what is a good thesis statement for animal rights

Animal Rights Essay: Topics, Outline, & Writing Tips

• 🐇 Animal Rights Essay: the Basics
• 💡 Animal Rights Essay Topics
• 📑 Outlining Your Essay
• ✍️ Sample Essay (200 Words)

🔗 References

🐇 animal rights essay: what is it about.

Animal rights supporters advocate for the idea that animals should have the same freedom to live as they wish, just as humans do. They should not be exploited or used in meat , fur, and other production. At long last, we should distinguish animals from inanimate objects and resources like coal, timber, or oil.

Interdisciplinary research has shown that animals are emotional and sensitive, just like we are.

Their array of emotions includes joy, happiness, embarrassment, resentment, jealousy, anger, love, compassion, respect, disgust, despair, and even grief.

However, animal rights legislation does not extend human rights to animals. It establishes their right to have their fundamental needs and interests respected while people decide how to treat them. This right changes the status of animals from being property to being legal entities.

The statement may sound strange until we recall that churches , banks, and universities are also legal entities. Their interests are legally protected by law. Then why do we disregard the feelings of animals , which are not inanimate institutions? Several federal laws protect them from human interference.

But the following statements are only some of the rules that could one day protect animal rights in full:

• Animals should not be killed by hunting.
• Animals’ habitats should allow them to live in freedom.
• Animals should not be bred for sale or any other purpose.
• Animals should not be used for food by industries or households.

Most arguments against the adoption of similar laws are linked to money concerns. Animal exploitation has grown into a multi-billion-dollar industry. The lives of many private farmers depend on meat production, and most people prefer not to change the comfortable status quo.

Animal Rights Argumentative Essay

An animal rights argumentative essay should tackle a problematic issue that people have widely discussed. While choosing ideas for the assignment, opt for the most debatable topics.

Here is a brief list of argumentative essay prompts on animal rights:

• The pros and cons of animal rights.
• Can humanity exist without meat production?
• Do animals have souls?
• Should society become vegan to protect animal rights?

As you see, these questions could raise controversy between interlocutors. Your purpose is to take a side and give several arguments in its support. Then you’ll have to state a counterargument to your opinion and explain why it is incorrect.

Animal Rights Persuasive Essay

An animal rights persuasive essay should clearly state your opinion on the topic without analyzing different points of view. Still, the purpose of your article is to persuade the reader that your position is not only reasonable but the only correct one. For this purpose, select topics relating to your opinion or formulated in questionary form.

For example:

• What is your idea about wearing fur?
• Do you think people would ever ban animal exploitation ?
• Is having pets a harmful practice?
• Animal factories hinder the development of civilization .

💡 53 Animal Rights Essay Topics

• Animal rights have been suppressed for ages because people disregard their mental abilities .
• Cosmetic and medical animal testing .
• Laws preventing unnecessary suffering of animals mean that there is some necessary suffering.
• Red fluorescent protein transgenic dogs experiment .
• Do you believe animals should have legal rights?
• Genetically modified animals and implications .
• Why is animal welfare important?
• Neutering animals to prevent overpopulation: Pros and cons.
• Animal testing: Arguments for and against.
• What is our impact on marine life ?
• Some animals cannot stay wild .
• Animal testing for medical purposes .
• We are not the ones to choose which species to preserve.
• Pavlov’s dog experiment .
• Keeping dogs chained outdoors is animal neglect.
• The use of animals for research .
• Animal dissection as a learning tool: Alternatives?
• More people beat their pets than we think.
• Duties to non-human animals .
• If we do not control the population of some animals, they will control ours.
• Animals in entertainment: Not entertaining at all.
• Animals in research, education, and teaching.
• Which non-animal production endangers the species?
• Is animal testing really needed?
• Why do some people think that buying a new pet is cheaper than paying for medical treatment of the old one?
• Animal experiments: benefits, ethics, and defenders.
• Can people still be carnivorous if they stop eating animals?
• Animal testing role.
• Marine aquariums and zoos are animal prisons.
• Animal experimentation: justification arguments .
• What would happen if we replace animals in circuses with people, keeping the same living conditions?
• The ethics of animal use in scientific research .
• Animal sports: Relics of the past.
• Animal testing ban: counterargument and rebuttal .
• Denial to purchase animal-tested cosmetics will not change anything.
• Animal research, its ineffectiveness and amorality .
• Animal rights protection based on their intellect level: It tells a lot about humanity.
• Debates of using animals in scientific analysis .
• How can we ban tests on rats and kill them in our homes at the same time?
• Animal testing in experiments .
• What is the level of tissue engineering development in leather and meat production?
• Equal consideration of interests to non-human animals .
• Animals should not have to be our servants.
• Zoos as an example of humans’ immorality .
• We should feed wild animals to help them survive.
• Animal testing in biomedical research .
• Abolitionism: The right not to be owned.
• Do you support the Prima facie rights theory?
• Psychologist perspective on research involving animal and human subjects.
• Ecofeminism: What is the link between animals’ and women’s rights ?
• No philosophy could rationalize cruelty against animals.
• Qualities that humans and animals share .
• Ancient Buddhist societies and vegetarianism: A research paper.

Need more ideas? You are welcome to use our free research topic generator !

📑 Animal Rights Essay Outline

An animal rights essay should be constructed as a standard 5-paragraph essay (if not required otherwise in the assignment). The three following sections provide a comprehensive outline.

Animal Rights Essay: Introduction

An introduction consists of:

• Background information,
• A thesis statement .

In other words, here you need to explain why you decided to write about the given topic and which position you will take. The background part should comprise a couple of sentences highlighting the topicality of the issue. The thesis statement expresses your plans in the essay.

For example: In this essay, I will explain why animal-based production harms the ecology.

Animal Rights Essay: Main Body

The main body is a place for you to argue your position . One paragraph equals one argument. In informative essays, replace argumentation with facts.

Start each section with a topical sentence consisting of a general truth. Then give some explanation and more specific points. By the way, at the end of this article, you’ll find a bonus! It is a priceless selection of statistics and facts about animal rights.

Animal Rights Essay: Conclusion

A conclusion restates your central ideas and thesis statement. Approach it as a summary of your essay, avoid providing new facts or arguments.

✍️ Animal Rights Essay Example (200 Words)

Why is animal welfare important? The term “animal welfare” evokes the pictures of happy cows from a milk advertisement. But the reality has nothing to do with these bright videos. Humane treatment of animals is a relative concept. This essay explains why animal welfare is important, despite that it does not prevent farms from killing or confining animals.

The best way to approach animal welfare is by thinking of it as a temporary measure. We all agree that the current state of the economy does not allow humanity to abandon animal-based production. Moreover, such quick decisions could make farm animals suffer even more. But ensuring the minimum possible pain is the best solution as of the moment.

The current legislation on animal welfare is far from perfect. The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 prevents cruelty against animals in labs and zoos. Meanwhile, the majority of suffering animals do not fall under its purview. For example, it says nothing about the vivisection of rats and mice for educational and research purposes, although the procedure is extremely painful for the creature. Neither does it protect farm animals.

Unfortunately, the principles of animal welfare leave too much room for interpretation. Animals should be free from fear and stress, but how can we measure that? They should be allowed to engage in natural behaviors, but no confined space would let them do so. Thus, the legislation is imprecise.

The problem of animal welfare is almost unresolvable because it is a temporary measure to prevent any suffering of domesticated animals. It has its drawbacks but allows us to ensure at least some comfort for those we unjustifiably use for food. They have the same right to live on this planet as we do, and animal farming will be stopped one day.

📊 Bonus: Statistics & Facts for Your Animal Rights Essay Introduction

Improve the quality of your essay on animal rights by working in the following statistics and facts about animals.

• According to USDA, National Agricultural Statistics Service , about 4.6 billion animals — including hogs, sheep, cattle, chickens, ducks, lambs, and turkey — were killed and used for food in the United States last year (2015).
• People in the U.S. kill over 100 million animals for laboratory experiments every year, according to PETA .
• More than 40 million animals are killed for fur worldwide every year. About 30 million animals are raised and killed on fur farms, and nearly 10 million wild animals are hunted and killed for the same reasons — for their valuable fur.
• According to a report by In Defense of Animals , hunters kill more than 200 million animals in the United States yearly.
• The Humane Society of the United States notes that a huge number of cats and dogs — between 3 and 4 million each year — are killed in the country’s animal shelters. Sadly, this number does not include dogs or cats killed in animal cruelty cases.
• According to the ASPCA , about 7.6 million companion animals enter animal shelters in the United States yearly. Of this number, 3.9 Mil of dogs, and 3.4 Mil of cats.
• About 2.7 million animals are euthanized in shelters every year (1.4 million cats and 1.2 million dogs).
• About 2.7 million shelter animals are adopted every year (1.3 million cats and 1.4 million dogs).
• In total, there are approximately 70-80 million dogs and 74-96 million cats living as pets in the United States.
• It’s impossible to determine the exact number of stray cats and dogs living in the United States, but the number of cats is estimated to be up to 70 million.
• Many stray cats and dogs were once family pets — but they were not kept securely indoors or provided with proper identification.

Each essay on animals rights makes humanity closer to a better and more civilized world. Please share any thoughts and experience in creating such texts in the comments below. And if you would like to hear how your essay would sound in someone’s mind, use our Text-To-Speech tool .

• Why Animal Rights? | PETA
• Animal Rights – Encyclopedia Britannica
• Animal ethics: Animal rights – BBC
• Animal Health and Welfare – National Agricultural Library
• The Top 10 Animal Rights Issues – Treehugger
• Animal welfare – European Commission

Research Paper Analysis: How to Analyze a Research Article + Example

Film analysis: example, format, and outline + topics & prompts.

• Dissertation
• PowerPoint Presentation
• Book Report/Review
• Research Proposal
• Math Problems
• Proofreading
• Movie Review
• Cover Letter Writing
• Personal Statement
• Nursing Paper
• Argumentative Essay
• Research Paper
• Discussion Board Post

How to Deal with Animal Right Essays: Quick & Simple Prompts

Table of Contents

Whether you’re a student at the Ethics, Biology, or Medicine department, you can receive an assignment to write animal right essays from time to time.

On the one hand, the task may seem simple and manageable at first glance. On the other hand, such essays (as any other type of academic work) require careful research, outlining, structuring, and writing in line with top academic standards. Thus, if you’re stuck on this task with no ideas in mind, read on to find valuable tips for this kind of essay.

Here we compiled valuable recommendations from our writing experts about:

• Finding an interesting, relevant topic.
• Composing an animal rights outline.
• Developing an effective animal rights thesis statement.
• Researching credible sources for animal right essays.
• Structuring your arguments.
• Effective editing and proofreading of the assignment.

Why It Is Important to Discuss Animal Rights

Whenever you approach writing about animal rights, this topic’s relevance always surfaces as a critical vantage point of your animal rights essays. It’s a commonly recognized fact that throughout history, humans have been too cruel toward animals, and they have ruined much of the authentic wildlife ecosystems in the process of industrialization and urbanization. As a result, numerous species lost their habitats and were urged to seek shelter elsewhere, thus altering other natural habitats by residing in places where they shouldn’t be.

Even in cities, where people and animals seem to have different lives, cruel treatment and abuse of human authority are evident.

First, pets are not always treated ethically and respectfully, mainly because of their legal status as human property.

Second, many pets are abandoned and flood the streets, where they are either killed by other street animals or are doomed to wandering the streets and surviving by eating trash and food remnants.

Third, corporate breeding animals for food (e.g., children farms and daily factories) is highly inhumane, involving cruel treatment of animals and their stay in awful conditions.

The situation with wildlife is not much better, with hunters and poachers killing wild animals for fun and entertainment. Fires and floods caused by human-made climate change also urge wild animals to seek shelter and food in human residences, which often ends in their killing or captivation.

Thus, as one can see, the problem of animal rights and human oppression of the planet’s fauna is pressing, with so many manifestations of unethical, inconsiderate, and cruel attitudes to all creatures, great and small.

Main Points to Elaborate on

Given the problems surrounding animal protection and rights today, you can approach the subject from numerous perspectives in your academic assignment:

• Legal rights of animals in your country or abroad. Comparison of legal policies towards wildlife and pet protection.
• Pet protection and a new legal status for pets.
• Legal and ethical standards for corporate farming.
• Legal and ethical standards for animal use with medical/experimental purposes.
• Wildlife protection and conservation.
• Protection of marine life from exploitative industrial practices.

How to Write Animal Rights Essay Introduction

All animal right essays should start with an impactful introduction so that your audience understands what you’re talking about, what you’re driving at, and what your key arguments are.

To achieve this goal, we recommend structuring an introduction as follows:

• First, discuss the broad context of the paper – animal rights in general, what kinds of rights they possess, and what abuses of those rights are observed globally.
• You may also boost the interest of your readers by citing some shocking stats or providing some anecdotal evidence. Anyway, this information should be relevant, pointing to the serious, pressing problem in the field of animal rights you have identified.
• Next, it’s vital to formulate the problem clearly and indicate how you will resolve/discuss it. It will be your thesis statement.

Following this structure, you’re sure to make a captivating intro that will urge your audience to read the paper until its end.

Animal Rights Essay Outline

To complete animal right essays quickly and effectively, you need to perform some pre-writing work. Composing an outline is always a helpful approach to organizing the basis for your writing process as you receive a roadmap for the further composition of your essay’s vital parts.

Here is a sample outline for a paper about pet rights and legal status. Still, you can successfully appropriate this outline for any other topic by following the instructions about each part’s content.

INTRODUCTION

Introduce your subject and give some background information. Underline the problem’s significance. State your key idea of the paper.

Pets are typically a part of the family in which they live, causing warm feelings and enjoying commitment from the people who invited them to their homes. Still, sadly, pets are considered property by law in 90% of countries, limiting the protection of cruelly treated and abandoned animals. Thus, a legal change is required to improve pet coverage by law and enable animal rights advocates to take measures against pet maltreatment.

BODY OF THE PAPER

Paragraph #1-3 – Indicate a topic sentence with each paragraph’s key idea. Support that key idea with some supporting data from credible sources. Offer your interpretation of the information in those external sources. Make a transition to the next paragraph and then to the conclusion.

Paragraph #1 – statistics on pet maltreatment. Animal abandonment and abuse.

Paragraph #2 – protective legislation. E.g., the UK Animal Welfare Act (2007), felony animal cruelty laws in the USA.

Paragraph #3 – animal rights advocacy organizations (e.g., ALDF). Actions they take to prevent and minimize pet maltreatment.

Summarize your arguments concisely and refer them back to the general argument. Clarify the arguments’ significance for the broader subject of your research. Again, stress the importance of dwelling on this subject theoretically and with practical steps.

Pet abuse is still commonplace because of the legal status of home animals as human property. Still, numerous laws and activist organizations work to change the situation. A broader legal change is required to change pets’ status and enhance their protection.

How to Write Animal Rights Thesis Statement

The thesis statement for animal right essays should be clear and concise, communicating your central message and purpose of the paper. The thesis should not be too long or too short. It should also incorporate the central arguments you’ll expand in the following sections of your text.

In this way, this statement will function as your readers’ roadmap leading them from one argument to another one and helping them follow your logic.

20 Animal Topics for Research Papers – Choose the Best Idea

Looking for some bulletproof animal topics for research papers? Here is a list you can use on all occasions to compose various academic works with ease.

• Is it realistic to protect all animal rights today?
• Is the animals’ right to no selective breeding compatible with the human needs?
• What is the best way to protect animals from the harmful impact of humans?
• Is hunting ethical on any grounds?
• Hunting and animal species extinction – a need for a more effective protective policy.
• Is experimentation on animals generally avoidable?
• How does the human-made climate change affect the well-being of fauna?
• Is pet euthanasia a reality?
• The impact of massive fishing on biodiversity and fish species survival.
• Increasing peopling of suburbs and the loss of animal habitat – a reverse side of people’s flight from the vices of urbanization.
• What is the impact of invasive species on the local wildlife? Discuss with examples.
• Cruel handling of corporately farmed animals.
• Is overbreeding of pets a pressing problem? What are the far-reaching consequences of overbreeding?
• Destroying predators – a step towards human safety or an ecological crime? Discuss the fundamental role of predators in local wildlife and the adverse effects of these species’ minimization.
• Are police and military dogs given similar rights upon retirement as people who served their motherland? Discuss more extensive coverage of police/military dog health and care services.
• What kinds of experiments on animals are unavoidable to save people’s lives? And what are senseless and cruel?
• Animal abuse in zoos – the reverse side of human entertainment and endangered species conservation.
• Is it ethical to use animals in hard manual/agricultural labor?
• What can people do to enhance animal rights protection?
• Is it ethical to consider animals human property? The need for a legal change of pet status as a vital contribution to the more humane treatment of home pets.

With these topics, you’re sure to beat all professors’ expectations and develop an attention-grabbing, exciting argument.

Need Professional Help?

Writing animal right essays is an exciting activity that can help you hone your writing skills and, at the same time, enhance your understanding of the topic. But what can you do if the task seems too complicated or you have too little time for composing several urgent papers?

No panic; our service is available 24/7, and experts employed here are ready to respond to all student needs quickly and effectively. So, if you’re short of time or are stuck with no ideas in mind, no need to get an F for that essay. Contact us today, and our skilled authors will compose an impressive A-grade assignment to cover your back.

Place an order today and sit back, relaxing and knowing that your task is in the expert hands.

Role of A Teacher Essay: Write It Easily

What is background information: everything you need to know to do it right, how to check for plagiarism.

• Animal Rights Essays

Animal Rights Argumentative Essay

Animal rights have been a consistent subject of debate, with animal activists emphasizing the need to differentiate between animal rights and welfare. The government’s failure to lay down sufficient legislation to help in the protection of animals from human predation has made it difficult for several people to believe in animal rights. It is essential to note that animal rights do not concern putting animals over and above humans but instead on the rejection of speciesism and sentience. Humans utilize several ways to exploit animals, including hunting, fur, circuses, and animal products like eggs and meat. There is an urgent need to help in securing strategies that will free animals from human exploitation. Therefore, this paper seeks to analyze the reasons against animal exploitation and reinforce the probable methods to uphold animal rights.

Struggling with your HW?

Get your assignments done by real pros. Save your precious time and boost your marks with ease. Just fill in your HW requirements and you can count on us!

• Customer data protection
• 100% Plagiarism Free

There is a general feeling that the use of animals for both scientific and medical research results yields significant improvement in living standards and medical advancements. Thus, it is sensible for many to agree over the use of animals to test how healthy or harmful a newly discovered medicine is before giving it to the human species for consumption (Lin n.p). However, such tests and exposure to chemicals often result in the killing of thousands of animals for courses that in some instances turn unhelpful (Garner 21). Therefore, animals’ mere use for sciences’ sake is unacceptable since the animals’ suffering vastly outweighs the satisfaction of human curiosity (Lin n.p). It is thus unnecessary to justify animal exploitation on immoral grounds.

Animals cannot think and make rational decisions concerning what should take place in their lives. However, the determination of rights should not be based on intelligence grounds. Otherwise, conducting intelligence tests would be necessary for all humans for them to enjoy certain fundamental rights. Exploiting animals based on their inability to think and reason is unreasonable (Lin n.p). This form of reasoning would mean that babies with no intelligence and mentally challenged humans would have no rights.

Preservation of animal rights and dignity is an appreciation for their life since it develops significant status. Individuals who hold contrary arguments on animal rights protection tend to believe that human life is more critical than animal life (Lin n.p). Therefore, destroying animal life to preserve human life is justifiable. This is an ineffective criterion to determine the importance of having rights since such are usually subjective, and individuals often have selfish personal interests (Garner 9). Interestingly, an individual may find their home-bred animals more important than a stranger in the neighborhood with this scope. It should not allow the individual to kill or misuse animals just for the sake of prioritizing and ranking the importance.

Used our essay samples for inspiration ?

For more help, tap into our pool of professional writers and get expert essay editing services!

In conclusion, the concept that animals should have the ability to move freely without human interference and exploitation affirms the need for animal protection. With the ability to experience emotions, fear, pain, and happiness, the argument that the absence of cognitive abilities makes animals lesser than humans is baseless. Besides, arguments in favor of the protection of animals and giving more rights to animals does not mean putting them at the same level as humans, but attempts to show the value that animals have as a human source of food and labor objects. Therefore, upholding animals’ inherent value is critical for maintaining animals’ rights and ensuring the maintenance of a balanced and organized ecosystem where there is a significant minimization of human predation on animals.

Works Cited

• Garner, Robert, ed. Animal rights: The changing debate . Springer, 2016.
• Lin, Doris. What Are Animals Rights? 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.thoughtco.com/what-are-animal-rights-127600

Related Essays

Find Free Essays

We provide you with original essay samples, perfect formatting and styling

Request must contain at least 2 characters

Popular Topics

Samples by Essay Type

Cite this page

About our services

Type Argumentative

Topic Animal Rights

Level College

This sample is NOT ORIGINAL. Get 100% unique essay written under your req

• Only $11 per page
• Free revisions included

Studyfy uses cookies to deliver the best experience possible. Read more.

Studyfy uses secured cookies. Read more.

Animal Rights Persuasive Essay Sample, with Outline

Published by gudwriter on November 23, 2017 November 23, 2017

Animal Rights Essay

Animals have a right to be free of human use and exploitation. They have an inherent worth and moral rights that should be respected. To have the best grades on such kind of essays, essay writing services for MBA will write them for you.

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

Animal Rights Essay Outline

Introduction.

Thesis: People should consider giving animals the same rights as human beings because they deserve it.

Paragraph 1:

Animals should be granted the same rights as humans first because just like humans, they have the capacity to suffer.

• They feel motherly love, loneliness, frustration, fear, and pleasure depending on the situation they find themselves in.
• It should be the moral obligation of humans to take this fact into account whenever they consider undertaking actions that would interfere with the needs of animals.

Paragraph 2:

Human beings should also consider that animals have an inherent worth which in itself is completely separate from the usefulness of animals to humans.

• Being living beings capable of moving, all animals have the right to life and therefore have every right not to be subjected to any kinds of pain.
• It is wrong on the part of humans to presume that the sole reason for the existence of nonhuman animals is for them to be used by humans.

Paragraph 3:

Another consideration that humans should make is that their infringement of animal rights is based on prejudice that they can easily put an end to.

• Only prejudice pushes a person into denying another person the rights that they expect to have for themselves.
• Prejudice is morally unacceptable whether it is based on species, sexual orientation, gender, or race.

Paragraph 4:

There is no any morally relevant difference between human beings and non-human animals.

• If humans are entitled to their rights, it is only fair that animals too are allowed to enjoy their own rights.
• It makes no sense when human animals are granted their rights but non-human ones are denied theirs.

Paragraph 5:

Animals have a culture to preserve and thus killing or caging them amounts to an erosion of this culture.

