Humans Have The Right To Farm And Eat Animals ✓ Solved

Humans Have the Right to Farm and Eat Animals

This paper serves as an annotated bibliography on the topic of Animal Rights and whether humans should eat meat. My argument is that humans have the right to farm and eat animals. The purpose of this bibliography is to provide an overview of some current viewpoints and research about this topic.

Article: "Animals Are Equal to Humans"

This article by the advocacy group Animal Liberation argues that animals have the right to life in the same way that humans do. The group observes that, according to the United Nations’ Declaration of Human Rights, all human life—regardless of disability or intelligence—has inherent value. They assert that just because animals are not as intelligent as humans, their lives remain valuable. Furthermore, the group compares the way animals are exploited and treated to racism, indicating prejudice against non-human life (Animal Liberation).

Evaluating this source reveals it represents a specific bias, as the Animal Liberation Front promotes extreme views on animal rights. Despite this bias, the philosophical implications regarding the value of life raised by this group are significant. This article will serve as a counterpoint to my argument, as I will challenge their views and highlight cultural and ethical traditions that justify human dominion over animals.

Article: "Humans Ought to Use Nature to Serve Their Own Needs"

Dr. Tibor Machan argues that animals act instinctively and do not share the same moral code as humans. He posits that nature's brutality illustrates the distinction between animals and humans; we do not hold animals accountable for their instinctive actions. According to Machan, rights are grounded in moral capacity, something animals are biologically incapable of possessing (Machan).

This source's reliability stems from Machan's experience as a philosophy professor. His argument that moral capacity is essential for rights will help me address the philosophical views of the Animal Liberation Front. I will employ this source to argue that the power dynamics in human-animal relationships are not intrinsic but shaped by societal norms that dictate ethical considerations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, exploring these varying perspectives informs my thesis on animal rights and the human entitlement to eat meat. By presenting contrasting viewpoints from both animal rights advocates and pro-meat scholars, I can effectively craft a well-rounded argument. Through the analysis of these sources, it is evident that cultural, ethical, and philosophical contexts play essential roles in shaping human perspectives towards animals and the consumption of meat.

References

• Animal Liberation. "Animals Are Equal to Humans." Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 1 March 2015.
• Machan, Tibor R. "Humans Ought to Use Nature to Serve Their Own Needs." Putting Humans First. Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.
• Durose, Munjae, Smith, Brandon, and Langan, Patrick. "Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2008 National Crime Victimization Survey." Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2009.
• Garner, J., & Maxwell, C. "Use of Force by Police: Overview of National and Local Data." National Institute of Justice, 2002.
• Mumola, Christopher J. "Police Killings: A National Analysis." National Institute of Justice, 2006.
• Brown, M., & Langan, P. "The Relationship between Crime and Police Shootings." Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2001.
• Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985).
• Hickman, M. J., & Reaves, B. A. "Local Police Departments, 2003." Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003.
• U.S. Government Accountability Office. "Less-Than-Lethal Weapons: Growing Popularity and Use." Washington, D.C., 2005.
• Hickman, M. J., & Reaves, B. A. "Sheriff's Offices, 2003." Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003.