Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Morality & Society THE “RIGHTS” OF ANIMALS

Actually, what I wrote was, "The natural Rights of Man is the center of a political philosophy concerning the relationship between the Individual and the state, and extends to how individuals relate to each other. It is based on negative Rights. Since there seems no logical way of recognizing such negative Rights in animals, perhaps what we need to do is develop a political philosophy concerning the relationship between Man and animal. Such a relationship would probably have to be based on what is referred to as positive rights -- something more one way and directed toward a lesser living being. Determining what those positive rights may be will probably be heavilly dependent on ethical considerations, no?"
Yours,
Issodhos

Please don't base this discussion on skin color. I have just enough Cherokee blood to make me mocha, not black and not white. Hell, I can't do anything right not even choose the right skin color.

I declare my own animals to have the same rights and respect that I demand for myself. Being on the internet for 10 years has shown me little if any respect. I am forever labeled as pro-choice on everything and an Athiest. It doesn't get much worse than that.

Natural rights are missing in action in America with few people who give a damn. Many members of CHB show an interest in these missing rights and it keeps me here.

I'm assuming this thread is not based on the slaughter of the pit bulls that seem to be of interest of the main stream media. I'm offended by any human who can be entertained by dogs killing each other.

I have a great love for dogs and wonder if man did them a favor by taming them into believing they would be loved and cared for. I realize many children are brought into a family and treated badly and even trained as dogs to fetch and obey. Many of my greatest joys come from my association with my own dogs and those of my family.

I did not realize the government had the bison slaughtered and find it impossible to believe. But the older I get, the more reality sets in and the human race always seems to plummet into the depths of horror for many reasons. I have little respect for the human race and it seems to have gotten worse these last 10 years.

Sandy, FWIW - Greger is right about the bison. Bison were considered a "supply store" for the indigenous population, and that is why the government hired buffalo hunters.

I want to explain (to all) the vehemence of my earlier replies.

As late as the early 1970s, state courts in the US were still defining married women as chattel.I married at the end of that decade; I would have to do a longer search than I'm willing to do, to find out if I was ever legally chattel. If not, it was a very close scrape.

My point being that I have been uncomfortably close to having my inherent rights legalized away from me on the grounds, basically, that He Who's Got, Decides Who Doesn't. Therefore the idea that one group of people/beings decides who does and does not have rights -- it makes my skin crawl.

Because if you can do that, then forget all that garbage about "inherent rights," because there aren't any. The only rights that exist are the ones you are granted by those higher on the ladder than you.

A large number of the posters on this site are white male Americans who have never had to consider the possibility of being, to all extents and purposes, owned by another human being. I will tell you that it is a difficult thing to take lightly. We are unlikely to share a perspective here.

I am not only touchy about this on my own behalf; if you have a companion critter you've been in the position of curtailing their rights and you know how uncomfortable it can be to think about.

So I will drop my argumentative stance, but I would ask that the arguments you use be carefully examined for possible dangerous parallels. As I said earlier, it is too easy to re-define what is human, and what is lesser - as you can see by looking at the status of women in countries other than this one.

Thanks, Julia, for zeroing in on that so concisely. I totally agree. How can anyone, logically, have the 'right' to dictate inherent rights?

I thank you too, Mellow Julia.

I saw this carefully exhibited very close to home. My husband and I had 2 daughters. He brought a son into the family with him and I thought we have the perfect combination for a successful family. By the time the girls were ready for school it was decided by my husband that they would go to the closest school.

My problem was that the Los Angeles School district had very low academic standards in the middle 60s. The two girls were born as less than equal as tney were only girls and no need to find academics other than homemaking skills.

I had read and understood Ayn Rand and had higher standards for my kids no matter what sex they were. My step son did very well in the Santa Monica school district and was allowed to stay there but the San Fernanco Valley schools were a disgrace and I found a small private school. It turned out that had I had boys no expense would have been too much for their education but the girls must just get past highschool.

I had some money of my own and the girls were in private school where they stayed until entering U of C at Berkeley. I never heard of such a thing. I learned that the head of the house hold had the rights for all of us and if I didn't obey I could be replaced. I was! He left and I declared my independence that forced me into working several jobs but I did it! The kids I raised were the ones who excelled and the other girl did time for drug smuggling and never did finish highschool. I had my nose rubbed into that Old Testament crap that Eve was to be manipulated by Adam and that was the end of the story. I became the best example of bending to the wishes of my husband until I had those kids and put a stop that crap.

I've had a problem trying to understand this notion that women were inferior. I went to an all girls boarding school where we were all competitive in academics and sports. I ran into this on the internet where I was told over and over to use a man's name when voicing my opinions or I would be laughed at. I was!

When I got into the background of the Constitution, I met up with natural rights. I am a free citizen of America because I am a citizen of the USA. Nobody granted me rights, They were mine naturally. It hit me seriously when I began to listen to the Religious Right telling me that none of us have rights except those from our creator. It meant I had to believe in the Creator and that was impossible.

I'm supposed to beg our President to allow me to determine the size of my family and explain to my grandson that he can't marry his mate. I'm supposed to beg the Congress to allow me to be given a pill to end my life and they would rather I put gun in my mouth when the pain of disease is too much for me? I'm supposed to vote for a President who will never approve of funding stem cell research?

Under the laws of the Republican Party I am not a full blown citizen with the ability to live and raise my kids according to my own agenda but I have to ask permission to make my own choices and I say it is horse pucky time. Naomi we are equals in America and it is time we stood up for our natural rights and tell the religous right to stuff it!

We don't need these social conservatives to set our morals as they have screwed up their own. I learned years ago that I, a confirmed Atheist have the ability to keep an oath and the holier than thou religious wackos cannot keep an oath.

We are the keepers of our own rights and we can take actions against this silly idea that we are inferior. We are getting smarter and we should be training our younger women to act accordingly. At this time women hold the majority of CEOs in the corporations and we hold the majority in the bankers of financial institutions. We hold the majority of professors in many Universities but we hesitate to discuss it because it pisses off the men. Oh my!

The men often overlook the basis of women's issues and we are the care takers, the healers, the teachers of the children and we are the future of our American standards. Religion is the enemy of our freedoms and we are nearly as bad as the Muslims.

We have to show what we are made of quietly so as not to disturb the manly attitudes of our mates. This can be learned and passed on to our daughters and grand daughters. We must be wise to manipulations of the proud Republican hypocrites that roam even here at Reader Rant. My money is on the ladies!

Let's define 'animal rights' for the sake of discussion. I work with animals for my living, and enjoy purebred dog breeding, and competitions as my hobby. There are 'Animal Rights' groups who would like to do away with both my living, and my hobby, as both 'violate' the 'rights' of animals as they define them. So, before voicing much, I'd like to clarify the definition of 'rights' as opposed to animal welfare in the context of this discussion

We're talking about "the same rights as humans" here, Frazier. Can you believe it?

Oh I can believe it. I regularly fight PETA, HSUS, and other groups attempts to limit MY rights to enjoy my pets. Do a quick web search on Ingrid Newkirk,Wayne Pacelle and other 'animal rights' type folks. It's illuminating.

Animal welfare? I'm all for it. But I would truly like to see the definition of 'rights'. The 'right' to freely wander where the animal chooses? The right to propogate at will? No more shelters or euthanasia as the animal has a 'right' to life as it chooses? WHat are 'rights' as applied to animals?

For my part Frazier, I agree with you. Animal welfare is far more important than giving them "rights" they could never comprehend.
The PETA people are sort of the extreme right wing of the animal lovers. Purebred dog breeding and showing is a good thing, breeding dogs to fight is a very very bad thing. One reflects the ethical treatment of animals the other reflects a complete lack of ethics.
So far I don't think anyone among us has come out and claimed that animals should have the same rights as people but we all (I think) agree that the beasts should be treated as kindly as possible.