• All species suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.
• Not justifiable to subject another species to an experience one would not wish for themselves.

Paragraph 6:

It is the belief of some people that because animals are not humans, they should not have the same rights as humans.

• However, it should be noted that adult mammals and human animals have no morally relevant difference between them.
• They are both animals and they deserve to be treated the same.

It is true that animals are not human beings and that is not up for debate. However, they deserve to have the rights granted to humans because they suffer like humans. They have an inherent worth given that they are animals like humans save for the difference in their species.

Animals Should Have the Same Rights as Humans

Human beings continue to go to zoos and circuses, wearing leather, and eating meat; activities all of which involve either caging or killing of animals. Animals are also kept as pets by humans and this involves the selling of animals and constructing cages for them so they may not escape. Noteworthy, all these actions have to do with the infringement of animal rights in one way or another. It is however interesting that humans never consider the impacts that these actions have on animals presumably because animals, to them, have no rights. This disregard for animal rights has even attracted court cases some of which sought to have animals viewed as persons just as humans. People should consider giving animals the same rights as human beings because they deserve it.

At the same time Gudwriter’s also provides essay on argumentative essay on animal rights with examples.

Animals should be granted the same rights as humans first because just like humans, they have the capacity to suffer. They feel motherly love, loneliness, frustration, fear, and pleasure depending on the situation they find themselves in. As such, it should be the moral obligation of human beings to take this fact into account whenever they consider undertaking actions that would interfere with the needs of animals. As pointed out by Bennett-Jones (2015), “Factors to consider would include the degree of an animal’s autonomy, sensitivity to pain, level of sentience, self-awareness and ability to hold preferences.” It is well deserving for animals to lead their lives free from being exploited or being subjected to sufferings. As a matter of fact, when deciding on the rights of any being, the question should be whether they can suffer and not whether they can talk or reason.

Human beings should also consider that animals have an inherent worth which in itself is completely separate from their usefulness to humans. Being living beings capable of moving, all animals have the right to life and therefore have every right not to be subjected to any kind of pain. In this regard, it is wrong on the part of human beings to presume that the sole reason for the existence of nonhuman animals is for them to be used by humans. Animals attach immense value to their lives just like humans do, and rightly so. This is why they will always try to evade danger either by defending themselves or running away from sources of danger ( Smith, 2012 ). It is also why they go about looking for food to fend for themselves and their young ones, much like humans.

Further, there is no any morally relevant difference between human beings and non-human animals. If humans are entitled to their rights, it is only fair that animals too are allowed to enjoy their own rights. It makes no sense when human animals are granted their rights but non-human ones are denied theirs. Moreover, being ‘subject-of-a-life,’ both the human and non-human animal species have many attributes in common. They are for instance alive to the fact that they live (“Animal Rights,” 2014). There is thus no justification whatsoever why animals should be denied the rights they deserve. This point leaves human beings with no valid reason to continue trampling upon the rights of non-human animals.

Another consideration that humans should make is that their infringement of animal rights is based on prejudice that they can easily put an end to. As it is, only prejudice pushes a person into denying another person the rights that they expect to have for themselves. As noted by Smith (2012), prejudice is morally unacceptable whether it is based on species, sexual orientation, gender, or race. If humans would not eat a dog for instance, why should they eat goats? The capacity to feel pain is inherent in both dogs and goats. However, out of prejudice, humans consider one as food and the other as a companion.

Further, animals have a culture to preserve and thus killing or caging them amounts to an erosion of this culture. Just like humans, “Elephants that have witnessed the slaughter of their parents by poaching or culling and lost the support of their extended family group exhibit the same erratic and often detached behaviors…” (Siebert, 2014). Their fate resembles that of orphans of war who after losing their families and witnessing the destruction of their villages, remain to wallow in miser. In other words, all species suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Why subject another species to an experience you would not wish for yourself?

It is the belief of some people that because animals are not humans, they should not have the same rights as humans. However, as already seen, adult mammals and human animals have no morally relevant difference between them ( Cavalieri, 2003 ). They are both animals and they deserve to be treated the same. No matter how humanely animals may be treated, killing, confining, breeding, buying, and selling them invade into their rights. It is unjust to subject one species to sufferance while fighting for the rights of another species yet morally; they both deserve respect and freedom. It is thus dishonest to assume that humans can do whatever they like with animals.

It is true that animals are not human beings and that is not up for debate. However, they deserve to have the rights granted to humans because they suffer like humans. They have an inherent worth given that they are animals like humans save for the difference in their species. They have the will to organize their life according to their culture which is unfortunately interfered with by humans. It amounts to prejudice to subject them to untold sufferings in the name of being turned into food or being kept in cages for whatever purposes. In this respect, it is high time humans considered championing for animals to have the same rights as humans.

Animal Rights. (2014). In BBC . Retrieved July 10, 2020 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/rights/rights_1.shtml

Bennett-Jones, O. (2015). Should animals be given human rights? . BBC News . Retrieved 22 November 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-32854504

Cavalieri, P. (2003). The Animal Question: Why Nonhuman Animals Deserve Human Rights . Cary, NC: Oxford University Press, USA.

Siebert, C. (2014). Should Animals Have The Same Rights As People? . Popular Science . Retrieved 22 November 2017, from https://www.popsci.com/should-animals-same-rights-people

Smith, W. J. (2012). A Rat Is a Pig Is a Dog Is a Boy: The Human Cost of the Animal Rights Movement . New York City, NY: Encounter Books.

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Related Posts

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…

Skip to Main Content

• My Assessments
• My Curriculum Maps
• Communities
• Workshop Evaluation

Share Suggestion

"zoos and animal welfare" argumentative/persuasive writing.

"Zoos and Animal Welfare" Argumentative/Persuasive Writing

Grade levels, course, subject.

• Printer Friendly Version

Apply the appropriate models to show interactions among organisms in an environment.

CHANGE AND CONSTANCY

Explain mechanisms organisms use to adapt to their environment.

Describe how selective breeding and biotechnology can alter the genetic composition of organisms.

Compare and contrast observable patterns in the physical characteristics across families, strains and species.

Explain why the extinction of a species may occur when the environment changes.

Explain that mutations can alter a gene and are the original source of new variations in a population.

• Big Ideas Purpose, topic and audience guide types of writing
• Concepts Focus, content, organization, style, and conventions work together to impact writing quality Persuasive writing attempts to influence the audience by presenting an issue and stating and supporting a position. Various types of writing are distinguished by their characteristics
• Competencies Persuasive Writing: Develop substantial, relevant and illustrative content that demonstrates a clear understanding of the purpose (content). Persuasive Writing: Employ a thoroughly elaborated argument that includes a clear position consistently supported with precise and relevant evidence where rhetorical persuasive strategies are evident (content). Persuasive Writing: Employ effective organizational strategies and structures, such as logical order and transitions, which develop a controlling idea (organization). Persuasive Writing: Use proper conventions to compose in the standard form of the English language (conventions). Persuasive Writing: Write with a sharp, distinct controlling point made about a single topic with evident awareness of task and audience (focus). Persuasive Writing: Write with precise control of language, stylistic techniques, and sentence structures that create a consistent and effective tone (style). Write persuasive pieces, specific to a purpose and audience, which have a clearly stated position or opinion, with convincing and properly cited evidence that anticipates and counters reader concerns and arguments. Write to influence the audience by:• stating and supporting a position with detailed evidence, examples, and reasons. • using persuasive techniques (e.g.: emotional appeal, statistics, description, anecdote, example, expert opinion) to strengthen the argument. • employing a distinct structure to organize the argument and the opposing viewpoints. • acknowledging and refuting opposing arguments. • evaluating sources for validity, perspective, bias, and relationship to topic.• documenting sources of information responsibly and ethically. • using sources to achieve a balanced and authoritative argument. • supporting judgments with relevant evidence and detail. Write to influence the audience by:• stating and supporting a position with detailed evidence, examples, and reasons. • using persuasive techniques (e.g.: emotional appeal, statistics, description, anecdote, example, expert opinion, analogies and illustrations) to strengthen the argument. • employing a distinct structure to organize the argument and the opposing viewpoints. • acknowledging and refuting opposing arguments. • evaluating primary and secondary sources for validity, perspective, bias, and relationship to topic. • documenting sources of information responsibly and ethically. • using sources to achieve a balanced and authoritative argument. • supporting judgments with relevant evidence and detail. • presenting the position in either a deductive or an inductive framework. Focus, content, organization, style, and conventions work together to impact writing quality

Description

The Literacy Design Collaborative teaching task provides a blueprint for seamlessly integrating literacy and content standards in a rigorous, authentic classroom experience. After determining the discipline, course, and grade level, educators use teaching tasks built around predefined template prompts. The teaching task requires students to read, analyze and comprehend written materials and then write cogent arguments, explanations or narratives in the subjects they are studying.

Students will examine the zoo as a facility in which animals are confined within enclosures and displayed to the public. In many cases, animals may also be bred to produce offspring. Although enjoyed by many, some feel zoo conditions are detrimental to the health of animals. Students will explain and support their opinion as to whether or not animals should be kept in zoos.

In this extended writing task, students will read, analyze, and gather relevant information from text(s) and write an argumentative essay. Students will…

• Apply knowledge of the distribution and management of natural resources to a current issue
• Apply knowledge of the relationship between an environment and extinction to a current issue
• Read, analyze and gather relevant information from multiple texts
• Write an evidence-based argumentative essay, and address competing views

enclosure - something that "closes" a space

welfare - a condition of being or doing well

conservation - protection from extinction

zoochosis  - obsessive, repetitve behavior associated with animals kept in prolonged captivity

extinction - dying out or termination of a species. Occurs when a species can no longer reproduce at replacement levels

endangered species - a species existing in such small numbers that it is in danger of becoming extinct

500 minutes/10 periods

"Animal Ark or Sinking Ship?" BornFree.org . Born Free Foundation, July 2007. Web. Apr. 2011. < http://www.bornfree.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/files/zoo_check/ publications/Animal_Ark_or_sinking_ship.pdf >.

Dixon, Thomas. "Zoos: Debatabase - Debate Topics and Debate Motions." IDEA: International Debate Education Association - Debate Resources & Debate Tools. 06 Apr. 2009. Web. 28 Jan. 2011. < http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=1 >.

Horton, Jennifer. "Are Zoos Good or Bad." HowStuffWorks.com . 15 Sept. 2008. Web. Apr. 2011. < http://animals.howstuffworks.com/animal-facts/zoos-good-or-bad.htm >.

Lin, Doris. "Should Zoos Keep Endangered Species?" About.com . The New York Times Company. Web. Apr. 2011. < http://animalrights.about.com/od/wildlife/a/EndangeredZoos.htm >.

Van Tuyl, Christine.  Zoos and Animal Welfare . Detroit: Greenhaven, 2008. Print.

Related Materials & Resources

Suggested instructional strategies, instructional procedures.

Teacher Preparation Prior to launching the teaching task in the classroom, a teacher should consider the following questions:

How much support will students need to successfully complete the task?

What parts of the process can be completed independently (during or outside of class)? What parts of the process represent new learning or substantial challenge and warrant direct instruction or guided practice during class?

What content and vocabulary instruction and activities will be provided so that students are able to successfully complete the task?

How will reading be scaffolded for my students? (Read together? Read in groups? Read independently?)

What note-taking method will students use, and does that method align with the writing task?

How will students make the transition from the reading to the writing? (outline, graphic organizer, etc.)

What writing instruction is needed to help students write their thesis statements, organize their notes, embed quotes, and cite evidence?

How will students receive feedback at various stages of the writing process to make sure they are answering the prompt, their papers are focused, their ideas are fully developed with details, examples, etc.?

Daily Plan The daily plan is flexible based on students' prior knowledge, experience and skills in reading, research and writing as well as their ability to apply subject area knowledge to a new scenario. The amount of time, in class instruction, and scaffolds needed can be increased or decreased to provide the appropriate level of challenge and support for students.

Teaching Task 2 (Argumentative/Analysis L1, L2): Should animals be kept in zoos? After reading informational texts, write an essay that addresses the question and support your position wiht evidence from the text(s). L2  Be sure to acknowledge competing views.

Task Engagement and Analysis The teacher introduces the teaching task to students by linking the task to the class content that has been taught previously and to existing knowledge, skills, and interests. The teacher asks students to read the teaching task and make notes or discuss with peers things they already know about this issue or topic.

The teacher helps the students to understand the expectations of the teaching task by asking students what they think a good response to the task might include and creating a classroom list. The teacher may share examples of the type of texts the students will produce (either actual student samples or commercially published texts). Sharing the rubric with students will clarify the expectations. (Clicking on each performance level of the rubric will enable teacher access to annotated student writing for that level.)

The teacher explains the timetable and supports available for completing the task.

Text Selection The teacher has either preselected the texts or will provide access to research sources for students to select texts. The teacher asks students to begin to record information about the sources (e.g., using notebooks, note cards, technology). The teacher may need to provide models or instruction on creating a bibliography or works cited. The students should identify author, title, publisher, date, and any other needed information (e.g., volume, editor) A discussion about the credibility or merit of sources may be needed.

Preview texts The teacher can provide students with all of the texts or offer students a list of acceptable sources from which to choose. The teacher briefly highlights each text with a summary to assist students in making appropriate text selections. The teacher asks the students to skim through each text to identify the genre, purpose, and text structure. A teacher think-aloud explaining rationale for making certain text selections may be beneficial to students.

Note-taking The teacher provides or suggests that a note-taking method be used that is consistent with the expectations for the task and the type of writing (e.g., argumentative-pro/con t-chart). Students should be encouraged to refer to the teaching task so that their notes are relevant to the prompt. Students should be encouraged to include both textual information and their own connections and implications. Students should continue to add to their bibliography or works cited.

Teachers may need to teach or reinforce practices to promote academic integrity and to help students avoid plagiarism. The ability to use and credit sources appropriately shows respect for the work of others and adds credibility to a student's argument and/or research.

Reading and Research The teacher assigns the reading, research and note-taking to students and provides instruction to support analysis and synthesis of texts. The teacher may ask students to reflect orally or in writing on key questions including:

Which parts of the text provide evidence that relates to the prompt?

What historical or current examples did you notice that relate to the prompt?

What is the text explicitly saying? What gaps or unanswered questions do you see?

What competing arguments have you encountered or thought of based on the text (argumentative)?

How do you know your sources are credible?

Depending upon the needs of students in the classroom, additional scaffolds may be necessary (e.g., whole-group reading and teacher modeling of note-taking, paired in-class reading, talking to the text, small group discussion). The teacher may either provide students with print source options or make electronic texts available to them through the use of Web 2.0 tools (e.g., Wikis, Nings) or online library databases (e.g., EBSCO, ProQuest).

Transition to Writing The teacher uses discussion based strategies such as the Paideia/Socratic seminar or small group discussions to help students make connections between their research and notes and the teaching task.

Developing a Thesis or Claim Students write an opening paragraph that includes a controlling idea and sequences the key points that will be made throughout the writing assignment. The teacher may provide models of opening paragraphs and analyze them with the class. Students may provide feedback to each other on their opening paragraphs. Students should compare their opening paragraph to the teaching task and assess whether the paragraph fully address the main points of the prompt (e.g., define and explain, compare, take a position, etc.)

Organizing Notes/Planning Students organize their notes into a graphic organizer or outline that establish a logical structure for the assignment. An outline begins with the thesis or claim, sequences key points and includes supporting evidence from texts.

Development of rough drafts Students begin writing their rough drafts. The teacher frequently checks in with students to answer questions, offer feedback, and provide writing instruction as needed. Through planning, the teacher embeds opportunities for students to receive feedback on their writing prior to the submission of the final draft either through peer conferencing, teacher conferencing, or written teacher feedback. Students revise their drafts based on the feedback they receive. The amount of time needed for the development of rough draft varies and may include time during and outside of class.

Completion of Final Draft Students either self or peer-edit their papers for conventional errors and complete the final draft.

Assessment and Reflection The teacher uses the LDC rubric to assess the students' writing and provide feedback to help students improve their performance. Patterns in student performance guide further instruction.

Analytic Scoring The rubric is structured to facilitate analytic scoring - the awarding of separate scores by readers for each of the seven scoring elements. Scorers should keep in mind that the description of work quality within any particular "cell" of the rubric may still address more than one idea, and therefore may not match a particular essay perfectly. The scorer must identify the descriptor that is the best match to a paper based on the preponderance of evidence. If the decision is truly a "coin toss," the scorer should feel free to use the "in-between" or "half" scores. A variation of analytic scoring might be used in a situation in which the emphasis of instruction at a particular time might be on a subset of the seven scoring elements. For example, if instruction is focused on development and organization, then a teacher might simply award scores for those two scoring elements.

Holistic Scoring Holistic scoring is assigning a single, overall score to a paper. Analytic and holistic scoring rubrics look much the same. The holistic scorer's job is to pick the single score (1, 2, 3, 4) that corresponds to the set of descriptors for scoring elements that best matches a paper. Again, in-between or half scores can be used. Ideally, holistic scorers are thinking about all the scoring elements as they read papers, but over time they find that they can assign holistic scores very rapidly, yet still fairly accurately. This is one of the advantages of holistic scoring. However, analytic information is not generated by this method.

Score Recording and Feedback It would be good practice for teachers to share the rubrics with students and discuss "criteria for success" relative to the scoring elements. However, it is not intended that a clean scoring rubric would be attached to every paper that is scored in all situations. It might be more appropriate to attach score slips that list the scoring element names with blank spaces after them for the recording of scores (and a space for a total score, too, perhaps). A customized rubber stamp could accomplish the same. Analytic scores do provide useful information to the students since they reference descriptors in the rubric. However, nothing beats descriptive comments that are best written in the margins of the papers where they are most appropriate.

Cut Scores for Proficiency Levels Scorers can readily compute a total score (the sum of the seven element scores) or an average score (that sum divided by 7). If translating scores to performance levels is desired, then the structure of the rubrics lends itself to the use of the following cut scores:

LDC Scores and Grades LDC scores could be translated to grades contributing to students' course grades. How this would be done is an individual teacher's decision. Teachers could establish their own cut scores for letter grades or just re-label the four performance levels as A, B, C, D. They could come up with their own way to convert LDC scores to numerical grades consistent with whatever numerical scale they use for other class work.

Click on each performance level below (Not Yet, Approaches Expectations, Meets Expectations, Advanced) to view annotated student samples.

Sean Houseknecht, Alex Shubert, Monica Cressman - Elizabethtown Area School District

Content Collections

Date published.

Animal rights Pacifism

• Published: 25 May 2021
• Volume 178 , pages 4053–4082, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Blake Hereth   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9338-0417 1  

652 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The Animal Rights Thesis (ART) entails that nonhuman animals like pigs and cows have moral rights, including rights not to be unjustly harmed. If ART is true, it appears to imply the permissibility of killing ranchers, farmers, and zookeepers in defense of animals who will otherwise be unjustly killed. This is the Militancy Objection (MO) to ART. I consider four replies to MO and reject three of them. First, MO fails because animals lack rights, or lack rights of sufficient strength to justify other-defensive killing. Second, MO fails because those who unjustly threaten animals aren't liable or, if they are liable, their liability is outweighed by other considerations (e.g., a strong presumption against vigilante killing). I then argue both of these fail. Third, MO succeeds because animal militancy is permissible. Fourth, MO fails because there aren't liability justifications for defensive killing in general (i.e., pacifism is true). I argue that there's thoroughgoing epistemic parity between the Militancy View (MV) and the Pacifist View (PV), and that two considerations favor PV over MV. First, because under conditions of uncertainty, we should believe rights-bearers retain rather than lose their rights, which PV affirms and MV denies. Second, because PV is intrinsically likelier than MV to be true since PV at worst affirms wrongful letting die and MV at worst affirms wrongful killing, the latter of which is intrinsically harder to justify than the former.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Comment: Animals in ‘Non-Ideal Ethics’ and ‘No-Deal Ethics’

Are We Smart Enough to Know When to Take the Political Turn for Animals?

Is there a Rawlsian Argument for Animal Rights?

Though as Abbate ( 2015a ) powerfully shows, the nature of the justification for defensively harming nonhuman animals isn’t clear.

My argument, which I lack the space to develop fully here, is that mere failure to assist can make one liable to defensive harm. Here’s why: If you fail to help someone under threat of unjust harm H when you could reasonably do so (i.e., when it’s feasible and at little cost to you), then you share responsibility for the fact that H isn’t no longer a threat to that person, which entails that you are responsible for the fact that H is still a threat to that person, which entails that you bear some responsibility for the fact that the threat imposed by H is maintained . Since the threatened person has a reasonable claim against you that you not maintain threats, you are liable to defensive harm if you fail to help them when you reasonably could. Moreover, since you can’t be liable for acting permissibly and since every act is either permissible or impermissible, it follows that you acted impermissibly. Thus, you have an obligation to assist them resulting from a claim they have against you—which is identical to a right to assistance. For similar views, see Aas ( 2021 ) and Hanser ( 1999 ).

For more on a Militancy-Objection-style argument for the permissibility of abortion, see Tollefsen ( 1997 ). See also Kaczor ( 2015 : 220). For a powerful reply, see Williams (2021).

The full story can be viewed here: https://abc13.com/man-arrested-after-doorbell-cam-captures-dog-being-choked/6182160/ .

For an extended defense of this view, see Gunasekera ( 2018 ): 93–102.

An anonymous reviewer objects that the necessity condition isn’t satisfied. After all, the activists might discharge their obligation to rescue nonhuman animals by pursuing effective forms of nonviolent activism. This reveals two applications of the necessity condition: whether violence is necessary to save some animals and whether it’s necessary to save these animals. I have stipulated that violence is necessary to save these animals in the Zookeeper case and cases like it, but perhaps this misfocuses the moral problem (and its solution). I disagree. Suppose I encounter a human child about to be brutally murdered. I can either kill the unjust aggressor and save the child, or I can donate to Oxfam and save one child’s life, but I can’t do both. (Perhaps the donation window is closing at Oxfam and ‘rushed funds’ are needed to save a child by day’s end.) Surely I am at least permitted to save the child about to be brutally murdered, which is all the permission thesis requires. The necessity condition is satisfied for the same reason under the assistance thesis , though then we must adjudicate between competing rights to assistance. If donating to the Animal Legal Defense Fund saves some animals whereas killing Nour saves these animals, we might look to lesser-evil considerations to resolve the impasse. If the impasse is theoretically unresolvable and our obligation to assist can be discharged equally well under either action, then there’s no obligation to save some animals over these animals (or vice-versa), thereby ensuring that the necessity condition is satisfied under either course of action under the assistance thesis .

Think, for example, of naval personnel who utilize dolphins to identify mines, or ground forces which utilize canines and other animals to detect explosives. Similar arrangements are made by police personnel (e.g., K-9 units).

I say “perhaps” since poachers are less likely to be viewed favorably under commonsense moral views.

