<p>Growing up as a child, we had a Dog. To us, it was like a means to an end. That is, hunting other animals for food and for protection, with no special care and treatment given to this animal. Butas days passed by I began to witness a wind of change against such actions. I was made to understand that we were committing two crimes-: using the Dog as a means to an end (for hunting and for eating animals). Today almost every newspaper has something to say about the treatment of animals by humans, especially in their use as experimentation subjects. This has led to the wide spread arguments about “Animal right” and “Animal equality” Advocates of the above arguments hold that just like humans, animals too have rights and are in many ways like humans. There also exist animal right groups. Organisations and countries now have laws regulating animal used in the laboratory. If I may be permitted, I will want to say that the world is in a state of dilemma regarding animal experimentation. While some argue against it, based on the claim that these animals have no right and are not equal to humans, others argue in favour of it on claims that animals have moral rights, feel pain and suffer just like humans and should not be subjected to painful experiments. I then begin to wander how research on animals to improve human health should not be undertaken just because it is claimed that these animals have rights and are in many ways equal to humans. It is the contention of this paper to find out the extent to which animal rights and animal equality justifies the fight against animal experimentation.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA/oai:DiVA.org:liu-2920 |
| Date | January 2005 |
| Creators | Tagha, Yuninui Eric |
| Publisher | Linköping University, Centre for Applied Ethics |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, text |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds