Nicly done with your argument above, however its all emotional appeal, no logic. This is my counter argument with logic.
1.3 billion people worldwide depend on animals as a profitable and efficient source of food and income. Poor people or animals?800 million people go to bed hungry everyday, grazing animals such as cows are our only way of converting fiber into usagable energy. Hungry people or animals?Millions of people are still deprived of their basic rights and animal rights activists wish to extend those same rights to animals. Rights for people or animals?Trillions are invested in livestock related infostructure.Some pharmaceuticals can only be produced (or produced in sufficient quantities) with animals. Sick people or animals?Animals cannot understand the concept of rights as they have no morality.Animals cannot defend their right if granted by humans.Animals do not have the capacity to corporately maintain rights with humans.Animals cannot follow rights themselves.Animals cannot ask for rights or indicate a desire for them.Countless animals everyday are slaughtered for food or fun by other animals everyday, humans are no different.Only humans will be affected by animal rights as only humans will obey the law.The concept of being a heartless person is relative, if i was taught dogs liked being kicked and that it was the right thing to do i would be doing it right now.Animals rights do not benefit humans in any way, rather it harms humans.What if an animal loved to be hurt, humans have BDSM and it can be assumed that some animals also do. How can a person decide for the animal?If full animal rights were granted then all carnivores will have to be locked up for cannibalism.To what extent is something considered an animal? This is a matter of opinion that only humans can decide on.What should the rights be for an animal, they obviously are different, should there be different laws for each species? To what extent? How can we tell its the best for them? This is a matter of opinion that only humans can decide on.I believe most hungry and poor people will shoot you first before they let you do what you want with their cattle.People are judged on how they treat others, not animals as only other people can comment on your morality.
Nicly done with your argument above, however its all emotional appeal, no logic. This is my counter argument with logic.
1.3 billion people worldwide depend on animals as a profitable and efficient source of food and income. Poor people or animals?800 million people go to bed hungry everyday, grazing animals such as cows are our only way of converting fiber into usagable energy. Hungry people or animals?Millions of people are still deprived of their basic rights and animal rights activists wish to extend those same rights to animals. Rights for people or animals?Trillions are invested in livestock related infostructure.Some pharmaceuticals can only be produced (or produced in sufficient quantities) with animals. Sick people or animals?Animals cannot understand the concept of rights as they have no morality.Animals cannot defend their right if granted by humans.Animals do not have the capacity to corporately maintain rights with humans.Animals cannot follow rights themselves.Animals cannot ask for rights or indicate a desire for them.Countless animals everyday are slaughtered for food or fun by other animals everyday, humans are no different.Only humans will be affected by animal rights as only humans will obey the law.The concept of being a heartless person is relative, if i was taught dogs liked being kicked and that it was the right thing to do i would be doing it right now.Animals rights do not benefit humans in any way, rather it harms humans.What if an animal loved to be hurt, humans have BDSM and it can be assumed that some animals also do. How can a person decide for the animal?If full animal rights were granted then all carnivores will have to be locked up for cannibalism.To what extent is something considered an animal? This is a matter of opinion that only humans can decide on.What should the rights be for an animal, they obviously are different, should there be different laws for each species? To what extent? How can we tell its the best for them? This is a matter of opinion that only humans can decide on.I believe most hungry and poor people will shoot you first before they let you do what you want with their cattle.People are judged on how they treat others, not animals as only other people can comment on your morality.
No comments:
Post a Comment