Abbate considers a case in which a human man hikes on a wilderness trail where grizzlies are known to roam. He comes across a grizzly, the grizzly growls, and the man fatally shoots the grizzly. Abbate describes this case as one in which the hiker engaged in and is responsible for risk-taking activities which resulted in a foreseeable violent conflict. Because the risk-imposition is non-reciprocal—that is, because “the hiker could have stayed home” and “the bear cannot be expected to just ‘stay in his den’”—the hiker is liable to defensive harm to an extent that the grizzly is not. Thus, the hiker, and not the grizzly, should bear the brunt of the ensuing harm. See Abbate ( 2015a : 122–124).

Cf. Ebert & Machan ( 2012 ). Ebert and Machan focus on a distinct objection, which they call the Predation Objection. According to this objection, the animal rights thesis implies that agents have a duty to defend animals from predation by other animals, which they claim is absurd. In the course of defending this objection, they note that since Regan denies that there is a duty to defend animals from such predation on the grounds that animals are ‘moral patients’ and therefore cannot violate rights, it follows that it is impermissible to harm or kill animals in defense of humans. They then claim such a view also implies that if, for example, a wolf attacks a human and the human responds with violent self-defense, it is permissible to harm or kill the human in defense of the wolf’s rights. This is notable for two reasons. First, it shows that the animal rights thesis pro tanto justifies animal rights militancy. Second, it portrays this implication as problematic. Under my formulation of the Militancy Objection, however, the assistance thesis explicitly restricts the scope of the right to defensive assistance to averting unjustified harms, which excludes the harms posed by nonhuman animals (and, for that matter, even human animals) who lack moral agency. For a fresh revisitation of this topic, see Abbate ( 2020 ). Notably, Abbate claims there is sometimes a moral obligation to harm some animals to prevent intolerable injustices to other animals.

See also McMahan’s objection to Judith Jarvis Thomson in McMahan ( 2002 : 398-421). Thomson assumes for argument’s sake that fetuses have strong rights and argues that abortion is nevertheless often permissible. McMahan replies that such a strong view of rights implies that a third party can permissibly defend fetuses under immediate threat of abortion.

Speciesists will doubtlessly defend an asymmetry here, contending that human slaves are importantly different from animals, such that ascriptions of rights are not undermined by the permitting of widespread violence in the case of slaves but are undermined in the case of animals. But that’s just to offer a distinct objection to the animal rights thesis .

I assume internalism about defensive liability merely for the sake of argument. According to internalism, Threat is liable to be harmed only if harming Threat would be necessary to avert some harm, narrowly proportionate, etc. In other words, these requirements are ‘internal’ to liability; someone isn’t liable without meeting the requirements. For more on this distinction, see Frowe ( 2014 : 88–89 and 91–94).

For an insightful critique of Regan’s conclusions about the Lifeboat Dogs case, see Abbate ( 2015b ).

Cf. McMahan ( 2016 ).

Notably, McMahan ( 2002 : 420) condemns animal rights militancy for these reasons.

This example is a more described variant of an example given in McMahan ( 2005 ).

For those keeping track of the math, that’s a combined 40 years for the elderly pedestrians and another 80 years for Driver. Since imposing 80 years of lost life is twice as bad as imposing 40 years of lost life, preventing the latter by causing the former appears to violate narrow proportionality.

Gordon-Solmon ( 2017 : 127, fn. 8) suggests that responsibility is internal to, or necessary for, narrow proportionality. I’m assuming the same is true of degrees of responsibility with respect to what counts as narrowly proportionate (or disproportionate) in a given case.

Nozick ( 2013 : 41) claims it’s impermissible to inflict slight discomfort on a human in order to spare 10,000 animals from extreme suffering. Nozick makes this claim as an example of what we’re forbidden to do to non-liable parties. He makes no claim about what we may do to liable parties, such as Nour. The same is true of Regan in his comments on the Lifeboat Dogs case: He claims no amount of animal sacrifice is disproportionate, but he fails to consider liable parties like Nour whose interests are discounted.

There may be other ways of denying or weakening the animal rights thesis . I lack the space to explore them here.

Any plausible moral theory on which the animal rights thesis is true will condemn Nour’s actions, since her actions would be morally comparable to someone guarding a prison filled with humans who will shortly be unjustly killed.

It’s thus an assumption of the diminished liability approach that it’s impermissible to defend human slaves even if pacifism is false. As I argue below, this is false. Slaves are permitted to defend themselves with violence, if anyone is.

Kaufman ( 2010 ) develops a similar case against the view that it’s impermissible to harm innocent aggressors in self-defense. Cf. Kaufman ( 2009 : 78-9).

A stronger variation of the vigilante principle might be that such violence is permissible only if it would be unlikely to bring about worse injustices. On this interpretation of the moral requirement, a mere lack of a positive likelihood is insufficient. What’s needed is a negative likelihood (i.e., an unlikelihood). Thus, in cases where the probability of bringing about greater injustices hovers at 0.5, or where there is no better reason to believe that greater injustices will be brought about than that they won’t be, it’s wrong (on the stronger vigilante principle ) for third parties to engage in defensive violence.

Or, per the above footnote, it’s unlikely to bring about worse injustices.

Might B mistakenly believe that employing x will prevent z ? No, because (per Uniacke’s stipulation) B knows that x won’t prevent z . Imagine that B used something else he believed wouldn’t help him successfully defend against z , like singing opera. If B sang opera, would he be employing it as a defensive measure? The answer, it seems to me, is that he obviously wouldn’t be.

This implication, too, strikes me as counterintuitive. John Brown fought in defense of slaves, acting more or less precisely as Rowlands envisions. It seems to me that if pacifism is false, then Brown surely acted permissibly.

A war in defense of mistreated animals might in some ways be easier to wage permissibly than a war in defense of slaves. Concerns about wide proportionality, for example, would be less of a concern, since there were millions of slaves but billions of abused animals. This will effectively permit a larger number of non-liable persons to be (unintentionally) killed, since the number of animals who would be saved would be considerably larger.

If the vigilante principle did condemn animal rights warfare in Canadian War , it would also condemn the war waged by the Northern States in American Civil War , which is implausible.

Kagan ( 2019 : 255) signals an openness to this view. For the fuller discussion, see 252–258.

Perhaps we should distinguish between posing a threat and aiding a threat. But even if we do, aiding a threat is surely going to entail liability to defensive harm, at least when one aids a threat in a morally responsible way, as Nour does. For example, perhaps only Assassin threatens to kill you with a gun, but I hold you in place for the kill shot. Moreover, perhaps I am unaware that Assassin is acting wrongly in doing so—for example, perhaps I mistake Assassin for a police officer doing their duty.

See, for example, section 3.2 where the solipsist and the person uneducated about human rights provide examples of appeals to ignorance. It seems to me that both persons are culpably ignorant because two reasonable pro tanto reasonable expectations are that individuals recognize that there are sentient individuals distinct from themselves and that it’s impermissible to harm such individuals without a sufficiently good reason. It also seems to me that neo-Cartesian views of animals are false and obviously so, or at the very least that it’s reasonable to expect most humans to recognize animal sentience since we think it’s reasonable to hold most humans morally and legally responsible for animal abuse. However, I can’t defend these positions at length here. These disputes are somewhat peripheral, however, since it seems permissible to harm the convinced solipsist whether or not they are culpably ignorant. The same, therefore, will be true of the lookout, Nour, certain animal researchers, and so on.

Someone is liable to harm just in case you would not wrong them by harming them. Thus, even if you harm a liable individual and thus don’t wrong them, you might in doing so still wrong someone else , and thus it might be impermissible to harm the liable individual. Moreover, even if it’s permissible to harm someone, it doesn’t follow that they’re liable to be harmed. For example, it might be permissible to harm them as an unintended side effect of preventing some immense harm. For more on distinction between liability and permissibility, see Frowe ( 2014 : 188).

Hadley’s appeal to factors like contributory causation appear to commit him to the view that it is the number of liable individuals that generates the counterintuitive nature of the Militancy Objection. Indeed, in his abstract, he refers to the problem as the Multiple Inappropriate Targets Problem. Whereas Hadley and I differ in our interpretation of the problematic nature of the Militancy Objection, our interpretations are not incompatible. Moreover, Hadley’s concerns appear to overlap with a similar problem in the broader literature on the ethics of self-defense. See Hadley ( 2009a : 168). For more on the more general problem, see McMahan ( 2011 : 24).

Here’s an objection: Militancy doesn’t permit us to kill all of these people (or people in comparable professions), since doing so would in many cases be disproportionate to the harms they threaten to impose on animals. For example, some animal researchers neither kill nor physically injure animals. At most, they imprison animals. Killing those animal researchers to free the imprisoned animals, then, would be objectionably disproportionate. But this objection fails for two reasons. First, the objection relies on the dubious assumption that killing (for example) kidnappers is objectionably disproportionate. It isn’t at all obvious that human abductees aren’t permitted to kill their kidnappers if doing so is necessary to escape. Second, the objection assumes that the intuitive implausibility of the militancy view is restricted to its moral implications for killing, but that’s false. Suppose that Nour was guarding not animals who will soon be killed but animals who will soon be tortured, and that in order to rescue them it’s necessary to torture Nour. The view that Nour is liable to such harm is again counterintuitive.

If pacifism is true, is anyone liable to defensive harm? As I pointed out in footnote 59, liability doesn’t entail actual permissibility (and nor does actual permissibility entail liability). By implication, impermissibility does not entail non-liability. Thus, even if pacifism entails that assault is always impermissible, it doesn’t follow that no one is liable to defensive assault.

Does pacifism falsify the Permission Thesis? As stated, the Permission Thesis merely claims that there’s a third-party permission to defend animals. Typically, invoking a permission to other-defense is a way of invoking a permission to other-defensive assault . On that reading, pacifism falsifies the Permission Thesis. However, since there are substantive ways of defending others that do not involve assault, it seems that pacifism does not rule out every form of other-defense, and thus is compatible with a broader interpretation of the Permission Thesis.

F.B.I. (2014). URL:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/violent-crime

The number also reflects only crimes that actually occurred , and thus excludes attempted but unsuccessful violent crimes.

This criticism is from Narveson ( 2003 ), who argues that pacifists “have too many friends” and “terrorists” (which I’m calling “militants”) “have too many enemies.” On Narveson’s view, terrorism is wrong as a conceptual matter, since it condones the targeting of noncombatants who are not liable to defensive (or offensive) harm. Again, the worry here is not that the sheer number of persons liable to be defensively harmed is too many, as if there were some numerical threshold above which there is no liability to defensive harm. Rather, the worry is that these people don’t seem to be liable to defensive harm at all, and since the militancy view implies otherwise in so many cases, it gets the wrong judgment in an immense number of cases.

Helen Frowe (in conversation) objects that the epistemic par isn’t apparent. She concedes that there might be epistemic parity ‘downstream’, at the level of applied cases, but denies that there’s epistemic parity ‘upstream’, at the level of broad principles and ethical theory. Sometimes we use the independent plausibility of cases to determine the plausibility of moral theories and principles, and sometimes we use the independent plausibility of moral theories and principles to guide us through hard cases. Frowe claims we should rely on the independent plausibility of liability, like we did with the Burning Barn case in section §2, to guide us through hard cases like Zookeeper . Once we do, militancy will be the more plausible view. I can’t offer an extensive reply here, but I’ll offer one reply. Where militancy and pacifism part ways is at the crossroads of liability, and so (unless we’re to beg the question against either view) we need to look elsewhere for an independently plausible moral theory or principle that advantages militancy. Where might it be? So far as I can tell, the sort of ‘pre-liability’ moral story of the militancy view is the very same moral story as pacifism: Both accept that Nour and the pigs have rights, that there’s a pro tanto obligation against transgressing them, and so on. But if that’s true, then the epistemic parity appears thoroughgoing : There’s intuitive parity downstream with liability, and there’s parity upstream due to identical background moral assumptions.

