introduction essay on animal rights

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Philosophical background

Animals and the law.

• The modern animal rights movement

• What are the basic functional systems of animals?

animal rights

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Business LibreTexts - Animal Rights
• Official Site of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
• animal rights - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• animal rights - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

animal rights , moral or legal entitlements attributed to nonhuman animals, usually because of the complexity of their cognitive , emotional, and social lives or their capacity to experience physical or emotional pain or pleasure. Historically, different views of the scope of animal rights have reflected philosophical and legal developments, scientific conceptions of animal and human nature , and religious and ethical conceptions of the proper relationship between animals and human beings. Since the beginning of the modern animal rights movement , which was initiated by philosophers in the 1970s, animal rights has been a popular topic of discussion within the academic study of applied ethics , or the application of normative ethical theories to practical problems.

The proper treatment of animals is a very old question in the West. Ancient Greek and Roman philosophers debated the place of animals in human morality . The Pythagoreans (6th–4th century bce ) and the Neoplatonists (3rd–6th century ce ) urged respect for animals’ interests, primarily because they believed in the transmigration of souls between human and animal bodies. In his biological writings, Aristotle (384–322 bce ) repeatedly suggested that animals lived for their own sake, but his claim in the Politics that nature made all animals for the sake of humans was unfortunately destined to become his most influential statement on the subject.

Aristotle, and later the Stoics , believed the world was populated by an infinity of beings arranged hierarchically according to their complexity and perfection, from the barely living to the merely sentient , the rational, and the wholly spiritual. In this Great Chain of Being , as it came to be known, all forms of life were represented as existing for the sake of those forms higher in the chain. Among corporeal beings, humans, by dint of their rationality, occupied the highest position. The Great Chain of Being became one of the most persistent and powerful, if utterly erroneous , ways of conceiving the universe, dominating scientific, philosophical, and religious thinking until the middle of the 19th century.

The Stoics , insisting on the irrationality of all nonhuman animals, regarded them as slaves and accordingly treated them as contemptible and beneath notice. Aggressively advocated by St. Augustine (354–430), these Stoic ideas became embedded in Christian theology. They were absorbed wholesale into Roman law—as reflected in the treatises and codifications of Gaius (fl. 130–180) and Justinian (483–565)—taken up by the legal glossators of Europe in the 11th century, and eventually pressed into English (and, much later, American) common law . Meanwhile, arguments that urged respect for the interests of animals nearly disappeared, and animal welfare remained a relative backwater of philosophical inquiry and legal regulation until the final decades of the 20th century.

In the 3rd or 4th century ce , the Roman jurist Hermogenianus wrote, “Hominum causa omne jus constitum” (“All law was established for men’s sake”). Repeating the phrase, P.A. Fitzgerald’s 1966 treatise Salmond on Jurisprudence declared, “The law is made for men and allows no fellowship or bonds of obligation between them and the lower animals.” The most important consequence of this view is that animals have long been categorized as “legal things,” not as “legal persons.” Whereas legal persons have rights of their own, legal things do not. They exist in the law solely as the objects of the rights of legal persons—e.g., as things over which legal persons may exercise property rights . This status, however, often affords animals the indirect protection of laws intended to preserve social morality or the rights of animal owners, such as criminal anticruelty statutes or civil statutes that permit owners to obtain compensation for damages inflicted on their animals. Indeed, this sort of law presently defines the field of “animal law,” which is much broader than animal rights because it encompasses all law that addresses the interests of nonhuman animals—or, more commonly, the interests of the people who own them.

A legal thing can become a legal person; this happened whenever human slaves were freed. The former legal thing then possesses his own legal rights and remedies. Parallels have frequently been drawn between the legal status of animals and that of human slaves . “The truly striking fact about slavery,” the American historian David Brion Davis has written, is the

antiquity and almost universal acceptance of the concept of the slave as a human being who is legally owned, used, sold, or otherwise disposed of as if he or she were a domestic animal. This parallel persisted in the similarity of naming slaves, branding them, and even pricing them according to their equivalent in cows , camels , pigs , and chickens .

The American jurist Roscoe Pound wrote that in ancient Rome a slave “was a thing, and as such, like animals could be the object of rights of property,” and the British historian of Roman law Barry Nicholas has pointed out that in Rome “the slave was a thing…he himself had no rights: he was merely an object of rights, like an animal.”

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, humanitarian reformers in Britain and the United States campaigned on behalf of the weak and defenseless, protesting against child labour , debtor’s prisons, abusive punishment in public schools, and, inevitably, the cruel treatment of animals. In 1800 the most renowned abolitionist of the period, William Wilberforce , supported a bill to abolish bull- and bearbaiting, which was defeated in the House of Commons . In 1809 Baron Erskine , former lord chancellor of England, who had long been troubled by cruelty to animals , introduced a bill to prohibit cruelty to all domestic animals. Erskine declared that the bill was intended to “consecrate, perhaps, in all nations, and in all ages, that just and eternal principle which binds the whole living world in one harmonious chain, under the dominion of enlightened man, the lord and governor of all.” Although the bill passed the House of Lords , it failed in the House of Commons. Then, in 1821, a bill “to prevent cruel and improper treatment of Cattle” was introduced in the House of Commons, sponsored by Wilberforce and Thomas Fowell Buxton and championed by Irish member of Parliament Richard Martin. The version enacted in 1822, known as Martin’s Act, made it a crime to treat a handful of domesticated animals—cattle, oxen, horses, and sheep—cruelly or to inflict unnecessary suffering upon them. However, it did not protect the general welfare of even these animals, much less give them legal rights, and the worst punishment available for any breach was a modest fine. Similar statutes were enacted in all the states of the United States, where there now exists a patchwork of anticruelty and animal-welfare laws. Most states today make at least some abuses of animals a felony . Laws such as the federal Animal Welfare Act (1966), for example, regulate what humans may do to animals in agriculture, biomedical research, entertainment, and other areas. But neither Martin’s Act nor many subsequent animal-protection statutes altered the traditional legal status of animals as legal things.

This situation changed in 2008, when the Spanish national parliament adopted resolutions urging the government to grant orangutans , chimpanzees , and gorillas some statutory rights previously afforded only to humans. The resolutions also called for banning the use of apes in performances, harmful research, and trading as well as in other practices that involve profiting from the animals. Although zoos would still be allowed to hold apes, they would be required to provide them with “optimal” living conditions.

Law & Policy Policy

Resources for Journalists

• Food & Farming Media Network
• How to Pitch Us
• Freelance Charter
• Work With Us

Sentient Media

• Environmental Policy
• Code of Ethics
• Testimonials

Animal Rights: The Simple Idea That Sparked a Movement

Animal rights is a revolutionary idea and social movement that requires humans to reexamine their relationship with animals, especially animals used for food.

Explainer • Policy • Reflections

Words by Hemi Kim

There are many awkward conversations you might have at family or work meetings as the singular vegan . It’s possible to find yourself carefully describing your food choices, aware that you are on the edge of disassembling a joyous bulgogi dish into the painful experiences that were required to produce it. Talking about issues related to animal rights can be emotionally difficult especially when eating with and cooking for others is a love language; rejecting family and friends’ cooking can be hurtful. 

Yet animal advocates have managed to tap into common, shared values, successfully encouraging more and more people to reexamine what living their values really looks like, especially values of respect, empathy, imagination, cooperation, adaptability, and compassion for all living beings. 

Do Animals Have Rights?

In the United States, many animals are defined as property and do not have rights in the same sense that humans have rights. At least 13 nations have symbolically acknowledged the dignity and personhood of nonhuman animals or the need to show compassion towards them as something other than objects in their constitutions . (These are Brazil, Germany, India, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Egypt, the Iroquois Nations, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, the People’s Republic of China, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia.) Yet such acknowledgments remain largely lip service—the animals in these thirteen nations are still treated similarly, both culturally and legally, to the animals in any other country. 

Nevertheless, animal studies researchers such as Maneesha Deckha often see potential in the “shift in legal standing of nonhumans that constitutional recognition can precipitate.”

One advocacy approach seeks to translate the moral rights of animals into practical change by expanding how the law views animals: from property to personhood . Legal status as a person is something that U.S. courts have given to corporations, ships, and “entities of nature,” according to the Animal Legal Defense Fund , and it has been conferred on individual great apes outside the United States. Read more about the nuances of how advocates are trying to improve the status and legal protections of animals here .

What Are Animal Rights?   

Animal rights form part of a way of thinking about nonhuman animals as off-limits for human exploitation. People that espouse this way of thinking try to direct their own and others’ behaviors away from eating, dressing, conducting scientific experiments, and being entertained in ways that involve harm to nonhuman animals. 

Animal rights is also a broad term describing animal advocacy , and the social movement focused on improving the lives of nonhuman animals. Yet the term “animal rights activist” can be alienating , which may be why groups prefer to use the terms “animal protection” or “animal advocates.” 

When Did the Animal Rights Movement Begin in the U.S.?   

The modern animal rights movement in the United States saw a major milestone in the 1970s with the publication of Peter Singer’s “Animal Liberation,” in which he argued that it was ethically important that nonhuman animals feel pain, and that this fact demanded far more equal treatment of nonhuman animals and humans. He also popularized the term “ speciesism ” to describe what happens when nonhuman animals are not given the same consideration as humans. Other thinkers, writers, and activist groups have also notably furthered and developed the fabric of the animal rights movement, both before and since Singer’s book, including Tom Regan and PETA.

Singer’s text itself reportedly sits on the shoulders of at least one British author who lived about a century prior. And for many centuries European travelers to India have learned about, and been attracted to, the concept of ahimsa and care for animals. Ahimsa , documented as early as the eighth century B.C. in Indian religious texts—Hindu, Jain, and Buddhist—affirms nonviolence and the alleviation of the suffering of all beings.

From the perspectives of scholars such as Cree writer Billy Ray Belcourt, and vegan theorists such as Aph and Syl Ko, the modern divide between animals and humans works in tandem with the imposition of white supremacy: on Indigenous people whose land was stolen by settler-colonists and who were targets of genocide, and on Black and Brown people who were and often continue to be treated as less than human.

Thus the animal protection movement in the United States is limited by the legacies and habits of thought of settler colonialism and other oppressions, and the history of the movement is whitewashed—something that people are now trying to undo. Belcourt, for example, argued in a 2020 article that people concerned with living ethically must challenge the white supremacy underpinning many efforts to expand the rights of nonhuman animals, and instead look to Indigenous traditions that see “animals as kin who co-produce a way of life that engenders care rather than and contra to suffering.”

What’s the Difference Between Animal Welfare and Animal Rights?   

The terms “animal welfare” and “animal rights” are similar, but animal rights is a broader idea than animal welfare. Animal welfare refers to the responsibility of humans to treat nonhuman animals well and directly care for their health, but without challenging the overall circumstances that animals find themselves in or the ways they are used in society. 

For example, an animal welfare advocate may be vigilant about how animals such as bears and apes are treated in the movie industry when they are working on a set. An animal rights proponent may instead call for an end to the use of animals in films altogether. 

Another example of animal welfare is when people campaign for better treatment of young chickens before they are slaughtered. Though groups that campaign for animal welfare may also support goals that are compatible with animal rights, for example when promoting the consumption of plant-based foods.

What Are Some Examples of Animal Rights?

Animal rights supporters tend to be concerned that people use animals as a means to an end, typically without the animals’ assent to participate in an activity. In addition to the examples below, common areas of concern for animal rights include clothing, makeup, scientific experimentation, sports, and wildlife.

Animal Agriculture

Hogs are not just the source material for a good slow roast, crispy bacon, and pork belly. The pork industry also disassembles pigs for their parts to be used as ingredients in manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and other scientific endeavors. People who support animal rights tend to oppose all farming of livestock and fish. The fictional film “Okja” is often cited as an animal rights story dealing with these issues—one that is sympathetic to animals sent to slaughter. 

Entertainment

Circuses, zoos, and aquariums have been the subject of animal rights campaigns and popular documentaries, such as “Blackfish” , that have resulted in changes to how the entertainment industry markets animal-based entertainment.

Companionship and Working Animals

People concerned with animal rights might be more concerned with the potential for conscripting an animal into an unhealthy situation that exploits their labor than they would be about the benefits to humans of emotional support animals or land-mine-sniffing rats. 

Animal Rights Arguments: Pros and Cons   

The arguments of critics and supporters of animal protection can seem as diverse as the number of people who express an opinion. Below are some common reasons why people may feel pulled toward or away from animal rights causes.

Arguments in Favor of Animal Rights

In “Aphro-ism” , Syl and Aph Ko promote a view of animal rights within Black Veganism that sees animal rights as essential to ending racism. They write sensitively about the topic in a way that acknowledges how white supremacy has animalized Black people. They also draw a line from the oppression of nonhuman animals to white supremacy and convincingly argue that being antiracist is essential to animal liberation.

People allied with animal rights might also include Coast Salish activists in the Block Corporate Salmon campaign, who identify themselves as Salmon People and oppose the introduction of genetically modified fish to the local wildlife environment.

Arguments Against Animal Rights

People who oppose animal rights might see animals as property, and inferior to humans. They might argue that eating meat is a natural feature of the food chain, or that nonhuman animals exist for the benefit of humans . 

Sometimes, deciding to disregard animal rights is a matter of practicality. For example, using life-saving products that were created with scientific research that relied on experimentation on nonhuman animals, as is the case with vaccines and pharmaceutical medicines. 

As animal advocate, Christopher Soul Eubanks wrote in March 2021, “To Black people and non-vegans of all races, the animal rights movement can appear as an affluent far-left group who ignore the systemic oppression they have benefited from while using that affluence to advocate for nonhumans.” Indeed, roughly 9 out of 10 people working for farmed animal protection organizations are white. In a more racially equitable world, that number would be closer to 6 in the United States. 

Colonialist harms brought about by animal rights and vegan activism can be investigated: it’s something people of the global majority and others have begun.

Why Are Animal Rights Important?   

“Being labeled less-than-human” is a condition that most people experience, one that Black and other oppressed peoples live daily, according to Aph Ko in a chapter of “Aphro-Ism.” Ko also writes in a later chapter that “‘[a]nimal’ is a category that we shove certain bodies into when we want to justify violence against them, which is why animal liberation should concern all who are minoritized, because at any moment you can become an ‘animal’ and be considered disposable.” 

For Ko, being a critical thinker is more important than believing popular, yet false, narratives about oneself and nonhuman animals. This desire to re-evaluate what one thinks is a launching point for Afrofuturist possibilities, or Black-centered creativity , a philosophical wellspring for Black veganism. You can read more about Black veganism here , here , and here .

Animal rights, then, is an opportunity to constantly ask tough questions. And asking questions creates spaces within which vulnerable communities can flourish. For antiracist humane educator Dana McPhall , the following questions guide her work:

“So what would it look like to imagine a world where I’m not defined by the racial and gender constructs imposed upon me? Where people racialized as white are no longer invested in whiteness? Where the lives of nonhuman animals are no longer circumscribed within the social construct “animal?” Where huge swaths of our planet are not considered disposable, along with the people and wildlife who inhabit them?”

What Are the Consequences of Animal Rights?

Results of animal rights activism include the increasing popularity of vegan food products, a ban on selling fur in California, and state bans on using most animals in circuses. Keeping up with Sentient Media is one way to see these types of stories as they proliferate.

Ending Suffering Wherever It Persists

Nonhuman animals’ rights are not so much a question of legality or illegality, especially as laws tend to treat them as property. They are rather a way of thinking about what is morally right in a given cultural context. Avoiding the suffering of animals and respecting their right to exist are basic tenets of animal protection. As a way of thinking and being in community with others, animal rights can be an invitation for learning and imagining. Animal advocates of all races can dismantle white supremacy and undo “isms” by re-centering the experiences of Black, Brown, Indigenous, Asian, and other previously “less-than-human” people.

Independent Journalism Needs You

Hemi is a writer and educator.

• The Best & Worst Countries for Animal Welfare Are Difficult to Measure

Law & Policy • 7 min read

More Law & Policy

Investigation

Why Rodeos Are Still Popular When Marine Parks and the Circus Are Declining

Justice • 9 min read

How the Meat Industry Shapes U.S. Politics (and Vice-Versa)

A big question, answered briefly.

Law & Policy • 11 min read

The Loss of Chevron Could Also Be a Major Loss for Animals

A new Supreme Court ruling effectively guts the regulatory power of federal agencies.

Law & Policy • 6 min read

How Ecotourism Became an Unexpected Climate Solution in an At-Risk Guatemalan National Park

Climate • 3 min read

Is Organic Food Better for You?

Food • 9 min read

Why the Fiber Industry Needs People to Eat Too Much Meat

Health • 5 min read

Book Review: ‘Meet the Neighbors’ by Brandon Keim Compassionately Complicates the Narrative about Animals

Science • 8 min read

Most Read Today

• What Does Noninvasive Wild Animal Research Look Like?
• How Many Animals Are Killed for Food Every Day?
• The Blood of Pregnant Mares Fuels Factory Farming – Literally
• Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? The Argument, Explained
• Which Animals Are Monogamous Rather Than Mating For Life?
• What a Vegan Is and Isn’t, Explained
• Amazon Deforestation — How Much of the Rainforest Is Left?

Jump to navigation

Full Title Name:  Introduction to Animal Rights (2nd Ed)

This article explores the evolution of animal rights, specifically examining the influence of the property status of animals in the U.S.

I. Introduction

Whether at home, on the farm, or at the dinner table, animals play an important role in everyday human life.   They serve as companions, a source of livelihood, entertainment, inspiration, and of course food and clothing to people all across the world.   Yet animals can and do exist independent from people and, as living beings, they arguably have interests separate and apart from their utility to humanity.   As such, society is increasingly faced with legal, economic, and ethical dilemmas about the proper place for animals and the extent to which their interests should be respected, even when those interests conflict with what is best for humans.   Recognition of these issues has given rise to a new social movement, one that seeks to attain increased legal protections, and even the recognition of actual “rights”, for nonhuman animals.   Not surprisingly, this push has met with a considerable amount of criticism and ridicule from those who believe that the cost of animal rights specifically, and increased protections more generally, is a corresponding reduction in human freedom.    

This Article provides a sweeping overview of the issues at play in the debate over increased legal and social protections for animals.   It begins with a discussion of the historical and philosophical roots of animal rights before proceeding to an overview of the current state of the law as it relates to animals.   The Article then explores the various social forces both promoting and discouraging increased legal protections for animals and the justifications for each position.   It concludes with a discussion of the future of animal rights, specifically the types of reforms sought by animal advocates.

In reading the pages that follow, try to keep in mind the various “characters” that are involved.   For example, when considering the notion of pet ownership, keep in mind not only your own dog or cat, but also the unadoptable stray to be euthanized at the local animal shelter.   If contemplating the farming industry’s effects on cows, chickens, and pigs, also consider what effect reforms to the system would have on the average farmer or agricultural worker whose livelihood depends on the current system.   When considering the chimpanzee subjected to medical experimentation, keep in mind the diabetic whose length and quality of life has been extended thanks to that kind of research.   Finally, keep in mind the various interest groups involved in the “debate”— the animal activists, the industry opponents, farmers, consumers, and even the average family sitting around the dinner table.   Each provides an interesting and compelling perspective.     

II.Historical Roots of Animal Protection

Social movements are like novels – each comes with a beginning, followed by a succession of chapters that unfold the story until, ultimately, one reaches the conclusion.   The novel here is animal rights, a tale about the advancement of other species in a human-dominated world.   Stepping from the shadows of other, better known causes such as the civil rights movement and blossoming from the awareness occasioned by the environmental movement, animal rights is, for the first time, becoming a serious issue for debate.   Not long ago, animal rights activists were dismissed as fringe, covered in the press only for their more outlandish activities. [ i ]        More recently, however, animal issues have taken a more prominent place in the national media.   Suddenly, stories about animals – both good and bad, heroic and tragic [ ii ] – take a more prominent place in the evening broadcast.   Major newspapers discuss the newest animal rights books [ iii ] and profile those whose legal careers center on animal advocacy. [ iv ]   But in order to truly understand the contemporary situation, one must begin with the first chapter.    

A. In the Beginning

Unless one is reading the Bible, most stories do not begin at the beginning.   Rather, they begin just as things are about to get interesting.   So it is with animal rights.   While concern for animals and their well-being dates back hundreds of years [ v ]   and animal rights literature extends back to the heart of the Civil Rights Era, [ vi ] to American culture the animal rights movement was born in 1975 with the publication of Peter Singer’s still-controversial Animal Liberation . [ vii ]   In the book, Singer introduces the reader to issues that remain at the forefront of animal protectionism today – laboratory experimentation, factory farming, and vegetarianism.   In each chapter, the author details the horrors endured by animals at society’s cold and at times oblivious hand.    Singer accuses American society of speciesism – “a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of another species.” [ viii ]   In its place, Singer argues humans should give equal consideration to the interests of animals when making any decision that affects the well-being of other species.   Thus, in Singer’s world, the interests of all living beings are the same and no one, human or otherwise, should be given preferential treatment.  

The irony of associating the birth of animal rights with Peter Singer is that as a utilitarian, he does not believe that “rights” truly exist at all or form the basis for moral or legal entitlements.   As such, no one – be it man, beast, or shrub – possesses rights. [ ix ]   Thus, to theorists like Singer, animals are not entitled to any fundamental, inviolable privileges or protections.   But then, neither are humans.   Rather, all actions should be judged based on a cost-benefit analysis.   As applied by Singer, the benefits to humans that flow from the domination and perceived mistreatment of animals does not, as a practical matter, overcome the costs imposed on those other species.   Animal rights advocates, as it turns out, come to the same conclusion, but based instead on the notion that there are certain rights so fundamental that they extend to other species and must be respected by human civilization.

More important than Singer or his theories, however, is the recognition that he did not actually give birth to the animal rights debate.   Rather, questions about the status of animals in relation to humanity are not even a twentieth century development and instead dates all the way back to ancient Greece’s greatest thinkers.     Some, like the great mathematician Pythagorus, believed animals deserved some protections and as such chose to eat a vegetarian diet.   At the other end of the philosophical spectrum, Aristotle forcefully argued that humanity was superior to all other Earth life and that such responsibility carried with it no ethical obligations towards lesser creatures. [ x ]   Later philosophers, such as Rene Descartes and John Locke also considered animals’ place in human society. [ xi ]   Finally, although not speaking in the context of animal rights, Jeremy Benthan famously contended that the protection of any creature should depend not on its ability to reason, but its ability to suffer. [ xii ]    

Religion and science also influenced human perception of animals. [ xiii ]   While Christianity brought about many reforms in Roman society that improved the treatment of people towards one another, it did so in part by reinforcing the lesser status of other creatures and the lack of ethical obligations owed to them. [ xiv ]   With a few notable exceptions, [ xv ] Western religions have generally taught that humans stand in a morally superior position to other animals [ xvi ] and have on occasion challenged science’s best evidence of humanity’s close relationship to other forms of life. [ xvii ]   By contrast, several eastern religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism contain tenets that recognize the need to account for all life when considering the proper bounds of ethical action. [ xviii ]   Indeed, some animals are considered sacred; take for example the cow to Hindus or the cat to ancient Egyptians.  

Science has played a more complicated role in society’s treatment of animals.   While vivisection – the experimentation on and dissection of animals for the advancement of scientific knowledge and human benefit – has subjected animals to untold pain and torment, the fruits of such procedures have also enabled medical breakthroughs that have lengthened and improved the quality of human life.   While the continued propriety of such procedures is highly contested [ xix ] , their historical significance on human attitudes cannot be questioned.   Yet science has also helped to break down the barriers between humans and other species, most notably through Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and subsequent research that demonstrates the genetic similarity between humans and other animals.

The historical role of animals can also be viewed chronologically.   As will be discussed later [ xx ] , through much of human history animals have served as a kind of commodity valuable to human enterprises, but devoid of any independent legal interests.   As such, many, if not all, of the earliest laws relating to animals revolved around their proprietary value to their owners.   Thus, for example, the owner of cattle might be able to sue another person for the damage that individual caused to one of his cows (his investment), but that same cattle owner could not be held liable for any harm he himself caused to that same creature.   In the late nineteenth century, this purely economic vision of animals began to change with the publication of a book entitled Animal Rights , the formation of both the British and American Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and the enactment of the first anti-cruelty laws.   These laws for the first time recognized that animals themselves have an interest in being free from unnecessary and cruel suffering by giving the state the power to punish anyone who inflicts such pain on a non-human creature.   The instigation of World War I and the conflict and uncertainty that persisted until after World War II largely stifled further advances for animal interests during this period.   In post-World War II America, however, concern for animals was reborn as organizations such as the Humane Society of the United States educated the public about animal welfare and society continued its march towards increased urbanization.

Moreover, the move from the country to the city and the transition of animals from mere means of livelihood to household pets further modified the human perception of animals.   As more people developed emotional bonds to animals, they consequently began to view them, or at least certain species of animals, as deserving special protections.   This development and further refinement of animals’ place in a human-centered world continues today on an ethical and legal basis.  

With that historical foundation in place, the story now turns to the basic legal and social concepts fundamental to the discussion that follows.

B. Animals in Society Today

The prevalence of animals in society makes a detailed discussion of their importance unnecessary.   Nonetheless, it is worth briefly summarizing some of the figures to emphasize just how important animals are to American society and the economy.   According to the Census of Agriculture, in 1997 there were 98,989,244 cattle and calves used in United State agriculture, 61,206,236 hogs and pigs, 7,821,885 sheep and lambs, and over 7 billion chickens used for egg and meat production. [ xxi ]   In that same year the total value of all cattle and poultry was nearly $100 billion. [ xxii ]

Agriculture is but the tip of the proverbial iceberg, however.   Anyone who questions the bond between people and their pets need only look at statistics detailing the number of people who celebrate their pet’s birthdays, stay home from work when a pet is sick, or greet their pet first when coming home in the evening. [ xxiii ]   As detailed by the American Veterinary Medical Association:

Veterinarians in private clinical practice are responsible for the health of approximately 53 million dogs, 59 million cats. Bird ownership has risen over the past 5 years from 11 million in 1991 to approximately 13 million birds. The number of pleasure horses in the U.S. is about 4.0 million. Other pets such as rabbits, ferrets, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils, other rodents, turtles, snakes, lizards, other reptiles and many other animals primarily kept as companion animals. Rabbits and ferrets are owned by 2.3% of households in the U.S. with a total population of 5.7 million; 4.8 million rodents are owned by 2.3% of households and 1.5 % of households own 3.5 million reptiles. The fish population is estimated at 55.6 million owned by 6.3% of households. [ xxiv ]

Of course, animals can also be found in the laboratory.   A wide variety of species are used in research and experimentation. [ xxv ]   In fact, over 18 million animals are used in research and experimentation in the United States. [ xxvi ]   The controversy surrounding such experimentation is beyond the scope of this Article, however, even for a superficial discussion.   For such an overview of the animals in research controversy, one that is admittedly biased, see: http://www.hsus.org/ace/11366 ; http://www.hsus.org/ace/11366  

C. The Definition of Rights

Thus far, the term “rights” has been used fairly frequently and loosely in this Article without a definition of the word’s meaning.   Similarly, society, especially American society, often lacks an understanding of the exact meaning of the term when its members use “rights” to describe various legally protected interests.   While this is not the place for a comprehensive discussion of the meaning of “right,” a brief introduction is warranted so as to inform what is meant by “animal rights.”

Like so many other concepts there is no single, workable definition of “right”.   Put most succinctly, but consequently also most superficially, a right is “that to which one is morally or legally entitled.” [ xxvii ]   Then, a right can be an entitlement.   One might also look for the answer in natural law, which is the source of “right” as embodied in the Declaration of Independence. [ xxviii ]   From this perspective, a right is “the idea that human beings have by nature . . . certain rights that governments cannot legitimately violate, and that political law must respect.” [ xxix ]   A right, then, may also be something a person is born with.   One could also take a more functionalist perspective, viewing rights as those principles that protect individuals from the rest of society. [ xxx ]   To conceptualize, rights are thus like fences, keeping the world out of certain areas of the individual’s life. [ xxxi ]   Trying to mesh these different conceptions, rights might be less a concept than a tangible entitlement some creatures are born with.   They serve to protect individuals, in some cases at all costs, from the needs, wants, and prurient interests of the rest of society.   Such a definition, however, fails to make a critical distinction—that rights can be legal or philosophical.

Legal rights are those that the government, in some fashion, provides protection for.   Thus, when we talk of constitutional rights, we mean those interests that cannot be taken away by a court, government agent or action.   Philosophical rights are those recognized as inherent to human civilization; those that are based on notions of basic morality.   Thus, these rights do not depend on the enactment of any formal law before they will be deemed to exist.   Philosophical rights are those so fundamental that human society declares their existence even where it is unlikely that they will be enforced.   For example, people, we might say, have the right to be free from torture, even in countries where this right is not enforced or recognized by law.   Such rights, then, may not be universally applied and may even be violated regularly in some locations, but they exist nonetheless as the ethical and moral underpinnings of civilized society.

Legal rights, by contrast, are those that will be enforced by the law and provide substantive protections for the rights-holder.   They are those enforceable in a court and recognized under the law.   Some come from statutes, others from a constitution (state or federal), and still more from the common law made by judges.   Most are express and easy to identify, at least in principle, while others remain shrouded in the penumbras of other recognized rights waiting to be discovered. Their existence, however, is dependent upon the benevolence of the lawmaking authority to recognize and enact them.   Moreover, competing legal rights must be balanced against one another to determine which should win out in any given situation wherein the two conflict.   Legal rights also cannot be taken away by private individuals, though the scope of that protection is perhaps often misunderstood.   The simple existence of a legal right does not make it impossible for another to take that interest from another, rather the existence of that right will provide the aggrieved person with a remedy for that invasion.   To this point, however, society recognizes legal rights for only one species – humans.   Therefore, in seeking to expand society’s conception of rights, the nuances of one’s definition matter, at least to members of the animal advocacy community. [ xxxii ]   These, however, might be best thought of as characterizations of philosophical rights.    

Closely related to the concept of legal rights, and equally nebulous, a legal interest is “any interest that the legal proceeding has the authority to address.” [ xxxiii ]   Legal interests may better be understood in the negative – a deprivation of a legal interest equates to a cognizable injury capable of being remedied by the law. [ xxxiv ]   While closely related to and important to the issue, the Supreme Court has emphasized that the determination of legal interests is separate from a question of standing (or the ability to have a court hear your case). [ xxxv ]    

III. Present State of the Law

Under the law as it now stands, animals enjoy some legal protections from mistreatment, but they remain unable to enforce those entitlements themselves.   Instead, the state takes it upon itself to monitor, with varying degrees of success, human society to ensure that its members do not violate the safeguards meant to protect other species.   To understand the meaning of this state of affairs, a little legal background is warranted.

A. Legal Personhood

The law is full of classifications, one of the most important of which is the distinction between persons and nonpersons.   While there is no rule that prevents nonpersons from holding legal rights and protections, only legal persons have the capacity to enforce and safeguard those entitlements.   In reality, personhood is nothing more than a legal fiction, a term attached to certain entities that allow them to assert their rights and privileges.   To the nonlawyer, it is probably no surprise that today all people are persons.   It might be more surprising to learn that this was not always the case [ xxxvi ] or that entities like corporations and the government are legal persons. [ xxxvii ]   Animals, however, are not persons and thus, unlike in the wild, cannot fend for themselves in a court of law to protect their interests.   Moreover, this fact also limits the benefits animals can receive.

Personhood, then, for these purposes boils down to having the ability to sue.   To be able to sue, a potential litigant must have standing, as referenced earlier.   Standing might be thought of as the confluence of a legal person, a legal right, and a legal interest seeking to redress a legal wrong.   Because animals are not persons, they cannot sue.   Moreover, the standing requirements articulated by the Supreme Court make it difficult for activists to sue on behalf of animal interests because rarely can they assert a sufficient legal injury to their legal interests.   As articulated in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife , to have standing a plaintiff must:                       

1. have suffered an injury of fact,

2. caused by the defendant,

3. and that can be remedied by the judicial forum. [ xxxviii ]

This injury “must invade a legally protected interest which is a) concrete and particularized and b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” [ xxxix ]   Animal advocates often have trouble meeting this injury in fact test for many animals, especially those used in research because they have no personal relationship with the creature.   Indeed, while courts have been willing to recognize an aesthetic injury to support a lawsuit [ xl ] they have at the same time refused to read into statutes private causes of action. [ xli ]

While it is absurd to imagine a nonhuman actually litigating a case [ xlii ] , it is less difficult to imagine a human attorney representing an animal client.   That prospect, however, raises the potential for abuse by trial lawyers seeking out lawsuits.   As such, any change to the personhood status of animals would require consideration not only of what types of claims could be brought “by” the animal, but also what human(s) should be allowed to assert those rights on the animal’s behalf.   Moreover, as discussed later, there remains conflict within the animal protection community itself whether such a change should be a primary goal of the movement or simply the natural result of other substantive societal reforms. [ xliii ]

B. Property

To the law, animals are property: they are goods to be bought and sold, acquired and maintained.   This principle is deeply interwoven into the law.   Indeed, some of the first cases read by law students in Property class are Pierson v. Post [ xliv ] and Keeble v. Hickeringill [ xlv ] ; each of which is about the acquisition, ownership, and control of wild property – namely foxes and ducks.   Treating animals as property is not strictly a matter of law, however, as it is also deeply entrenched in Western religion.   The Old Testament, for instance, decrees that animals are goods over which humanity has dominion. [ xlvi ]   Philosophers, too, have considered the property status of animals. John Locke, for example, wrestled with the proprietary nature of humanity’s interactions with animals.   To him, animals were something common to the world, not unlike the air we breathe. [ xlvii ]   How could something of that nature be legally possessed by any one individual?   On the other hand, animals have the potential and perhaps purpose of serving humanity.   Towards that end, animals can best benefit individuals within society by giving people the ability to possess such creatures, to be able to control others’ access to certain animals. [ xlviii ]   Thus, to the law, religion, and philosophy, animals are chattels whose destiny is rightly directed by humans.   As property, they have no interests independent of those assigned by humanity.   And yet, animals are not just like any other household property. [ xlix ]

C. Animal Cruelty

Unlike the household toaster, the law regulates how people treat their animals.   Anti-cruelty laws prevent inhumane treatment to animals, subjecting violators to criminal sanction for causing unjustified harm to other creatures.   Penalties range from misdemeanor fines in some locations to a recent trend towards making such conduct a felony. [ l ]   Thus, much like criminal statutes designed to protect humans, the state has the power to penalize those who hurt animals.   This sets animals apart, giving them special status within the property regime.   They are entitled to certain minimum guarantees, namely that they will not be made to suffer unnecessarily.  

It is important to recognize at the same time, however, that such anti-cruelty regulations do not solely have animal interests at heart.   Quite apart from any benefit the animal might receive from being free from cruel treatment, such laws also help to protect human investment in property.   Moreover, many who support such laws are truly concerned not with the actual harm to the animal, but with what such treatment indicates about the abuser – namely a propensity to violence that might ultimately lead to violence against humans.   Given these concerns that exist independent of animal interests, it is not surprising that such laws are often vaguely written (what after all is cruel and what is unnecessary?) and are often under-enforced. [ li ]              

D. Federal Laws

While animal cruelty statutes serve as the most important state laws “on the books” to protect animals, two federal laws seek to regulate the way that that animals are used in agriculture and science.   The Federal Humane Methods of Livestock Slaughter Act regulates how animals raised for consumption are killed. [ lii ]   Similarly, the Animal Welfare Act seeks to protect animals used for scientific and medical research by limiting the procedures that can be performed on such test subjects. [ liii ]     While others have written extensively on these two laws, for these purposes it is most important to recognize the driving force behind these laws.   For better or worse, neither law seeks to bestow absolute protections upon the subject animals, but instead seeks to strike a balance between the human interests in research and cost efficient delivery of agriculture products and the interests of animals not to suffer “needlessly.”

Of course, no discussion of federal law would be complete without a brief introduction to the most commonly known animal protection law—the Endangered Species Act . [ liv ]   At base, the law operates by providing criteria for listing species threatened by extinction as “endangered” and then regulating and limiting human activities in areas where those animals are known to exist.   The result, in addition to preserving species who might otherwise be lost to the world, is to increase the cost of development and in some cases prevent development altogether.   Indeed, as originally drafted, the law was absolute in its protections, providing no exceptions from conservation of listed species, and as a result worked to temporarily stop the construction of the Tellico Dam in Tennessee because the area was the last known habitat of the Snail Darter. [ lv ]   As a result, the law was amended to provide for exceptions to strict conservation.

E. Damages to Animals

Unlike harm caused to humans there is rarely a private cause of action to redress injuries inflicted upon animals.   Surely, an animal owner can recover for the lost value of the animal, but in the case of a dog or cat such sums are usually insufficient to justify filing suit.   No court under the current legal regime would award an animal damages for injury to its being.   Moreover, most courts deny animal owners the ability to sue for the damages they incur to their person, in the form of emotional damage, when their animals are injured or killed. [ lvi ]  

Several jurisdictions in recent years have considered changes to this rule.   In 2003, several Colorado state legislators sponsored a bill that would have allowed pet owners to receive up to $100,000 in emotional damages for injuries inflicted upon their pets. [ lvii ]   The sponsors withdrew the bill, however, before any votes were taken after popular skepticism led several other legislators to ridicule the bill.   Tennessee in 2000 went substantially further and actually enacted legislation allowing animal owners to recover emotional damages for injuries inflicted upon their pets. [ lviii ]  

For a more thorough discussion of this issue, please see http://animallaw.info/topics/spuspetdamages.htm .

IV. Animals in Human Society

Thus far, the “story” of animal rights has been confined to the background historical and legal concepts necessary to understand the material that follows.   No one would dispute that animals play an important, perhaps even vital, role in human society.   Nonhumans provide the backbone to economies, to the advancement of science, and even to some people’s emotional and physical well being.   In considering and evaluating the materials to follow, add the following to the more general list of characters already introduced.

Consider first animals that exhibit human characteristics, or how people attribute animal characteristics to some animals.   For example, Alex is a parrot in Massachusetts that can speak.   Unlike the pet store parrot, however, Alex does more than mimic sounds.   He recognizes and can identify colors.   He can count.   Researchers at MIT are debating whether he can communicate.   It is there that he lives in his cage, along with several other birds, subject to the close scrutiny and tests of scientists trying to ascertain the limits of his linguistic capabilities. [ lix ]  

Renowned scholar Martha Nussbaum begins her critique of Professor Wise’s previous book with Flo’s story:

Flo, a female chimpanzee, died of old age by the side of a stream. Flint, her son, stayed by her corpse, grabbing one of her arms and trying to pull her up by the hand. He slept near her body all night, and in the morning he showed signs of depression. In the days following, no matter where he wandered off, he always returned to his mother's body, trying to remove the maggots from it. Eventually, attacked by the maggots himself, he stopped coming back, but he stayed fifty yards away and would not move. In ten days he lost about a third of his body weight. Finally, after his mother's corpse had been removed for burial, Flint sat down on a rock near where she had lain down, and died. The post mortem failed to show the cause of death. Primatologist Jane Goodall concludes that the major cause of death had to be grief: "His whole world had revolved around Flo, and with her gone life was hollow and meaningless. [ lx ]

Next, consider the new ways in which society finds to utilize animals for their benefit.   In South Dakota there is a cow named Yoon.   She looks and probably acts line any other bovine, but she is not.   Unlike other livestock, her “purpose” is not to provide meat or milk to society.   Yoon, like an ever-increasing number of animals, was genetically engineered by human scientists.   Unlike some clones, designed for the novelty of science or for food production, Yoon and her siblings were created to save lives.   Each produce human antibodies, antibodies the cows’ creators hope will someday do everything from treat ear infections to guard against bio-terror weapons like anthrax and smallpox. [ lxi ]

Such miracles might become a reality by infecting the animals with various bacteria and viruses.   The antibodies’ response could be used to treat and prevent illness in the same way we now use gamma globulin to combat hepatitis.   Other animals are similarly being used.   Research is underway, for instance into producing pigs whose hearts could be used for human transplants and who might better produce human insulin for diabetics.

Finally, consider a dog.   Luke was a yellow Labrador Retriever and a family pet.   Over the course of his ten year life, he became a dear member of the family who was much loved.   As often happens with our human loved ones as they age, Luke’s health began failing as he got older.   His veterinarian prescribed special diet food for him to go along with his multiple, daily medications.   He also had to have several surgeries and costly diagnostic tests from time to time.   Unlike a human family member, Luke’s family always had an alternative to treating his ailments—euthanasia.   Thus, when Luke blew out his knee like a football player, his family was given three choices: surgery, leaving it be and controlling pain with medication, and putting him down.   Ultimately, when Luke came down with something he could not recover from, his family did not wait for the end to come on its own and instead “put him to sleep” to cut short his suffering.   All along the way, these life choices were not, and perhaps could not be, made by Luke.

A. Differing Perspectives on Animals

Not everyone will react to the above biographies above in the same way.   Thus, for instance, some might consider the use of Yoon a travesty, while others a necessary cost of promoting human health, and still others yet another creative way to make an otherwise dumb animal useful.   For purposes of simplicity, this article assumes only two general groups of people—those in favor of increasing legal protections afforded to all animals and those opposed to all such attempts.   The discussion, then, is one of pure theory that intentionally omits the considerations of the great many people who find themselves in the middle of this ideological spectrum.   This drastic approach is taken not with the illusion that it represents reality, but rather with the hope that by contrasting these radically divergent viewpoints the reader can begin to place him/herself along that spectrum.            

1. Rights versus Welfare

Even within the animal protection movement there is disagreement about the goals that should be sought on behalf of other species.   Roughly, there are three competing philosophies: traditional welfare theory, animal rights, and “new welfarism.”   While each seeks to advance the protections afforded animals under the law, they differ in approach and the ends sought to be attained.  

Briefly, one might understand welfare and rights to lie at opposite ends of the protectionist spectrum.   Animal welfare advocates support the types of reforms long sought on behalf of animals – increased penalties for unjustifiable harsh treatment, in other words.   Welfarists accept the legal status of other species as property, even condoning such a classification.   Moreover, they acknowledge that animals always will be, and perhaps to some extent should be, used as resources for humanity.   The limit, however, is that animals should not suffer unnecessarily at the hands of people. [lxii]   In short, then, welfare advocates seek a benevolent dominion over animals that expressly reaffirms humanity’s superiority to other species.

Many of the contemporary gains made on behalf of animals are welfare-based in nature.   For instance, at the federal level, statutes such as the Animal Welfare Act [ lxiii ] and the Humane Slaughter Method Act [ lxiv ] seek to ensure that animals used in industry are treated appropriately.   State anti-cruelty laws aim to proscribe the mistreatment of animals by private citizens, in other words setting the bounds for the treatment of dogs, cats, birds, and the like. [ lxv ]  

Take note that the goal is to regulate unnecessary pain and suffering, not all suffering.   This means that it is all right to eat animals, to use them for some experimentation, to domesticate them, and in some circumstances to kill them.   Moreover, the effectiveness of welfarism in protecting animals depends on how broadly or narrowly a society chooses to define “unnecessary” in various circumstances. [ lxvi ]   Thus, welfarists seek no fundamental change in the legal order, only increased protections within the current regime.  

On the other end of the protectionist spectrum lie animal rights advocates.   Rights advocates seek to first change the fundamental legal status of animals away from mere property towards something closer to personhood.   Such a change would open the door to more expansive reforms down the line.   At base, rights advocates believe that all animals, human and otherwise, possess some inalienable rights that deserve recognition and protection.   To the law, these might be characterized as fundamental rights that must never be abridged except in the most dire of circumstances.   The number and scope of such rights do not come in one size, but rather are unique based on the intellect and capabilities of each species. [ lxvii ]   Therefore, rights advocates do not seek to equate human rights with those of animals, but rather recognition that some animal rights do exist. [ lxviii ]  

Thus, rights advocates do not accept the property status of animals nor the wisdom of subjecting them to human domination.   Animal experimentation in laboratories, even if helpful to humans, is unjustified.   Factory farming, and perhaps the meat industry itself, is immoral.   Indeed, one must be careful not to eat produce sprayed with pesticides that cost insects their lives. [ lxix ]   Even the concept of pet ownership is suspect under the rights framework. [ lxx ]   Acceptance of this rights position requires a rejection of American law as it currently stands. [ lxxi ]  

Such seemingly radical reforms make rights advances hard to come by.   As such, those dissatisfied by both extremes may look for an alternative approach.   Lying between the rights and welfare points on the spectrum exists what Professor Francione calls “new welfarism.” [ lxxii ]   At its most fundamental level, new welfarism represents a sort of compromise between rights and welfare whereby animal advocates accept traditional welfare gains in the hope that they will eventually amount to a recognition of animal rights. The new welfarist is identified by several characteristics. First, she rejects the notion that animals are merely tools for humanity. [ lxxiii ]   Second, is a rejection of the traditional animal rights framework as too radical to effect real change. [ lxxiv ]   Third, the strategies they instead employ tend to mimic those of traditional welfare-based groups. [ lxxv ]   To rights activists, the effect of such an approach is to substantially reinforce the human dominance over animals they claim to reject. [ lxxvi ]   In so doing, they perceive no “moral or logical inconsistency in promoting measures that explicitly endorse or reinforce [a] … view of animals [as instrumentalities of humanity] and at the same time articulating a long-term philosophy of animal rights.” [ lxxvii ]   In a more sympathetic light, new welfarists might be thought of as realistic rights advocates – taking what they can get now and hoping for more expansive reforms in the future.

2. The Anti-Animal Rights Position

Animal rights opponents object to both the concept of rights for nonhumans and its practical implications.   On a philosophical level, animal rights would devalue humans by putting them on par with other, perhaps all other, life on the planet.   Even if one were to accept that the differences between people and animals are subtle, it is the accumulation of these differences that makes civilization possible. [ lxxviii ]   To equate humans to animals, to really believe we are the same, one must dismiss “innate human characteristics, the ability to express reason, to recognize moral principles, to make subtle distinctions, and to intellectualize.” [ lxxix ]   In other words, one must dismiss a lot about humans to equate them with other species.   Moreover, such objections do not encompass the many religious objections to animal rights.   Many religions teach that it is the existence of a soul that makes human life so sacred and only humans possess souls.   Finally, one should not overlook the biblical grant of dominion over animals given to man.

In a similar but distinct vein, rights are something intrinsically unique to humans.   Rights are simply a term we attach to the special significance given to human life.   The existence of rights, and the extension thereof, is a human debate; one in which, by definition, animals cannot have a voice. [ lxxx ]   This principle has broader implications.   Peter Singer is famous for his accusation that humanity is “speciesist,” or heavily favors its own kind.   Others mean the same thing when they call humans homocentric or narcissistic. [ lxxxi ]   They complain people always put people first.   But is that so wrong?   Why shouldn’t a species care most for its own, even if that means exploiting another?   Put another way, this is how the animal kingdom works.   A mother bear does not care what effect her actions have on the rest of the animals in the forest, only on her cubs.   The coyote, when he devours livestock, does not consider the impact such a taking will have on the rancher’s livelihood, must less the well-being of the cattle.

Moreover, the rights opponents contend, society always has and still does reject any notion of rights for animals.   As Steven Wise, one of the leading animal rights advocates in the country, notes, people have long treated animals as “things.” [ lxxxii ]   Animals are things, like trees and oil, which we use for our own benefit.   This is a reality recognized by the courts.   Take for example the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah .   In that case, a Florida city passed an ordinance aimed at prohibiting the animal sacrifices performed by members of the Santeria religion.   The law was challenged in court on First Amendment free exercise of religion grounds.   As part of its defense, the city claimed the law was intended to safeguard animals from unnecessary suffering.   The Court rejected this argument almost out of hand, making numerous references to the cruelty humanity inflicts on animals all the time, conduct not regulated by the statute. [ lxxxiii ]

In speaking about the anti-animal rights position, it is important to note that many such people do not draw the same distinction between rights and welfare as done by animal advocates.   More importantly, few would classify themselves as against true animal welfare—some sort of philosophical position that seeks to inflict truly unnecessary harm on animals.   Quite to the contrary, most such people believe instead that there are already adequate animal protection laws on the books and that any additional laws can only be intended by the animal protection movement as a prelude to future more controversial reforms.

B. Forces Inhibiting Change

Apart from competing philosophies, there are external forces at work that discourage greater gains for animal protection.

1. Economics (domestic and international)

Money as they say, talks.   Animals are, for lack of a better description, big business in America and elsewhere.   A look around the average house demonstrates the important role that animals play in the economy. Household use of animal products extends far beyond leather shoes and the food in the refrigerator, however.   As Professor Wise points out:

the blood of a slaughtered cow is used to manufacture plywood adhesives, fertilizer, fire extinguisher foam, and dyes.   Her fat helps make plastic, tires, crayons, cosmetics, lubricants, soaps, detergents, cough syrup, contraceptive jellies and creams, ink, shaving cream, fabric softeners, synthetic rubber, jet engine lubricants, textiles, corrosion inhibitors, and metal-machining lubricants.   Her collagen is found in pie crusts, yogurts, matches, bank notes, paper, and cardboard glue; her intestines are used in strings for musical instruments and racquets; her bones in charcoal ash for refining sugar, in ceramics, and cleaning and polishing compounds. [ lxxxiv ]

The family pet is likely a product of the dog breeding industry. Factory farming techniques helped put meat, cheese, and eggs on the table at a reasonable price.   Dog racing, horse racing, and hunting provide both entertainment and income to millions across the country.   The list is nearly infinite, but the point is that the current status and treatment of animals is deeply interwoven into the American capitalist system. It must therefore be considered what effect a change to the legal status of animals would have on the national labor market and cost of goods.   Any change to the law that significantly alters the relationship between humanity and this lucrative property line would have deep repercussions within the economy.  

International economics also discourage significant changes to the legal status of animals.   With increasing globalization and the emergence of a worldwide marketplace has also come the proverbial “race to the bottom” in regulatory practices.   Thus, as a result of the comprehensive American laws meant to provide protection to the average employee, companies have moved many jobs to other countries where there is less workplace regulation and the cost of labor is far less expensive. [ lxxxv ]   Similarly, it seems likely that if the United States were to create more substantive protections for animals, thereby increasing the cost of delivering animal products to consumers, corporate farms and ranches would simply move their facilities to another country where animals do not enjoy similar protections.   In so doing, they would be able to provide a comparable product at prices far less than could domestic producers who would in turn be forced out of business.   The result, though “feel good” for animal advocates, might net only negligible gains for animal welfare.   In a world, then, where anything that has to be there overnight can be, animal advocates must propose not only legislation in their home, but also seek international change as well.

2. Culture and Tradition

Perhaps more important than money, human culture encourages a continuance of society’s current treatment of animals.   The use, and some might say abuse, of animals is well established.   While one might feel sympathy for the needs of his or her own dog or perhaps even the stray on the corner, that same concern probably does not extend to the turkey at Thanksgiving. Indeed, the recognition of animal rights might well mean the end of many cherished items and traditions, such as leather seats, shoes, and baseballs.

Similarly, there are hobbies and sports dependent on the treatment of animals as something less than legal individuals.   Animal rights opponents quite rightly point out that both hunting and fishing might well come to an end if animal protections are allowed to advance too far, not to mention other sports such as dog and horse racing.   Moreover, people have become used to viewing animals as things, as exhibits at the zoo or entertainers in the circus ring.   Indeed, these human perceptions and customs are so self-evident they need no further elaboration.

Taken as a whole, then, one sees that animal advocates, whether noble activists or misguided fanatics, face an uphill battle in winning over society and the legal system.  

V. Looking to the Future

To this point, we have examined the historical and legal background of the “animal rights” debate, met the characters and players involved, and considered the various conflicting factors that affect the potential for and desirability of legal change.   What remains, then, is a discussion about the actual goals sough by animal rights advocates.

A. Rights goals

There are many initial, intermediate, and ultimate goals that the average animal rights advocate would like to achieve.   To some, the ultimate goal is simply more equitable treatment for animals, with no real more tangible meaning than that conceptual hope.   Others have real tangible goals that include an end to animal experimentation, the consumption of animals by people, and perhaps an end to the domestication of different species.   Still others who consider themselves animal advocates are really only concerned about the interests of some subset of animals—animals like their dog for instance.   Thus, there is no end to the types of gains one might seek.   For a survey of such possibilities, there are countless excellent books on the subject.   For purposes of introduction, however, it seems far wiser to stick with a single, fundamental and yet highly controversial goal of the animal protection movement—legal personhood.  

Rights advocates, as discussed above, recognize that to achieve any novel gains for animals requires a change in their legal classification – away from property and towards legal personhood.   Personhood would give animals standing in court to assert their rights, both those that may exist currently under the laws in the form of anti-cruelty statutes and those that may evolve under the common law. [ lxxxvi ]  

One way to abrogate the property status of animals, thereby conferring some aspect of personhood, without totally dismantling the current system of animal ownership would be to divide that ownership into its legal and equitable components.   Such a division is common in title to real property and the ownership interests of trusts.   At its most fundamental level, the legal interest holder is the person with legal title to the property – the record owner with the ability and responsibility to control the property.     Common examples of legal owners are the grantor of a life estate with a reversion or the trustee of a trust.   Conversely, the equitable title holder – the holder of the life estate or the beneficiary of the trust – is the person deriving benefit from the property without having control over the property’s disposition.

Such a division allows the ownership interest in property to be held by multiple people in different capacities.   In the context of animal rights, recognizing animals’ equitable interest in themselves – equitable self-ownership – could transform them from pure legal property into pseudo-persons capable of enjoying greater legal protections and more importantly holding legal interests that they could enforce in a court of law.   Humans, on the other hand, would then retain legal title to the animals, leaving that person both the ability to use that animal and the responsibility for its care.  

The creation of this new legal classification of animals could resolve the standing obstacles to the enforcement of current laws – giving Yoon, Alex, or even Luke the ability to sue for their mistreatment – as well as pave the way for more innovative and progressive protectionist laws.   At the same time, it is a far less radical step than completely dismantling the current legal status of other species and works as a balancing tool between the competing interests of man and beast. [ lxxxvii ]

Such a subtle approach is, in a very real way, a form of new welfarism.   More importantly, one could view recent changes to the law as a sign of such subtle change.   Several years ago, Boulder, Colorado—locally known as ten square miles surrounded by reality—enacted a local ordinance to change the legal title of pet “owner” to pet “guardian” to reflect the special status of animals as property. [ lxxxviii ]   Though Boulder faced significant ridicule and scrutiny, its lead has subsequently been followed by several other municipalities. [ lxxxix ]   While such changes have not resulted in a substantive change in the legal classification or treatment of animals, it would be overly simplistic to call such reforms nothing more than semantics.   Similarly, trust law increasingly recognizes the interests of pets whose owners wish for them to be cared for after death.   The uniform probate code as well as the probate codes of several states expressly recognize “pet trusts”, under which Spike or Fido or Luke can be the beneficiary of a trust.   More importantly, appointed third persons, humans naturally, can enforce the terms of the trust to ensure that the trustee actually administers the trust in the best interests of the animal. [ xc ]   The Uniform Trust Code, recently drafted and being considered in many states, goes a step further and grants pet beneficiaries the classification of legal person for the limited purpose of serving as a beneficiary under a trust. [ xci ]  

B. International perspectives

Because of the origin of the author of this article, the preceding pages have concentrated on American society and American law.   It would be a mistake, however, to consider animal protection a strictly American dilemma.   Indeed, other countries have been more willing to embrace some notion of animal rights.   New Zealand, for example, enacted the Great Ape Project several years ago.   That law worked a fundamental shift in the country’s legal system by extending basic rights to humanity’s closest evolutionary relatives.   Now, under New Zealand law, these animals now possess three basic guarantees:   the right not to be deprived of life, not to suffer cruel treatment, and not to be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation.   Notice that each right is a negative one, a right to be free from something, rather than any positive rights.   The world’s reaction to the law was decidedly mixed, but to date no other countries have enacted similar laws.   Moreover, New Zealand has not expanded these animal rights any further.  

Germany, by contrast, recently wrote a very broad promise of animal rights into its constitution, though the real significance of the amendment is unclear.   After years of debate, both chambers of the German parliament agreed to include mention of animal rights in the country’s governing instrument.   There is no specific language explaining what this means.   However, shortly after its passage in the lower house of the German parliament, a BBC article speculated that “The addendum is expected to lead to new legislation limiting the testing on animals of products like cosmetics and mild pain relievers.” [ xcii ]   Perhaps ironically, after years of debate, the measure passed after a court decision strikingly similar to the City of Hialeah case decided by the United States Supreme Court. [ xciii ] speculated that “Thus, what effect such language will have on the daily lives of German animals remains to be seen.   How will fundamental protections for animals mesh in a country known for its meat products?   Similarly, Switzerland several years ago declared animals were no longer property.   Despite this assertion, the practical status of animals within the country remains substantially the same.

The European Union, too, has gotten into the act.   Many European countries have signed onto the “pet protection treaty”, the basic tenets of which are that:

1) Nobody shall cause a pet animal unnecessary pain, suffering or distress; and

2) Nobody shall abandon a pet animal. [ xciv ]

While mostly aspirational in seeking to elevate the welfare of animals, it does provide some substantive regulations, such as prohibiting the sale of an animal to anyone under sixteen years of age. [ xcv ]   Similarly, the Convention for the Protection of Animals during International Transport and the more recent Directive on the Protection of Animals during Transport seek to establish minimum safeguards for animals transported in Europe. [ xcvi ]   Indeed, across Europe animal rights is a burgeoning topic for social debate.   In Slovakia, “ Sloboda Zvierat” was formed in 1992. [ xcvii ]   In Poland, animal advocates have “Fundacji Viva!”, a Polish version of the VivaUSA!. [ xcviii ]

Asia, too, has sought to increase protections for animals.   India provides an example of a country with a longstanding tension like that potentially building in Germany.   India is the birthplace of some of the most animal-friendly religions in the world.   Indeed, Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism all contain important threads teaching respect and protection for all animal life.   To these religions, humanity is just a link in a much greater chain of existence.   Ghandi, known for his work and compassion for humans, was also a quiet but dedicated animal advocate.   Indeed, these philosophies have, in part, carried through into Indian law with several important protectionist laws.   The Indian constitution itself specifically protects animal life.   Yet, even here, these protections fall short of conferring real rights upon animals.   More importantly, the Indian ideal falls well sort of its goal and may in fact be in retreat.   Home to significant animal exploitation and exportation, including the mistreatment of cows – sacred creatures to the Hindu religion – the country is also being inundated by Western culture and its attendant treatment of animals.   Even some Buddhists, known for their vegetarianism, have repudiated their tradition for a meatier diet.   Moreover, just recently the highest court in Israel banned the production of fois gras (goose liver) by forced feeding as being violative of the country’s laws against cruelty to animals. [ xcix ]

Of course not all foreign countries are so generous to animals.   In many countries both man and beast are treated far worse than in the United States.   The point to be made, however, is that the animal protection question is a global one not localized to any state, region, or country.   More importantly, as alluded to in the discussion of international economics, changes made by one country to its animal laws will likely affect the well-being of animals in other countries. [ c ]  

C. Public Awareness

One might consider an important objective of the animal rights movement already achieved—increased public awareness.   Animal rights organizations have helped prompt reforms at several fast food companies and recently a national grocery store announced plans for new minimum humane treatment standards for all of the meat it sells. [ ci ]   In addition, major corporations are taking positions on animal issues [ cii ] and major educational institutions are working towards developing alternatives to animal testing. [ ciii ]

VI. Conclusion

Just as introductions rarely represent true beginnings, neither do conclusions represent the end of the story.   Rather than providing closure, conclusions are often, looked at in another way, simply introductions to another story.   Such is the case here.   While animal rights as theory already has a significant history, animal rights as a vehicle for legal change is just taking root.   In countries around the world changes in the legal status of other animals is already underway and several localities in the United States are beginning the slow process of fundamental change.   The question is no longer whether it makes sense to debate the place of animals in our society.   Rather, the issue has already been raised.   The question now is how that debate should be conducted and how the questions raised should be resolved.     

[xxv] A list of such species can be found at the Humane Society of the United States’ website: http://www.hsus.org/ace/11428

[xxvi] Huntington Life Sciences, http://www.huntingdon.com/hls/EthicalIssues/AnimalNumbers.html .

[xxvii] The New Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language (1989).

[xxxii] Gary L. Francione, Animal Rights and Animal Welfare 46 Rutgers L. Rev. 397, 405 (1996).

[xxxiii] Donald N. Duquette, Legal Representation for Children in Protection Proceedings: Two Distinct Lawyer Roles are Required , 34 Fam. L.Q. 441, 453 (2000).

[xxxix] Note, Standing Upright: The Moral and Legal Standing of Humans and Other Apes , 54 Stan. L. Rev. 163, 193 (2001);  see also Defenders of Wildlife , 504 U.S. at 560; Note, Standing on Shaky Ground: The Supreme Court Curbs Standing for Environmental Plaintiffs in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 38 St. Louis U. L.J. 199 (1993).

[xl] See , e.g. , Animal Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. Glickman, 154 F.3d 426 (D.C. Cir. 1998) .

[xli] International Primate Protection League v. Administrators of Tulane Ed. Fund, 500 U.S. 72 (1991) .

[xliii]  See discussion under “Rights Goals.”

[xliv] 2 Am. Dec. 264 (N.Y. 1805).

[xlv]  103 Eng. Rep. 1127 (Q.B. 1707).

[xlvi]   See King James Bible, Book of Genesis 1:20–25.

[xlvii]  Gary L. Francione, Animals, Property and Legal Welfarism: “Unnecessary” Suffering and the “Humane” Treatment of Animals , 46 Rutgers L. Rev. 721, 733 (1994).

[xlviii]   Id .

[xlix]  For a more detailed discussion of animals status as property, see Gary L. Francione, Animals, Property and the Law (1995); see also Steven M. Wise, The Legal Thinghood of Nonhuman Animals , 23 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 471 (1996).

[l]   E.g. Colo.Rev.Stat. § 18-9-202 (providing both misdemeanor and felony penalties for cruelty to animals).

[ci] Bruce Horovitz, Whole Foods Pledges to be More Humane , USA Today, available at : http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2003-10-21-wholefood_x.htm .

[ciii] E.g. , the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing, http://caat.jhsph.edu/ .

Full Site Search

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.

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content

Animal Charity Evaluators

Helping People Help Animals

• Recommended Charities
• How We Prioritize Causes
• How We Evaluate Charities
• Apply for Charity Evaluations
• Help Animals Now
• Donor Resources
• Movement Grants
• Application Guidelines
• Past Grants Recipients
• Meet Our Team
• Join Our Team
• Transparency
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Research Digest
• Research Library
• Tools for Charities

Animal Rights Movement: Understanding When and Why It Started

Introduction

The animal rights movement has progressed with time, reflecting our growing knowledge of animals’ needs and changing attitudes toward their treatment. What can animal advocates learn from looking back at how the animal rights movement came to be? In this article, we’ll explore the concept of animal rights and the history of the animal rights movement, delving into its early days, goals, challenges, and evolution in the modern era.

Do Animals Have Rights?

The belief that nonhuman animals have intrinsic value and the right to be treated with respect and compassion has existed in some form for millennia. For example, the Indian principle of ahiṃsā , which preaches nonviolence toward all living beings, dates back to the 9th century BCE and is observed in religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism to this day. Throughout history, however, humans have generally regarded animals as commodities with no inherent rights. One of the first prominent figures to discuss animals’ moral value, 17th-century French philosopher René Descartes, promoted a particularly callous view of animals. He argued that animals lacked a mind and could not feel pain, justifying cruel acts such as live vivisection. This sentiment fortunately lost favor as humans’ understanding of animal cognition, emotions, and sentience deepened.

Why Are Animal Rights Important?

Animals are sentient beings capable of experiencing pain, suffering, and joy. Respecting their rights to not be harmed, captured, taken away from their habitat, abused, confined, or killed for human purposes is in line with moral principles such as empathy, compassion, and ethical conduct. By securing animal rights, we can greatly minimize the amount of pain and suffering in the world. Acknowledging animal rights also benefits humans. For example, improving the living conditions of animals on farms decreases the likelihood of disease transmission to humans. Similarly, reducing meat consumption can help curb the impact of climate change and preserve ecosystems.

When Did the Animal Rights Movement Start?

The modern-day animal rights movement traces back to the Industrial Revolution, when rapid industrialization and urbanization spurred massive changes across Europe and North America. Along with other industries, traditional farming practices were replaced by large-scale, profit-driven factory farms and slaughterhouses. The dangerous, unsanitary, and traumatic working conditions in these meat industry facilities were famously depicted in Upton Sinclair’s 1906 book The Jungle . People began to question the treatment of workers and animals in this new industrial era, leading to the first organized animal advocacy efforts.

Who Started the First Animal Rights Movement?

Several people played a role in the development of the animal rights movement, although a few individuals are often credited with starting it. One of these individuals is Richard Martin, an Irish politician who passed one of the first farmed animal welfare laws (the Cruel Treatment of Cattle Act) in 1822 and founded the first animal welfare charity (the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) in 1824. Another prominent figure of the early animal rights movement is Henry Stephens Salt, an English writer and social reformer who argued in favor of animal rights in his 1892 book Animals’ Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress.

What Are the Goals of the Animal Rights Movement?

The goals of the animal rights movement have evolved over time, with early efforts more focused on soliciting compassion for animals and modern efforts more focused on reducing animal consumption or securing legal protection. Today, the end goal of the animal rights movement is to abolish all human activities that cause animal suffering, including factory farming, animal experimentation, and habitat destruction. Animal rights advocates focus on various causes and use different approaches to achieve this goal. Our Menu of Interventions presents a range of these strategies and their potential positive outcomes for animals.

What Laws Protect Animal Rights?

Animal rights laws vary significantly among countries, states, and jurisdictions. Although most countries still do not recognize animal rights or sentience, several have implemented laws to protect certain species against cruelty and neglect. Laws range from basic anti-cruelty protections to more nuanced regulations designed to address animal treatment in specific contexts. Companion animals tend to receive greater protection than farmed and wild animals, as industries routinely challenge new and existing legislation.

Was the Animal Rights Movement Successful?

Although there have been considerable advancements in animal welfare, the animal rights movement still faces challenges. Legal and societal shifts have resulted in better protections against animal cruelty and exploitation, but enforcement remains weak, welfare considerations for farmed animals are lacking, and few countries officially recognize animal sentience in law. Nevertheless, the movement has made significant progress by banning certain cruel practices, improving living conditions for animals, and shifting public opinion.

What Did the Animal Rights Movement Accomplish?

The animal rights movement has accomplished several significant changes and advancements over the years, although the extent of these accomplishments varies by species and region. Some notable accomplishments of the animal rights movement include:

• Raising public awareness about the treatment of animals in various industries, such as factory farming, entertainment, and research
• Influencing the creation and enforcement of laws and regulations aimed at protecting animals, covering areas such as animal cruelty, animal testing, and wildlife conservation
• Improving conditions for farmed animals in some regions, with some companies and farms adopting more humane practices, larger enclosures, and better living conditions for animals
• Addressing issues like poaching, illegal wildlife trade, and the use of animals in entertainment
• Pressuring companies to adopt more ethical and sustainable sources in their supply chains

The growth of the animal rights movement has also resulted in increased collaboration with other causes, such as environmental protection, social justice, labor rights, and human health. This approach addresses the broader context in which animal suffering occurs and builds alliances for more effective advocacy.

When Did Effective Animal Advocacy Emerge?

Effective animal advocacy (EAA) emerged during the early days of Effective Altruism (EA), a movement that uses evidence and reason to identify the most effecient and impactful ways to do good. EA gained prominence in the 21st century and quickly spread to philanthropic spaces, including the animal rights movement. The first group solely dedicated to effective animal advocacy, Effective Animal Activism, was founded in 2012 as an intern project of 80,000 Hours —a U.K.-based organization that guides individuals toward high-impact careers. Effective Animal Activism sought to improve animal welfare as much as possible, despite the lack of evidence-based guidance on the most effective ways to do so.

Growth of Effective Animal Advocacy

Effective Animal Activism’s earliest efforts consisted of evaluating animal charities, expanding the effective animal advocacy community, and providing career advice to aspiring animal advocates. In 2013, the group merged with a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and revised its mission to finding and promoting highly effective opportunities to help animals, soon rebranding as Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE). Charity evaluations became ACE’s core, and we remained the most prominent organization in EAA for years. Through introspection and the growth of EAA, we realized the limitations of our approach in directing funds to smaller groups in underrepresented regions. To address this gap, we introduced the Movement Grants Program.

How Did Effective Animal Advocacy Impact the Animal Rights Movement?

Effective animal advocacy has influenced the animal rights movement by popularizing data-driven approaches with measurable impact, leading to more strategic and cost-effective advocacy efforts. Despite its positive impacts, EAA has also been criticized for its quantitative focus, lack of diversity, prioritization methods, and association with the EA movement. As a prominent figure in the EAA space, ACE carefully considers these critiques and continually reassesses our approach to ensure we support the entire animal rights movement as best we can.

From ancient principles of nonviolence to modern legal debates, the animal rights movement is larger and more relevant than ever before. While many challenges lie ahead, the movement’s forward progress is undeniable. Will you help us advance it even further?

ACE is dedicated to maximizing the impact of every donation we receive. By becoming an ACE monthly donor, you can make the most of your desire to help animals and provide us with a stable foundation to plan and execute long-term projects that drive meaningful change for animals. Together, we can work toward a world where animal rights are valued and respected.

