CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
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.
But doesn't it depend on which animal? A dog still gets to roam around outside every now and then. They get to say hi to house guests by pounding on them and licking them right?
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..
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.
Humans have moral obligations to other living things. This is philosophically different from animals having rights though there are overlapping functional outcomes.
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.
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..
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...
helping an endangered species to not becoming extinct by helping it with sustainance.
bron, by rights, we are speaking in broad sense, as it could never be anything like human rights in the case of animals, we should make it "legal" to empower an idea, not violating the existing laws, which would help these animals.
Humans are priority, i have mentioned that earlier in this very debate, here we talk about how endangered species should be saved and that your squishing of ants and cockroaches won't necessarily affect them, but hunting endangered species, global warming, deforestation, does effect those animals, which we should help. You know already that we have human rights, to say that let's kill humans just because they're large in numbers is against the law, which i've previously clearly shown respect for.
bron, by rights, we are speaking in broad sense, as it could never be anything like human rights in the case of animals, we should make it "legal" to empower an idea, not violating the existing laws, which would help these animals.
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?
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
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.
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.
The fact that a species doesn't have morals, does not dictate that we should have no morals. A lion, while an apex predator that would of course have no human morality, is still a creature under the control of humanity. In fact, the only creatures that we don't dominate are bacteria and viruses. Everything else is within our purview to maintain and sustain as stewards of this planet.
There are certain places intended for endangered species to survive and.. those places are fenced and made sure the species populate the place. This is done so that species doesn't become extinct.
I was talking about jungle but at the zoo, did you enter the cage?
By the way, if they're so cool why are they in cages, do you know cage is a symbol of imprisonment? Jungle freedom i stand for.
2) you don't know that people specialize with dealing animals
Dealing how? Taming? That is right abuse in the first place. Slavery, Taming, suppressing natural God given instincts to comply with your desires for them not theirs for them.
you probably want to eliminate the lions, (any carnivore that eats humans) just because it is carnivorous.
Yh probably. Don't dictate to me what i want like you do to the lions.
4) you haven't read how extinction of a species causes indirect damage to human beings due to disturbance in the food chain and ecology.
You can't build upon what is destroyed. LOOK UP.
Do you realise taking animals from the jungle to zoos and people's homes as pets reduces food in the jungle? Disturbance in the food chain. And it affects human beings a lot like when you hear a lion came to a near by village to eat up a little kid instead of an antelope.
Or when animals in home cages break free unexpectedly to eat up some humans.
Or when people have snakes in their bedrooms for months and when they are convinced they are safe that is when snakes get convinced they are big enough for a fat meal.
Ykr?
5) i don't mean to be offensive, i'm sorry if i do offend you, please think twice before making an argument.
I was talking about jungle but at the zoo, did you enter the cage?
I haven't, but people do, everyday, it's their job to.
By the way, if they're so cool why are they in cages, do you know cage is a symbol of imprisonment? Jungle freedom i stand for.
ever heard of reserves???? they are solely dedicated to preserving species from becoming extinct.
Dealing how? Taming? That is right abuse in the first place. Slavery, Taming, suppressing natural God given instincts to comply with your desires for them not theirs for them.
you are totally crazy to call taming to be abuse. Taming is not only done for human needs, it is also done so that we can provide endangered and dangerous species with essential conditions for survival. "god" given instincts you talk about is the way their genes have been wired.
You can't build upon what is destroyed.
I'm talking about not letting it destroy in the first place.
Do you realise taking animals from the jungle to zoos and people's homes as pets reduces food in the jungle? Disturbance in the food chain. And it affects human beings a lot like when you hear a lion came to a near by village to eat up a little kid instead of an antelope.
Or when animals in home cages break free unexpectedly to eat up some humans.
Or when people have snakes in their bedrooms for months and when they are convinced they are safe that is when snakes get convinced they are big enough for a fat meal.
Ykr?
the whole theme I was talking about is providing animals(endangered) with rights to equip them with assistance for survival. Idk from where you brought this pets and zoo opinion of yours. many animals in zoos are better off than in forests, too. we do have animals that would have perished, if left in the forest. And the number of animals in zoos is very less compared to the number in forests, and do get basic survival needs which they might not have got in today's forests. And either way, even i stand against keeping animals as pets.. but if we do save a species by caging up a few, (still not as pets though) i totally agree with that.
Yh probably. Don't dictate to me what i want like you do to the lions.
I'm in no way dictating you, I haven't. I've deduced something and it turned out to be true. please, read about biodiversity, ecology and food chain. Elimination of one species backfires on many.
Don't worry your puerile talks can't offend me.
though my talks aren't what you claim, happy to know they don't offend you.
. Think twice when concluding an argument
believe me , i think four times. it's just people aren't good at reading and understanding the context being spoken of.
Think twice about who you argue.
xD This one, I totally agree upon, next time, I will, of course we can't expect everyone to have a rational thought process.
How many enter a cage at a time. And why do they take protective measures(weapons or sedatives).
Still don't eliminate lions and carnivores. they know their job.
Bullshit. In the times of king solomon where were they? Did lion foods go extinct?
bullshit.There were more people like you, back in the day. Lion foods didn't go extinct, but lions and other animals were hunted more back then, I can blame it to be one of the causes of endangered species. And where was deforestation and global warming to the extent it is today, back in king solomon's time???
They way i think is different from how i talk. Crazy is just a style.shit.
xD xD this is when people need a psychiatrist.
Bullshit.
just cuz there's nothing to say?? xD okay.
so?
you should be calling those "god" given instincts as genetic makeover, cuz nobody knows if god exists, while we know genetics does.
They are not meant to be immortals.
How long can you keep an animal safe from death.
the idea here is not to keep them so that they become immortal, it is because the fittest survive in the jungle and getting the more needy endangered can have a safe environment so that their species isn't at risk.
They have always managed to survive. They won't go extinct. Plus they reproduce
what about dodo birds?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List ofrecentlyextinctspecies
He who clears a bush path doesn't know the road crooked behind.
And he who can't clear a bush path never knows the treasures beneath.
I should be saying this,
You're just deluded.
Applauding. That's a perfect description of yourself. For the first time you said something rational.
I believe this is a breakthrough for you all thanks to me. But i really doubt it could continue.
so there shouldn't be any law against harming animals that are endangered, let them become extinct, is that what you say?
With this, i guess you know i wasn't talking about domestic animals.
Regarding wild animals, maybe a law about hunting once every month not more than two animals, not more than 3groups for a forest because the animals are pretty much hurting themselves already. Ask about the beef between saint lion and antelope. It has always been,they still exist.
I thought you needed one
The thoughts of someone who describes himself irrational, could only be rational in his irrational world(mind). So i guess you thought you were being rational. Sorry bro. It's default you can't change it. The harder you try the more your brain hurts(gradual damage beyond current ). only i can help you see that. Your dearest.mwah.
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.
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?