For her reply to the Taxpayer Objection, see Frowe ( 2014 : 209–212).

That is, assuming my arguments in Sect. 3.1 are successful.

Here’s another objection: Our background knowledge also tells us that the human aggressor is aggressing unjustly , which is reason enough to prefer militancy over pacifism. But the objection fails because knowing that someone acts unjustly isn’t sufficient to know they’re liable to defensive harm or that it’s permissible to kill them. For example, I might know that you acted unjustly by failing to pay someone what you owed them, but I don’t thereby know that you’re liable to defensive harm or that it’s permissible to kill you.

It’s unclear to me whether this is logically distinct from the claim that killing is intrinsically worse than letting die. Rachels ( 1986 ) compares two examples in which you either drown your cousin or let him drown. He affirms both are impermissible but denies one violation is intrinsically worse than the other. Quinn ( 1989 : 289) argues that even if Rachels is right that neither violation is worse than the other, it doesn’t follow that the permissibility thresholds are the same.

This is a modified version of Singer’s ( 1972 : 231) classic case.

Cf. Tadros (2011: 252). Thomson (1971: 52) defends the stronger view that if even your bodily liberty is at stake, such that it’s necessary for you to remain plugged into a violinist for nine months to save his life, that’s sufficient to justify not saving his life because the cost to you is too great.

For similar cases and discussion, see Frowe ( 2014 : 51–71).

The distinction has been defended extensively elsewhere. For defenses, see Hill ( 2018 ), McMahan (2009: 94), Kamm ( 2007 : 17), and Quinn ( 1989 ).

Aas, S. (2021). Vital prostheses: Killing, letting die, and the ethics of de-implantation. Bioethics, 35 (2), 214–220.

Article   Google Scholar  

Abbate, C. E. (2020). Animal rights and the duty to harm: When to be a harm causing deontologist. Journal for Ethics and Moral Philosophy, 3 (1), 5–26.

Google Scholar  

Abbate, C. E. (2015a). The search for liability in the defensive killing of Nonhuman animals. Social Theory and Practice, 41 (1), 106–130.

Abbate, C. E. (2015b). Comparing lives and epistemic limitations: A critique of regan’s lifeboat from an unprivileged position. Ethics and the Environment, 20 (1), 1–21.

Ebert, R., & Machan, T. R. (2012). Innocent threats and the moral problem of carnivorous animals. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 29 (2), 146–159.

Fischer, B. (2016). What if Barren and Klein are right about insect sentience? Animal Sentience, 9 (8), 1–6.

Francione, G. L. (2000). Introduction to animal rights: Your child or the dog?  Temple University Press.

Frowe, H. (2021). The duty to save and the duty to minimize harm. In S. David, V. Peter, & W. Steven (Eds.), Oxford studies in political philosophy. (Vol. 7). New York: Oxford University Press.

Frowe, H. (2014). Defensive killing . Oxford University Press.

Gardner, M. (2016). The interspecies killing problem. In E. Mylan & L. C. Gary (Eds.), The moral rights of animals. (pp. 119–140). Lanham: Lexington.

Gordon-Solmon, K. (2017). Self-defense against multiple threats. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 14 (2), 125–133.

Guerrero, A. A. (2007). Don’t know, don’t kill: Moral ignorance, culpability, and caution. Philosophical Studies, 136 (1), 59–97.

Gunasekera, C. A. (2018). The ethics of killing ‘Surplus’ zoo animals. Journal of Animal Ethics, 8 (1), 93–102.

Hadley, J. (2009a). Animal rights and self-defense theory. Journal of Value Inquiry, 43 (2), 165–177.

Hadley, J. (2009b). Moral responsibility for harming animals. Think, 22 (8), 51–55.

Hadley, J. (2009c). Animal rights extremism and the terrorism question. Journal of Social Philosophy, 40 (3), 363–378.

Hadley, J. (2006). The duty to aid Nonhuman animals in dire need. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 23 (4), 445–451.

Hanser, M. (1999). Killing, letting die, and preventing people from being saved. Utilitas, 11 (3), 277–295.

Hill, S. (2018). Murdering an accident victim: A new objection to the bare-difference argument. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 96 (4), 767–778.

Kaczor, C. (2015). The ethics of abortion: Women’s rights, human life, and the question of justice . (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Kagan, S. (2019). How to count animals, more or less . Oxford University Press.

Kamm, F. M. (2007). Intricate ethics . Oxford University Press.

Kaufman, W. (2010). Self-defense, innocent aggressors, and the duty of martyrdom. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 91 (1), 78–96.

Kaufman, W. (2009). Justified killing: The paradox of self-defense . Lexington Books.

McMahan, J. (2016). The comparative badness for animals of suffering and death. In T. Višak & R. Garner (Eds.), The ethics of killing animals. (pp. 65–85). Oxford University Press.

McMahan, J. (2011). Killing in war . Oxford University Press.

McMahan, J. (2005). The basis of moral liability to defensive killing. Philosophical Issues, 15 (1), 386–405.

McMahan, J. (2002). The ethics of killing: Problems at the margins of life . Oxford University Press.

Mikhalevich, I., & Powell, R. (2020). Minds without spines: Evolutionary inclusive animal ethics. Animal Sentience, 29 (1), 1–25.

Narveson, J. (2003). Terrorism and Pacifism: Why we should condemn both. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 17 (2), 157–172.

Nozick, R. (2013). Anarchy, state, and utopia . Basic Books.

Quinn, W. S. (1989). Actions, intentions, and consequences: The doctrine of doing and allowing. The Philosophical Review, 98 (3), 287–312.

Rachels, J. (1986). Active and passive Euthanasia. In A. Ethics (Ed.), Peter singer. (pp. 29–35). Oxford University Press.

Regan, T. (2004) [1983]. The case for animal rights . University of California Press.

Rosen, G. (2002). Culpability and ignorance. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 103 (1), 61–84.

Rowlands, M. (2002). Animals like us . Verso Press.

Rowlands, M. (1997). Contractarianism and animal rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 14 (3), 235–247.

Singer, P. (1972). Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs , 1 (3), 229–243.

Statman, D. (2008). On the success condition for legitimate self-defense. Ethics, 118 (4), 659–686.

Tollefsen, C. (1997). Donagan, abortion, and civil rebellion. Public Affairs Quarterly, 11 (3), 303–312.

Uniacke, S. (2014). Self-defense, just war, and a reasonable prospect of success. In H. Frowe & G. Lang (Eds.), How we fight. (pp. 62–74). Oxford University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Williams, J. (Forthcoming). on anti-abortion violence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research X.X: 1–24.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Massachusetts, 883 Broadway St, Dugan Hall, Suite 200, Lowell, MA, 01852, USA

Blake Hereth

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Blake Hereth .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This paper was graciously awarded the 2019 Frank Chapman Sharp Memorial Prize for the best essay on the ethics of war and peace. My thanks to Helen Frowe, Seth Lazar, Suzanne Uniacke, Holly Lawford-Smith, Jeff Sebo, Nathan Nobis, Mylan Engel Jr., Cheryl Abbate, John Hadley, Chris Cuomo, Paul Tubig, Karen Emmerman, Michael Blake, my students at the Washington Corrections Center for Women, and an anonymous reviewer at this journal for feedback and helpful conversation. Thanks also to those present at the 2017 Society for the Study of Ethics and Animals Inaugural Workshop at the University of Colorado, the Stockholm Center for the Ethics of War and Peace Graduate Reading Retreat at the Australian National University (Kioloa campus), and the invited symposium “Animal Rights Terrorism and Pacifism” at the 2017 APA Eastern Division Meeting in Savannah, Georgia. Shortly thereafter, on 22 February 2018, the paper was featured on the Blog of the APA. My thanks to the APA for featuring it and for those who commented.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Hereth, B. Animal rights Pacifism. Philos Stud 178 , 4053–4082 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01636-x

Download citation

Accepted : 26 March 2021

Published : 25 May 2021

Issue Date : December 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01636-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Animal rights
• Militancy objection
• Self-defense
• Other-defense
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Home — Essay Samples — Government & Politics — Totalitarianism — Animal Farm Thesis Statement

Animal Farm Thesis Statement

• Categories: Totalitarianism

About this sample

Words: 659 |

Published: Mar 13, 2024

Words: 659 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, the corruption of power, totalitarianism and oppression.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Government & Politics

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 643 words

3 pages / 1570 words

1 pages / 1681 words

1 pages / 483 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Totalitarianism

The Outer Party in George Orwell's novel "1984" plays a crucial role in the dystopian society of Oceania. This group of individuals serves as the middle class, sandwiched between the ruling elite Inner Party and the oppressed [...]

George Orwell's acclaimed novel "1984" has been a staple of high school and college literature courses for decades, and for good reason. The oppressive political regime depicted in the book, known as Ingsoc, is often used as an [...]

Animal Farm, George Orwell's allegorical novella, serves as a scathing critique of totalitarianism, exploring themes of power, corruption, and manipulation. In Chapter 5, we witness the gradual rise of the pigs as they solidify [...]

Totalitarianism is a political system in which the state holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life wherever possible. This form of government is characterized by a [...]

Following the political upheaval and struggle for power after the second world war, George Orwell's novel 1984 cautions against the dangers of oppression and exemplifies the consequential nightmarish world of the near future. [...]

Totalitarianism is a form of government characterized by the state's desire to control every aspect of public and private life. This includes the economy, education, media, and even personal beliefs and thoughts. To maintain [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Looking for interesting animal testing topics to research and write about? This field is truly controversial and worth studying!

• 🌶️ Titles: Catchy & Creative
• 🐶 Essay: How to Write
• 🏆 Best Essay Examples
• 📌 Good Topics to Research
• 🎯 Most Interesting Topics to Write about

❓ Animal Testing Research Questions

In your animal testing essay, you might want to explore the historical or legal perspective, focus on the issue of animal rights, or discuss the advantages or disadvantages of animal testing in medicine, pharmacology, or cosmetic industry. We’ve gathered the most creative and catchy animal testing titles and added top animal testing essay examples. There are also useful tips on making and outline, formulating a thesis, and creating a hook sentence for your animal testing essay.

🌶️ Animal Testing Titles: Catchy & Creative

• What would life be like without animal testing?
• Animal testing: the cruelest experiments.
• AWA: why does not it protect all animals?
• What if animals experimented on humans?
• In the skin of a guinea pig: a narrative essay.
• Opposing animal testing: success stories.
• Animal-tested products: should they be destroyed?
• What have we gained from experiments on animals?
• Animal testing and cancer research: past and present.

🐶 Animal Testing Essay: How to Write

Animal testing has been an acute problem for a long time. Scientists and pharmaceutical firms use this approach to test cosmetics, foods, and other products people use daily.

Essays on animal testing are important because they highlight the significance of the problem. Writing outstanding animal testing essays requires extensive research and dedication.

We have prepared some do’s and don’ts for your excellent essay. But first, you should select a topic for your paper. Here are the examples of animal testing essay topics you can choose from:

• The question of animal intelligence from the perspective of animal testing
• Animal testing should (not) be banned
• How animal testing affects endangered species
• The history and consequences of animal testing
• The controversy associated with animal testing
• Animal Bill of Rights: Pros and cons
• Is animal testing necessary?