HELP ANIMALS ALL YEAR LONG

Share this Post on

About Selena Darlim

Selena joined ACE in September 2021. She is a longtime animal advocate with several years’ experience writing for nonprofits and media organizations. She holds a self-designed bachelor’s degree in Wildlife Conservation and Animal Advocacy, and she strives to continually expand her knowledge of human and nonhuman advocacy movements.

At the risk of appearing to lack humility, the concept of Effective Animal Advocacy started earlier, with the launch of Faunalytics (then called the Humane Research Council) in 2000. We may have not used the same terminology, but we had a similar sense of cause prioritization and a clear focus on evaluation and effectiveness for both individual groups and the movement. This is a part of our movement’s history that I think is often overlooked by EAAs.

Hi Che. Thank you for reading this article and providing additional background around the movement. We update our pages periodically, and we’ll make sure to take this into account in our next revision.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept the Privacy Policy

Post Comment

Related Posts

Advice for Advocates --> Vegan Diet 101: Benefits and Resources to Get Started January 23, 2024

Advice for Advocates --> Free Courses for Animal Advocates October 16, 2023

Advice for Advocates --> Crossroads Series: What Can Animal Advocates Learn from the Environmental Movement to Strengthen Our Advocacy Efforts? April 19, 2023

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Numismatics
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Social History
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Legal System - Costs and Funding
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Restitution
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Social Issues in Business and Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Sustainability
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Disability Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous
• Next chapter >

Introduction: What Are Animal Rights?

• Published: November 2005
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This introductory chapter explores the concept of animal rights. It shows the range of possible positions concerning the animal rights issue and explores what issues, of theory or fact, separate reasonable people. The chapter claims that in at least some sense, almost everyone believes in animal rights, and that the real question is about what the phrase ‘animal rights’ actually means. It discusses the provisions of some state laws concerning animal rights, and the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. The introduction also explains the objectives of this book, which are to bring some new clarity to the animal rights debate, and to chart some new directions for both practice and theory.

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• 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.

Writing Complex Depression Research Papers

100+ Personal Essay Topics For College And Writing Tips

100+ motivational speech topics that guarantee good grades.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Animal Rights: Ashgate International Library of Essays on Rights. Edited collection. 582p.

Related Papers

SSRN Electronic Journal

Cass Sunstein

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

Aysel Dogan

I argue that animals have rights in the sense of having valid claims, which might turn out to be actual rights as society advances and new scientific-technological developments facilitate finding alternative ways of satisfying our vital interests without using animals. Animals have a right to life, to liberty in the sense of freedom of movement and communication, to subsistence, to relief from suffering , and to security against attacks on their physical existence. Animals' interest in living, freedom, subsistence, and security are of vital importance to them, and they do not belong to us; they are not the things we have already possessed by virtue of our own nature.

Oxford Journal of Legal Studies

Saskia Stucki

With legal animal rights on the horizon, there is a need for a more systematic theorisation of animal rights as legal rights. This article addresses conceptual , doctrinal and normative issues relating to the nature and foundations of legal animal rights by examining three key questions: can, do and should animals have legal rights? It will show that animals are conceptually possible candidates for rights ascriptions. Moreover, certain 'animal welfare rights' could arguably be extracted from existing animal welfare laws, even though these are currently imperfect and weak legal rights at best. Finally, this article introduces the new conceptual vocabulary of simple and fundamental animal rights, in order to distinguish the weak legal rights that animals may be said to have as a matter of positive law from the kind of strong legal rights that animals ought to have as a matter of future law.

Dr Kaustav Banerjee

Emmanuel Debaty

Political Theory

James W Nickel

Animal Frontiers

Gary Francione

Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy (Sellers M., Kirste S. eds.))

Saskia Stucki , Visa Kurki

Journal of Human Rights and the Environment

Saskia Stucki , Tom Sparks , Visa Kurki

Anthony J Langlois

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Ethics in Progress

Ethics in Progress - Research Journal

in Lori Gruen (ed) Critical Terms for Animal Studies (U. Chicago Press): 320-336

Sue Donaldson , Will Kymlicka

Law & Society Review

David M. Engel

William A Edmundson

Alasdair Cochrane

Journal of Medical Ethics

Bonnie Steinbock

Jeffrey Spring

onyekachi ihesiulo

The Journal of English Language and Literature

Alan Durant

Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights

Tomasz Pietrzykowski

Chigozie Nwagbara

Proportionality and the Rule of Law: Rights, Reasoning, Justification (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014) 123-154

Grégoire Webber

The Southern Journal of Philosophy

Jan Narveson

Marcus Schultz-Bergin

Joseph Perry

Haris Wahidi

Religion and Public Policy: Human Rights, Conflict, and Ethics, edited by Sumner B. Twiss, Marian Gh. Simion, Rodney L. Petersen

Grace Y Kao

Peter Sutch

SAMMY OGOLLA

Maximiliano E. Korstanje

The Journal of Philosophy

Heather J Gert

Omi Chowdhury

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• IELTS Scores
• Life Skills Test
• Find a Test Centre
• Alternatives to IELTS
• General Training
• Academic Word List
• Topic Vocabulary
• Collocation
• Phrasal Verbs
• Writing eBooks
• Reading eBook
• All eBooks & Courses
• Sample Essays

Animal Rights Essay

This IELTS  animal rights essay  discusses the exploitation of animals by humans.

People who believe in animal rights think that they should not be treated cruelly, for example in experiments or for sport.

'To exploit' means to benefit from something in an unfair way. Take a look at the question:

A growing number of people feel that animals should not be exploited by people and that they should have the same rights as humans, while others argue that humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs, including uses for food and research.

Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Discussing 'Two Opinions'

Animals should not be exploited by people and they should have the same rights as humans. Humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs, including uses for food and research.

In this essay you are being given two opposing opinions to discuss.

This is the first opinion:

• Animals should not be exploited by people and they should have the same rights as humans.

This is the second opinion:

• Humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs, including uses for food and research.

In this type of essay, you must look at both sides. In other words you need to discuss the arguments FOR animal rights and AGAINST .

You must also ensure you give YOUR opinion.

Organising the Essay

One way to organize an essay like this is to consider both opinions, then give your opinion in a final paragraph ( see this example ) or dedicate a whole final paragraph to your opinion ( see this example ).

Another way to write an essay like this is to also make one of the 'for' or 'against' opinions your opinion as well.

Look at the model animal rights essay below. The second body paragraph discusses the first opinion, but the topic sentence makes it clear that this paragraph is also representing the writers opinion as well:

However, I do not believe these arguments stand up to scrutiny.

This now means that in two body paragraphs you have covered all three parts of the question from the animal rights essay:

1. First opinion 2. Second opinion 3. Your opinion

The advantage of doing it this way rather than having a separate paragraph is that you do not need to come up with new ideas for a new paragraph.

If you have a separate paragraph with your opinion you may find you cannot think of any new ideas or you may end up repeating the same things as in your previous paragraphs.

IELTS Writing Example

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.

Write at least 250 words.

Animal Rights Essay - Model Answer

Animals have always been used by humans in some form to satisfy their needs. However, while some people believe that animals should be treated in the same way humans are and have similar rights, others think that it is more important to use them as we desire for food and medical research. 

With regard to the exploitation of animals, people believe it is acceptable for several reasons. Firstly, they think that humans are the most important beings on the planet, and everything must be done to ensure human survival. If this means experimenting on animals so that we can fight and find cures for diseases, then this takes priority over animal suffering. Furthermore, it is believed by some that animals do not feel pain or loss as humans do, so if we have to kill animals for food or other uses, then this is morally acceptable.

However, I do not believe these arguments stand up to scrutiny. To begin, it has been shown on numerous occasions by secret filming in laboratories via animal rights groups that animals feel as much pain as humans do, and they suffer when they are kept in cages for long periods. In addition, a substantial amount of animal research is done for cosmetics, not to find cures for diseases, so this is unnecessary. Finally, it has also been proven that humans can get all the nutrients and vitamins that they need from green vegetables and fruit. Therefore, again, having to kill animals for food is not an adequate argument.

To sum up, although some people argue killing animals for research and food is ethical, I would argue there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this is not the case, and, therefore, steps must be taken to improve the rights of animals.

(Words 290) 

<<< Back

Next >>>

More Discuss Two Opinion Essays:

Formal and Informal Education Essay: What age should it start?

This formal and informal education essay is about whether it is best for children to begin their formal education at school when they are 7 rather than much younger.

Childcare Essay: Should family or carers look after young children?

Childcare Essay: In the essay you have to discuss two sides of an argument. The first is that it is better if pre-school children are looked after at home with relatives such as grandparents. The second opinion is that children should be looked after at childcare centres.

IELTS Essays: What is the best way to reduce crime?

IELTS essays online with comments by an IELTS instructor - A writing sample on the topic of reducing crime.

Extraterrestrial Life Essay: Should we look for life on other planets?

This extraterrestrial life essay is an IELTS opinion essay where you have to discuss both sides of an issue then give your own opinion.

Diet and Health Essay: Who is responsible for diet and health?

Diet and Health Essay for IELTS: This model examines the extent to which individuals or governments should be responsible for health. Read a model answer and useful comments about the essay which will help you to improve your IELTS Score.

IELTS Writing Example: What are the aims of a university education?

IELTS writing example essays. This is an essay on the aims of university education. In this essay, two opposing opinions need to be discussed. It is important to understand how to answer this type of question in the IELTS exam.

Sources for Stories Essay: Should parents read to their children?

This sources for stories essay asks for your opinion on the best way for children to get stories. Is it from parents reading to them or other ways?

Influence of Scientists or Politicians Essay

Influence of Scientists or Politicians Essay- Model answer for IELTS. Who has had the most influence on our world? In this essay you have to discuss both sides.

Child Development Essay: What factors influence a child's development?

Child Development Essay for IELTS. The essay is about the factors that affect the way that children develop. It provides you with a model answer and comments on the response to help you know how to improve your band score.

IELTS Essay Becoming Independent

This IELTS essay discussed whether people are becoming more independent than they were in the past. This is a question that has come up a few times in the test. This is discussion type essay as you have to discuss both sides of an argument and come to a conclusion.

Donating Money to Charity Essay: Where should the money go?

Donating Money to Charity Essay: IELTS model answer to an essay on the topic of giving locally or to national and international charities.

Zoo Essay: Are zoos cruel or do they protect animals?

This is a recent zoo essay question from the IELTS test (June 2018). Essay about zoos have come up a few times in the IELTS test so it's worth studying same sample questions and sample essays about the topic.

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

Bargain eBook Deal! 30% Discount

All 4 Writing eBooks for just  $25.86 Find out more >>

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

• All Lessons
• Band Score Calculator
• Writing Feedback
• Speaking Feedback
• Teacher Resources
• Free Downloads
• Recent Essay Exam Questions
• Books for IELTS Prep
• Useful Links

Recent Articles

IELTS Essay: Living with Climate Change

Aug 23, 24 02:37 AM

Grammar in IELTS Listening

Aug 22, 24 02:54 PM

IELTS Line Graph: Governments Expenditure on Research

Jul 23, 24 01:27 PM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

Before you go...

30% discount - just $25.86 for all 4 writing ebooks.

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Animal Ethics — Persuasive Animal Rights And The Importance Of Treating Animals With Respect

Persuasive Animal Rights and The Importance of Treating Animals with Respect

• Categories: Animal Cruelty Animal Ethics

About this sample

Words: 1394 |

Published: Jan 28, 2021

Words: 1394 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Table of contents

Introduction, works cited.

