CreateDebate


Debate Info

27
22
Yes No
Debate Score:49
Arguments:40
Total Votes:53
Ended:10/06/17
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (18)
 
 No (11)

Debate Creator

mwduncan(48) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Do Animals have Rights

Yes

Side Score: 27
Winning Side!
VS.

No

Side Score: 22
4 points

Yes. For example cock fighting, as well as dog fighting are illegal in most if not all states. Most would agree that needlessly torturing an animal is wrong.

So it would seem that we believe animals in fact, do have a right to be treated with a measure of respect.

Side: Yes
ghostheadX(1069) Clarified
1 point

I think what you're saying is liberties, not rights. Civil liberties are not civil rights.

Side: Yes
daver(1772) Clarified
1 point

I'm sorry, but where do chickens and dogs have any liberties?

Chickens are in cages and dogs are on leashes. I believe I am correctly referring to rights of living creatures, not to be abused.

Side: Yes
3 points

Hello mw:

Rights, as in laws??? Nahhh... But MORALLY??? Sure.. Certainly, they're entitled to be free from ABUSE. Even IF they're just food, for the brief time they're on this planet, they should be able to live the best life they can..

excon

Side: Yes

Someone has only those rights which he can defend.

Therefore, since animals are not inanimate statues, they have rights.

Side: Yes
2 points

It's disgraceful the way the human rights of so many animals are ignored every day and they are treated like animals.

Side: Yes
1 point

The line has to be drawn somewhere. You can't say animals shouldn't have rights because there are people who would abuse them and kill them uncontrollably. But if you give too many rights, then killing a spider would be punishable by death. I think there's a good case for animal rights as long as we plan on coexisting with them on this planet.

Side: Yes
3 points

Humans have moral obligations to other living things. This is philosophically different from animals having rights though there are overlapping functional outcomes.

Side: No
3 points

This isn't no brain surgery. Animals don't got rights. They only got lefts.

Side: No
3 points

Hell no, they have no free will. Are you giving them HUMAN traits?

Side: No

I wouldn't say they "have rights" as in Constutional rights, but if they are more than a pest, meaning a fly, cockroach, ants climbing on the sink, wasps, spiders, etc, I personally treat them the way I would want treated if I were the dog, cat, horse, raccoon etc... If they are a pest, then if I squish them, I feel no remorse or sympathy. If I hurt a dog, I would feel bad, thus I don't hurt dogs. I think it has to do with how intelligent or similar the creature is to us that determines our desire to kill it or pamper it. If it seems foreign, like a roach or fly, we simply just don't care or have empathy as a collective human race, so we choose the squish option.

Side: No
Atrag(5201) Disputed
2 points

You seriously believe that animals have constitutional rights?

Side: Yes
outlaw60(8861) Disputed
1 point

Is it not the Progressives are always going on about Constitutional Rights ? Now you have opposition to the views of the Left?

Side: No
0 points

cockroaches, flys ants are enormous in populations, and hence, we killing them would not have any affect unless we are determined to eliminate the species. for example, ants have a population of about 10 thousand trillion!!!!!! what i'm talking about is rights for the needy species.. the ones which are endangered due to/not due to human population.. and a few constitutions already have animal rights in them..

Side: Yes
2 points

What kind of rights are you talking about beast? The right to life? The right for other of its kind to not rape it? For the other cheetahs to not steal its food? Can we prosecute said cheetah if it kills, steals or rapes??!!!? These are the things we need to know...

Side: No
2 points

What? Wait a second beast. Humans have an enormous population compared to mammals. Are we to be killed with no remorse due to large numbers?

Side: No
2 points

Mr. Bee, rat, scorpion, python, cockroach, ant, maggot, housefly, butterfly, giraffe, snail, should have human constitutional right?

Don't hit them when they are crossing the road or will be prosecuted for murder, though they pay no taxes.

A bee won't hesitate to sting,a scorpion, a snake won't hesistate to strike if not immediately if as a pet in the long run it will, ants bite immediately, a tortoise, saint lion, uncle cheetah, bro tiger, etc.

these creatures have already taken the law into their hands and you want to give them more rights?

Side: No
1 point

it's so common to see with people having such a narrow view of rights. I'm not surprised to see this argument made by you, please read my earlier replies to bron

Side: Yes
1 point

No animals do not have rights. Animals have no soul nor do they have the ability to make an intellectual decision. And by that I mean they do not make the decisions we make. Thousands of children around the world are starving or constantly dehydrated looking for their next meal. But for some reason people are so fast to fund animal protection such as the ASPCA but not give to children.

Side: No
1 point

I completely agree with the fact that we must give our priority to humans, but to say animals so not have rights, i feel is wrong. we are the most dominating species on earth and we would be mere bullies to not care about animals and let them become extinct, which is indirectly due to us again.

Side: Yes
jeffreyone(1137) Clarified
1 point

Go to the jungle. Meet saint lion, and see if he will think twice about making a meal out of you.

Side: Yes
jeffreyone(1137) Clarified
1 point

Go to the jungle. Meet saint lion, and see if he will think twice about making a meal out of you.

Side: Yes
mrcatsam(346) Disputed
1 point

So little, itty bitty unborn babies have rights, but animals don't? Scientifically we are animals. Also, comparing this to world hunger doesn't work ,because not all children can be fed and kept alive, but we can try to keep most animals alive.

Side: Yes
1 point

I for one support plant rights and condemn evil humans for violently ripping plants from their roots and boiling potatoes.

Side: No
1 point

In specific places where humans have passed laws to protect them then yes they do.

But how many of those places really are there and how much of animal world does it cover? Even where there are laws against animal cruelty it's primarily about domesticated animals. You can still do pretty much anything you want to all the rest of the animal kingdom as long as you're discreet about who sees it and/or you have a proper hunting license (where required).

Most of human existence animals have been used or abused in just about any way humans could conceive. That doesn't make it correct. But that's how it was.

And as for the general ethical question should animals have rights, the story of all life on this planet is you eat what you can eat and you use what you can use and you try not to get eaten or beaten yourself. How can you say then that a dog has inherent rights when pretty much no other animal walking the planet would stop to honor that right?

Side: No