Remember that these animal testing essay titles are just the ideas for your paper. You are free to select other relevant titles and topics for discussion, too. Once you have selected the problem for your essay, you can start working on the paper. Here are some do’s of writing about animal testing:

• Do extensive preliminary research on the issue you have selected. You should be aware of all the problems associated with your questions, its causes, and consequences. Ask your professor about the sources you can use. Avoid relying on Wikipedia and personal blogs as your primary sources of information.
• Develop a well-organized outline and think of how you will structure your paper. Think of the main animal testing essay points and decide how you can present them in the paper. Remember to include introductory and concluding sections along with several body paragraphs.
• Start your paper with a hooking sentence. An animal testing essay hook should grab the reader’s attention. You can present an interesting question or statistics in this sentence.
• Include a well-defined thesis statement at the end of the introductory section.
• Your reader should understand the issue you are discussing. Explain what animal testing is, provide arguments for your position, and support them with evidence from your research.
• Discuss alternative perspectives on the issue if you are working on a persuasive essay. At the same time, you need to show that your opinion is more reliable than the opposing ones.
• Remember that your paper should not be offensive. Even if you criticize animal testing, stick to the formal language and provide evidence of why this practice is harmful.

There are some important points you should avoid while working on your paper. Here are some important don’ts to remember:

• Avoid making claims if you cannot reference them. Support your arguments with evidence from the literature or credible online sources even if you are writing an opinion piece. References will help the reader to understand that your viewpoint is reliable.
• Do not go over or below the word limit. Stick to your professor’s instructions.
• Avoid copying the essays you will find online. Your paper should be plagiarism-free.
• Avoid making crucial grammatical mistakes. Pay attention to the word choice and sentence structures. Check the paper several times before sending it for approval. If you are not sure whether your grammar is correct, ask a friend to look through the paper for you.

Do not forget to look at some of our free samples that will help you with your paper!

Animal Testing Hook Sentence

Your animal testing essay should start with a hook – an opening statement aiming to grab your reader’s attention. A good idea might be to use an impressive fact or statistics connected to experiments on animals:

• More than 100 million animals are killed in US laboratories each year.
• Animal Welfare Act (AWA) does not cover 99% animals used in experiments: according to it, rats, birds, reptiles, and fish are not animals.
• More than 50% adults in the US are against animal testing.

🏆 Best Animal Testing Essay Examples

• Animal Testing: Should Animal Testing Be Allowed? — Argumentative Essay It is crucial to agree that animal testing might be unethical phenomenon as argued by some groups; nonetheless, it should continue following its merits and contributions to the humankind in the realms of drug investigations […]
• Should Animals Be Used in Medical Research? It is therefore possible to use animals while testing the dangers and the toxicity of new drugs and by so doing; it is possible to protect human beings from the dangers that can emanate from […]
• Cosmetic Testing on Animals The surface of the skin or near the eyes of such animals is meant to simulate that of the average human and, as such, is one of easiest methods of determining whether are particular type […]
• The Debate on Animal Testing The purpose of this paper is to define animal testing within a historical context, establish ethical and legal issues surrounding the acts, discuss animal liberation movements, arguments in support and against the act of animal […]
• Experimentation on Animals However, critics of experimenting with animals argue that animals are subjected to a lot of pain and suffering in the course of coming up with scientific breakthroughs which in the long run may prove futile.
• Animal Testing and Environmental Protection While the proponents of animal use in research argued that the sacrifice of animals’ lives is crucial for advancing the sphere of medicine, the argument this essay will defend relates to the availability of modern […]
• Animal Testing in Medicine and Industry Animal testing is the inescapable reality of medicine and industry. However, between human suffering and animal suffering, the former is more important.
• Preclinical Testing on Animals The authors argue that despite the recent decline in the level of quality and transparency of preclinical trials, the scientific communities should always rely on animal testing before moving to human subjects and the subsequent […]
• Using Animals in Medical Research and Experiments While discussing the use of animals in medical research according to the consequentialist perspective, it is important to state that humans’ preferences cannot be counted higher to cause animals’ suffering; humans and animals’ preferences need […]
• Animal Testing: History and Arguments Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Laboratory Experiments on Animals: Argument Against In some cases, the animals are not given any painkillers because their application may alter the effect of the medication which is investigated.
• Animal Testing From Medical and Ethical Viewpoints Striving to discover and explain the peculiarities of body functioning, already ancient Greeks and Romans resorted to vivisecting pigs; the scientific revolution of the Enlightenment era witnessed animal testing becoming the leading trend and a […]
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing To alter these inhumane laws, we should organize a social movement aiming at the reconsideration of the role of animals in research and improvement of their positions.
• Animal Testing: Long and Unpretty History Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Animal Testing as an Unnecessary and Atrocious Practice Such acts of violence could be partially excused by the necessity to test medications that are developed to save human lives however, this kind of testing is even more inhumane as it is ineffective in […]
• Animal Experiments and Inhuman Treatment Although the results of such a laboratory may bring answers to many questions in medicine, genetics, and other vital spheres, it is frequently a case that the treatment of such animals is inhumane and cruel. […]
• Animal Testing for Scientific Research Despite the fact that the present-day science makes no secret of the use of animals for research purposes, not many people know what deprivation, pain, and misery those animals have to experience in laboratories.
• Animal Testing and Ethics I believe it is also difficult to develop efficient legislation on the matter as people have different views on animal research and the line between ethical and unethical is blurred in this area.
• Animal Testing: History and Ethics Moreover, in the twelfth century, another Arabic physician, Avenzoar dissected animals and established animal testing experiment in testing surgical processes prior to their application to man. Trevan in 1927 to evaluate the effectiveness of digitalis […]
• Animal Testing Effects on Psychological Investigation In this context, ethical considerations remain a central theme in psychological research.”Ethics in research refers to the application of moral rules and professional codes of conduct to the collection, analysis, reporting, and publication of information […]
• Genetic Modification and Testing: Ethical Considerations It is done on a molecular level by synthesizing DNA, generating sequences and then inserting the received product into the organism which will be the carrier of the outcome. Another possibility is that the time […]
• Animal Testing: Why It Is Still Being Used The major reason for such “devotion” to animal testing can be explained by the fact that alternative sources of testing are insufficient and too inaccurate to replace conventional way of testing.
• Effects of Animal Testing and Alternatives Another challenge to the proponents of animal testing is related to dosage and the time line for a study. Animal rights values rebuff the notion that animals should have an importance to human beings in […]
• Ethics Problems in Animal Experimentation In spite of the fact that it is possible to find the arguments to support the idea of using animals in experiments, animal experimentation cannot be discussed as the ethical procedure because animals have the […]
• Animal Testing: Ethical Dilemmas in Business This means that both humans and animals have rights that need to be respected, and that is what brings about the many dilemmas that are experienced in this field.
• Should animals be used for scientific research? Therefore, considering the benefits that have been accrued from research activities due to use of animals in scientific research, I support that animals should be used in scientific research.
• Use of Animals in Research Testing: Ethical Justifications Involved The present paper argues that it is ethically justified to use animals in research settings if the goals of the research process are noble and oriented towards the advancement of human life.
• Ethical Problems in Animal Experimentation The banning of companies from testing on animals will force the manufacturers to use conventional methods to test their drugs and products.
• Utilitarianism for Animals: Testing and Experimentation There are alternatives in testing drugs such as tissue culture of human cells and hence this is bound to be more accurate in the findings.
• Use of Animals in Biological Testing Thus, these veterinarians have realized that the results that are realized from the animal research are very crucial in the improvement of the health of human being as well as that of animals.
• Medical Research on Animals Should be Forbidden by Law Vaccines and treatment regimes for various diseases that previously led to the death of humans were all discovered through research on animals.
• Psychoactive Drug Testing on Animals The alterations in behavioral traits of animals due to psychoactive drugs are primarily attributed to the changes in the brain functions or inhibition of certain brain components in animals which ultimately translates to changes in […]
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing In many instances it can be proofed that drugs have been banned from the market after extensive research on animal testing and consuming a lot of cash, because of the dire effects that they cause […]

📌 Good Animal Testing Topics to Research

• Monkeys Don’t Like Wearing Makeup: Animal Testing In The Cosmetics Industry
• Animal Testing – Should Animal Experimentation Be Permitted
• Essay Animal Testing and In Vitro Testing as a Replacement
• Animal Testing : A Better Knowledge Of Human Body
• The Importance Of Animal Testing For Evaluating Consumer Safety
• The Issues on Animal Testing and the Alternative Procedures to Avoid the Use of the Inhuman Experimentation
• An Alternative to the Harsh and Unnecessary Practices of Animal Testing for Products, Drugs, Chemicals and Other Research
• The Unethical Use of Animals and the Need to Ban Animal Testing for Medical Research Purposes in the United States
• An Argument in Favor of Animal Testing for the Purpose of Clinical Research
• An Argument Against Animal Testing and the Banning of the Practice in the United States
• The Debate About the Ethics of Animal Testing and Its Effects on Us
• An Argument in Favor of Animal Testing as Beneficial to Human Health Research
• Animal Testing and the Reasons Why It Should Be Illegal
• The Principles of the Animal Testing From the Human Perspective
• The Ethical Issues on the Practice of Animal Testing to Test Cosmetics and Drugs
• Stopping Animal Testing and Vivisection by Passing a Bill against Animal Cruelty

🎯 Most Interesting Animal Testing Topics to Write about

• An Argument Against Animal Testing of Consumer Products and Drugs
• The Consequences and Unethical Practice of Animal Testing for Medical Training and Experiments
• How Do The Contributions Of Animal Testing To Global Medical
• Ways To Improve Animal Welfare After Premising The Animal Testing
• Animal Testing – Necessary or Barbaric and Wrong?
• Animal Testing And Its Impact On The Environment
• Animal Testing and Its Contribution to the Advancement of Medicine
• Cosmetics and Animal Testing: The Cause of Death and Mistreatment
• Animal Testing And People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals
• Animal Rights Activists and the Controversial Issue of Animal Testing
• A History and the Types of Animal Testing in the Medical Area
• Argumentation on Medical Benefits of Animal Testing
• An Analysis of the Concept of Animal Testing Which Lowers the Standard of Human Life
• Is The Humane Society International Gave For Animal Testing
• A Discussion of Whether Animal Testing Is Good for Mankind or Violation of Rights
• The Ethics Of Animal Testing For Vaccine Development And Potential Alternatives
• The Good and Bad of Human Testing and Animal Testing
• What Should the Government Do About Animal Testing?
• Why Does Animal Testing Lower Our Standard of Living?
• Should Animals Be Used in Research?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Accepted in the World?
• How Does Technology Impact Animal Testing?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Illegal?
• Should Animal Testing Remain Legal?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Banned?
• Can the Animal Testing Done to Find Cures for Diseases Be Humane?
• Does Animal Testing Really Work?
• Why Can’t Alternatives Like Computers Replace Research Animals?
• Should Animal Testing Continue to Test Cures for Human Diseases?
• How Does Animal Testing Effect Medicine?
• Should Animal Testing Continue or Be Stopped?
• What Are Advantages and Disadvantages of Animal Testing?
• Why Can Animal Testing Save Our Lives?
• Is Stem Cell Research Beginning of the End of Animal Testing?
• Do Beauty Products Suffer From Negative Publicity if They Conduct Trials on Animals?
• Should Medicine Trials Be Conducted?
• Can Results of Animal Testing Be Generalized to Adults?
• What Are the Origin and History of Animal Testing?
• Why Are Animals Needed to Screen Consumer Products for Safety When Products Tested by Alternative Methods, Are Available?
• How Much Does an Animal Suffer Due to Testing?
• What Is the Effectiveness of Animal Rights Groups in Stopping Animal Testing?
• How Do We Learn From Biomedical Research Using Animals?
• Who Cares for Animals in Research?
• How Do Laboratory Animal Science Professionals Feel About Their Work?
• Why Are There Increasing Numbers of Mice, Rats, and Fish Used in Research?
• How Can We Be Sure Lost or Stolen Pets Are Not Used in Research?
• Why Do Clinical Trials in Humans Require Prior Animal Testing?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 9). 105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/

"105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 9 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 9 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

• Vegetarianism Essay Ideas
• Animal Welfare Ideas
• Bioethics Titles
• Wildlife Ideas
• Extinction Research Topics
• Hunting Questions
• Genetic Engineering Topics
• Zoo Research Ideas

Reproduced with permission from student

January 26, 2004

Public Speaking 220

Katherine E. Oleson

Title: “The importance of understanding the controversy around animal testing”

Topic: animal testing

General Purpose: to inform

Specific Purpose: to inform the audience about what animal testing is, and explain the alternative practices to it

Thesis Statement: Animal testing is a highly controversial topic that has divided people into group that either support animal testing or oppose it altogether, and another one that advocates the use of alternatives.

Organizational plan: Categorical

I. Introduction

• Attention getter: How many of you use here use razors to shave? How many of you wear makeup? How many of you have been on antibiotics at some time in your life? If you raised your hand or answered “yes” in your head to any of these questions, then this speech concerns you. Animal testing has been used as a mechanism in the advancement of medicine, household products, and the cosmetic industry in the United State s for nearly 60 years. With between 17 and 70 million animals killed each year in U.S. laboratories, the growth in animal experimentation has sparked much debate.
• Thesis: Animal testing is a high controversial topic that has divided people into groups that support animal experimentation, oppose it altogether, or advocate the use of available alternatives.
• Preview: Today I am going to tell you about some of the main ideas that are involved in the debate surrounding animal experimentation. Along with providing you a background about animal testing, I will educate you with information about both the benefits of animal testing and the disadvantages of animal testing.

<Transition> I will start out by illustrating the historical background of and the legislative reasons behind its use.

• While there is a law in effect that regulates the condition of animals used in experiments, the legality of these tests is not enforced.
• The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is the federal law that governs the humane care, handling, treatment, and transportation of animals used in laboratories (PETA, 2004).
• No law requires animal testing for cosmetics and household products, and both the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Food and Drug Administration does not require any particular product test.

<Transition> Even though there is not strict regulation that can force companies into using animals as their means of testing, proponents of animal testing support its use for the efficiency it offers that other types of testing do not.

• Supporters of animal testing feel that because the animals are handled in a civilized manner, their use in making medical breakthroughs and guaranteeing product safety justifies animal testing.
• Various medical advances have been made thanks to animal testing that would otherwise have not been achieved.

a.        Barbara Davies, deputy director of the Research Defense Society, reports that “All you have to do is think of any major medical advances of the last 100 years to see the benefit of animal testing,” (Morrison, 2001).

b.       Because of animal research we have anesthesia, hip replacement, kidney dialysis, and a vaccine for acute Hepatitis B, and without animal testing doctors would not have the chemotherapy to save 70% of children who now survive acute lymphatic leukemia (Americans for Medical Progress Educational Alliance, 2002).

• Advocates of animal experimentation argue that laboratory testing is not as common or cruel as it is conveyed by the common public.

a.        Of all the areas in animal use, including agriculture, pet, sports, and animal research, the standards of welfare and veterinary care laid down are the highest for animals kept in labs for research (Haugen, 2000).

b.       In 1999, 57 percent of vertebrate animals in labs covered by the Animal Welfare Act experienced no pain or distress, and of those that do undergo moderate to severe pain, 34 percent were relieved by anesthesia or analgesia, and only 9 percent tested suffered from unrelieved pain or stress. (The Center for Laboratory Animal Welfare, 2004).

3. Product testing is crucal to guaranteeing consumers that they can securely use everyday products without experiencing side effects.

a. Scientists defend testing on animals because they are conducted in the name of protecting consumers, while manufacturers rely on animal testing to verify the safety of the product and protect them from lawsuits (McCoy, 1993).

b.  Researchers call attention to the fact that only 20 percent of animals used in laboratories are used to evaluate the safety of consumer products (The Center for Laboratory Animal Welfare, 2004).

c. If no testing is performed on a product, the producer is legally responsible to print a warning on the product label reading: THE SAFETY OF THIS PRODUCT HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED, which may turn away potential buyers and in a snowball effect the manufacturers, scientists, and researchers are left without jobs (McCoy, 1993).

<Transition> Although I have presented several reasons in support of animal experimentation, there are also a number of strong arguments that oppose it.

• Those against the current means of animal testing undermine it as a malicious procedure of yielding inaccurate results that could be more effective and scientific with the use of alternatives.
• Opponents allege testing on animals leads to unreliable and unscientific findings that harm or kill humans 61% of the time after being deemed safe (Americans for Medical Progress Educational Alliance, 2003).

a.        Plavix, which is taken by more than three million patients, passed all required animal tests and was considered safe for humans. Now it is causing bleeding, anemia, and kidney failure in some clients (Cohen, 2001).

b.       Medications such as aspirin kill cats, and penicillin kills guinea pigs, yet guinea pigs can safely eat strychnine, one of the deadliest poisons for humans that is safe for monkeys to consume (Haugen, 2000).

• Animal testing is a vicious process that inflicts stress and physical pain that can very well be avoided.

a.        The Eye Irritancy Test involves immobilizing rabbits from stocks where only their heads project and dropping different substances into their eyes usually with no anesthesia to test the damage to the eye tissue over a course of generally 72 hours (PETA, 2004).

b.       With the Acute Toxicity Test a substance is usually forced by tube into the animals stomachs or through holes cut into their throats to determine the amount of a substance that will kill a percentage, even up to 100 percent, of a group of test animals (PETA, 2004).

• Challengers of animal testing say alternatives are the future, and that since they are available they should be persued.

a.        A study by the American Medical Association found that 75 percent of Americans are against using animals to test cosmetics (Haugen, 2000).

b.       While the expansion and recognition of using alternatives is slowly growing, over 500 companies have already shunned animal testing (PETA, 2004).

i.                      Colgate-Palmolive is one of the largest companies that’s reduced its use of animal testing and their research facility has reduced the use of animals for experimentation by as much as 90 percent (McCoy, 1993).

c.        Through epidemiology (population research), in vitro experimentation, and clinical studies we have discovered our most valuable information about the origins of cancer, the efficiency of treatments, and the prevention of cancer (Cohen, 2001).

<Transition> Both sides of this debate have valuable arguments that should be taken into consideration when shaping your opinion and when deciding the future of animal testing.

III. Conclusion

• Signal: Considering how detailed and supported the statements of the challengers and advocates of animal testing are, the outlook of animal testing will take much time and deliberation to make an educated decision. It is important that we the public stay informed and active as we are the consumers of these products.
• Summary/Review: As you have seen, those who agree with animal testing cite the medical breakthroughs, the necessity of animal testing in determining safety, and the humane treatment of animals as reasons to support their position. In contrast, those who disagree with animal experimentation see it as unreliable and unscientific, cruel physical harm, and want alternative practices to be more widely used.
• Closure: Billions of dollars are funded each year in the animal testing industry, so next time you go to the store to buy makeup, medication, or even toothpaste, make a well-informed decision about whether or not you support animal experimentation.

Americans for Medical Progress Educational Alliance. (2003). Animal Research . Retrieved

January 25, 2004, from Americans for Medical Progress Educational Alliance Web site: http://www.amprogress.org/Issues/issuesmain.cfm

Cohen, M. (2001 April). Human lives not saved by lab animals . Seattle Post-Intelligencer . A19.

Retrieved January 22, 2003, from UMI Proquest Direct.

Haugen, D.M. (2000). Animal experimentation . San Diego: Greenhaven Press.

McCoy, J.J. (1993). Animals in research, issues, and conflicts . United States: Impact.

Morrison, N. (2001, February). Animal rights and wrongs. Northern Echo . 08. Retrieved January

21, 2004, from UMI Proquest Direct database.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). (2004). Factsheets . Retrieved January 21,

2004, from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Web site: http://www.peta.org/mc/facts.html

The Center for Laboratory Animal Welfare. (2004). Laboratory Animal Welfare . Retrieved

January 21, 2004, from the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Web site: http://www.labanimalwelfare.org/

What is a good thesis statement for animal rights?

Typically, asking a question is not a good form for a thesis statement . It is a statement after all. It is not a bad practice to use a thesis question to help focus your writing, but it should be edited out of the final draft. Avoid asking questions altogether in any essay unless it is purely a rhetorical question, and even then this strategy should be used sparingly.

For an essay on animal abuse, ask yourself what you want to discuss. Where do you want to take your audience? On what do you want to focus? Do you want to take an emotionally track or do you want to rely more heavily on statistics and hard data?

You might try this or something like it:

Thousands of pets are euthanized every year. People want companionship, and without much forethought, they run to the nearest pet store and buy the first puppy, kitten, bird, turtle, rabbit, chicken, or duck that catches their eye. They become instantly enamored with their choice of friend, but then the food dish gets kicked over, the first accident happens on their twenty thousand dollar carpet, the threads are torn from the couch, or the drapes are shredded. What then? Obviously the master was never intended to live like this, so only one option remains: death. This is the destiny of thousand, perhaps hundreds of thousands of pets lives every year.

There are quite a few topics that would make good thesis statements for animal abuse. One good one would be the effects of puppy mills. The topic dog fighting in America would make a good thesis statement.

read up on the subject, I have been told in every introduction to ask questions that you are going to answer within your essay. Good luck

Animals deserve rights, and these rights should annihilate one direction Zayn Malik lousy

There are quite a few good thesis statements for pro animal testing viewpoints. One thesis statement is 'Animal Testing Helps Improve Quality of Life in Humans'.

There are many good thesis statements for an essay regarding animal testing. One thesis statement may be 'The Effects of Animal Testing and Cosmetic Use.'

Animal cruelty is bad because God did not put them on Earth to be abused.

animals are inportant to society and testings are cruel. If you gain something you also WILL loose something.

Add your answer:

What is a good thesis statement on animal testing?

There are quite a few good thesis statements for pro animal testing viewpoints. One thesis statement is 'Animal Testing Helps Improve Quality of Life in Humans'.

What is a good thesis statement for The Communication Collapse?

What is a good thesis statement for the article "The Communication Collapse"

What is a good thesis statement for osteoporosis?

what is a good thesis for osteoporosis

What is a good thesis statement for crime scene investigator?

what is a good thesis statement for a crime scene investigator.

What is a Thesis statement on mlb vs NBA?

what is a good thesis statement on the NBA

What will be an appropriate closing sentence on animal testing?

WHats a good thesis statement against animal testing

Is this a good or bad thesis statement?

I would need to see the thesis statement in order to determine if it is good or bad.

What is a good thesis statement for the effects of school budget cuts?

What is a good thesis statement for a operating budget after adding a profitable new product

What is a good thesis statement about terrorism?

What is a good thesis statement for kkk, what is a good thesis statement on suicide, what is a good statement for malnutrition.

what is a good thesis statment for malnutrition?

Top Categories