• American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). (n.d.). Animal cruelty laws in Canada. Retrieved from https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/canada
• Animal Equality. (n.d.). Animal testing. Retrieved from https://www.animalequality.org/issues/animal-testing
• Animal Welfare Act. (1966). 7 U.S.C. § 2131 et seq.
• Bekoff, M. (2013). The emotional lives of animals: A leading scientist explores animal joy, sorrow, and empathy — and why they matter. New World Library.
• Cartmill, M. (1996). A view to a death in the morning: Hunting and nature through history. Harvard University Press.
• Dawkins, M. S. (2006). Through our eyes only? The search for animal consciousness. Oxford University Press.
• Francione, G. L. (1995). Animals, property, and the law. Temple University Press.
• Herzing, D. L. (2010). Dolphin communication: A window into the complexity of human language. In S. M. Reader & K. Laland (Eds.), Animal social complexity: Intelligence, culture, and individualized societies (pp. 293-311). Harvard University Press.
• Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. University of California Press.
• Singer, P. (2009). Animal liberation. Harper Perennial.

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

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Law, Crime & Punishment Environment

+ 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

2 pages / 878 words

3 pages / 1281 words

1 pages / 518 words

1 pages / 488 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 Animal Ethics

De La Cruz, R. A. 'Ecological and Interspecies Ethics'.Regan, T. (1983). The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press.

Martinez, Diana Rowe. “Rodeo Animals Are Not Abused.” Greenhaven Press, 2004 and Gale 2001. 07 May 2001. Opposing Viewpoints Context. Accessed 27 Oct. 2019.O’Connor, Jennifer. “Animal Abuse at The Rodeo.” New York Times, 07, [...]

The practice of keeping animals in zoos has sparked a passionate debate that revolves around ethical considerations and conservation goals. This essay explores the multifaceted arguments for and against the existence of zoos, [...]

Zoos have long been a popular tourist attraction, drawing in millions of visitors each year. These exotic establishments claim to educate, entertain, and conserve various animal species. However, upon closer examination, it [...]

The Bahamas are a ground of about 700 islands and 2,400 uninhabited islets and cays lying 50 mi off the east coast of Florida. Only about 30 of the islands are inhabited; the most important is New Providence (80 sq. mi; 207 sq. [...]

Animal domestication began in the ancient times. Human beings are seen to have domesticated animals like cats for companionship in ancient Egypt and livestock for agricultural purposes. This was the earliest form of animal [...]

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

• A Beginner’s Guide to IELTS
• Common Grammar Mistakes [for IELTS Writing Candidates]

Writing Correction Service

• Free IELTS Resources
• Practice Speaking Test

Select Page

Animal Rights Essay

Posted by David S. Wills | Jan 20, 2023 | Model Essays | 0

In the IELTS writing exam, you could be asked to write an essay about animals. Most likely, your question would relate to animal rights . This might seem challenging for some people, so I have written this article to help you understand it better.

Animal Rights and IELTS

For IELTS writing, you often have to discuss ethical issues. Thus, for the topic of animals, you would most likely have to write about animal rights. This could include:

• whether it is ethical to keep animals in a zoo
• discussing animal experimentation
• the ethics of eating meat
• whether humans should keep pets

Because IELTS requires no specialist knowledge, you would probably not have anything more specific than this to discuss. For example, you wouldn’t be asked about the ethics of purebred pet ownership because most people don’t know much about it. You would also not be given anything that is extremely controversial.

Therefore, the most common animal topics will be quite general and relate to animal rights.

Animal Rights Essay – Experimentation

Here is the question that we will examine today:

Some people argue that all experimentation on animals is bad and should be outlawed. However, others believe that important scientific discoveries can be made from animal experiments. Can experimentation on animals be justified? Are there any alternatives?

Note that there are many variants upon this topic. I have seen this same idea with “ Discuss both views ” and “ To what extent do you agree/disagree ” question types.

This one, of course, is a two-part question . Therefore, don’t waste too much time reading the long part above the questions. Regardless of what that says, your task is to:

• Say whether or not experiments on animals can be justified.
• Say whether there are alternatives to this practice.

Be aware that your answer to the first question cannot negate having to answer the second. Whether you say that animal testing can or can’t be justified, you still have to say whether there are alternatives.

Language for an Animal Rights Essay

If you need to write an essay on animal rights, you need to know some appropriate language. Again, you do not need to be an expert, but you should have enough of a grasp of English to say something intelligent about the topic.

You may have noticed that I’ve used these expressions in this article:

• Animal experimentation
• Experiments on animals
• Animal testing

These all mean the same thing but it can be useful to employ different ways to do that, so that you don’t just repeat yourself.

Of course, what you say will also depend hugely on your position and your ideas. If you think that animal experimentation is wrong, then you’ll probably incorporate some rather negative language, such as:

• Impossible to justify

On the other hand, if you support animal testing, you might say something more positive:

It is also good to know some specific language related to the topic:

• Medical testing
• Subjected to

You can learn more language by reading articles on this topic. Try searching Google for “animal rights” or “animal testing.” You’ll find lots of articles. Just make sure that it is written by a native speaker or a professional writer. Also, be aware that with a contentious topic there will probably be a lot of passionate language and maybe even some misinformation.

Planning your Answer

First of all, you need to figure out what your position is in regards the question(s). Then, you need to think about how to explain your position in a straightforward way.

Here, we had two questions. Both of them are yes/no questions but of course you need to develop those ideas with explanations. Think of your answer as “Yes because…” or “No because…” This will help you to think of reasons that you can then incorporate into your answers.

Also, be aware that two-part questions are really easy to structure! You can just devote one body paragraph to each question:

My position is that animal experimentation cannot be justified, so I will explain that in my first body paragraph. I will start with the main argument in defence of animal testing, then refute it comprehensively.

For the next question, I will state that I don’t really know whether or not there are any alternatives. Thus, my structure will be:

Sample Band 9 Answer

Over the past few decades, animal testing has been fiercely debated due to the ethical problems inherent in this area of science. This essay will explain why it cannot be justified and that alternatives need to be sought.

The people who believe that animal testing is necessary tend to say that there are serious benefits to humanity, such as testing medicines before using them on human beings. They believe that this will help to figure out the cures to many serious illnesses, which will make the world a better place for humans. However, this is wrong for several reasons. Chief among them is the fact that animal testing is not as helpful in developing medicines as people think. Medicines that work on animals do not always work on humans, and vice versa. As such, these trials are not just unnecessary but also profoundly unhelpful. For example, if scientists give a mouse diabetes and then try various drugs to cure the problem, they may find that there are twelve drugs that do not work on the mouse. However, maybe one of those drugs would have worked on a human. As such, animal testing would have caused more problems than it solved.

Part of the reason for animal testing is that there are not many alternatives. Whilst it is obviously cruel and pointless to subject animals to experiments, most people would agree that it is worse to do this to human beings. However, there needs to be some sort of procedure by which testing can move from theoretical to human trials without the need for the evils of animal testing. What this process would be remains to be seen, but it is essential for any humane society.

In conclusion, people may argue that there are benefits that come from experimenting on animals, but in fact there is no good reason to continue doing this. Scientists need to immediately seek an alternative and end this barbaric and pointless practice. 

Notes on the Answer

This was a good answer because it gave fully developed explanations and used language accurately. Here are some words and phrases from the answer:

• fiercely debated
• ethical problems
• profoundly unhelpful
• cruel and pointless
• theoretical
• humane society

Paragraph two was also quite interesting. I felt that the most convincing way to make my point was to show conventional logic and then comprehensively debunk it. To do so, I gave a clear example and demonstrated through a simple explanation of just why animal testing is so useless.

About The Author

David S. Wills

David S. Wills is the author of Scientologist! William S. Burroughs and the 'Weird Cult' and the founder/editor of Beatdom literary journal. He lives and works in rural Cambodia and loves to travel. He has worked as an IELTS tutor since 2010, has completed both TEFL and CELTA courses, and has a certificate from Cambridge for Teaching Writing. David has worked in many different countries, and for several years designed a writing course for the University of Worcester. In 2018, he wrote the popular IELTS handbook, Grammar for IELTS Writing and he has since written two other books about IELTS. His other IELTS website is called IELTS Teaching.

Related Posts

A Very, Very Difficult IELTS Question [Sample Answer]

June 18, 2021

Major Environmental Problems [Task 2 Sample Answer]

June 17, 2019

Dress Code [IELTS Model Answer]

December 1, 2023

Economic Success and Environmental Consequences – IELTS Writing Task 2

January 31, 2022

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Download my IELTS Books

Recent Posts

• Ambition and Success: Sample IELTS Essay
• Do the Advantages Outweigh the Disadvantages? – Advice About This Question Type
• Exams vs Continual Assessement [Model Essay]
• British vs American Spelling
• How to Improve your IELTS Writing Score

Recent Comments

• David S. Wills on Writing Correction Service
• raquel on Writing Correction Service
• Lesson Plans
• Model Essays
• TED Video Lessons
• Weekly Roundup

NCERT Books

Animal Right Essay | Essay on Animal Right for Students and Children in English

Animal Rights Essay: Animal Rights is the thought or idea that says that some or all animals are entitled to their basic rights such as possession of their life, and other crucial needs to survive.

It is the idea that all animals are born free like humans, and we should not subject them to exploitation for our needs. Animal rights aim to give animals the same rights as humans in which they are not killed or tortured at the hands of people.

Long and Short Essays on Animal Right for Students and Kids in English

We provide children and students with essay samples on an extended essay of 500 words and a short piece of 150 words on the topic “Animal Rights” for reference.

Long Essay on Animal Rights 500 Words in English

Long Essay on Animal Rights is usually given to classes 7, 8, 9, and 10.

Is it unjust to kill animals to feed ourselves? If you are a vegetarian or an animal lover, you might find killing animals to feed ourselves as unethical. There are various views on the subject, and continuous debates and articles try to resolve the matter.

Animal rights are the thought process that all animals have basic rights like all human beings, and they do not deserve to be killed at our hands or made to suffer. It is best not to view animals as our commodities. It is wrong to view them as our resources. If we can accept the fact that animals are not born to be killed or exploited at our hands, we can approach a human view of treating animals and can then genuinely discuss the rights of animals.

We wrongly believe that animals are the commodities that we use. If we adopt this thought, our actions towards them will be unethical and regrettable. If we think that animals have no moral status, we will be extremely apathetic, which is diametric to human nature. The wrong thought process can hamper the understanding and reasoning of everything in our life.

Animals are living creatures, and so are we. They too feel pain and suffering. Hence, it is not illogical to consider the topic of animals having rights.

Believing that animals have rights does not necessarily mean that eating meat is wrong or unethical. People of different backgrounds and religions follow different diets and have different eating habits. Some of them include non-vegetarian diets, and some of them don’t.

Eating meat is a lifestyle for some people, and others should respect it. But, eating meat is not the only question that comes to mind when we think about animal rights. Thousands of animals are kept in farms and slaughterhouses. They are brought up in extremely inhospitable environments and are ultimately killed. Many of them are brought and stored in labs, and people perform all sorts of heinous and inexplicable experiments on them.

You can now access more Essay Writing on this topic and many more.

Humans torture millions of animals every year in labs. They burn, cut or starve animals in the name of research that does not always bear results. Most drugs that work on animals might not work for humans or not have the same efficiency. Hence, it is barbaric to meaninglessly kill animals and think that they do not have any rights.

People should never believe that animals are useless, dumb creatures. They too have a soul and can feel. Their emotions might not be as complex as humans, but they deserve to be acknowledged.

Humans are different than other animals. We have a moral compass and try to justify the events around us. Hence, when we think about any living creature being hurt, it makes us sad.

If you see an abused animal or an injured animal, you could walk past it. You could also report the animal abuse if it is a domestic animal, or take it to the vet for treatment. We should have realized that it is more peaceful to care for animals contently, than kill or capture them. Animals are soulful creatures like us and magnificent creation. We should respect them, and they do have rights.

Short Essay on Animal Rights 150 Words in English

Short Essay on Animal Rights is usually given to classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

The animal right is the thought that all animals have birthrights like humans. It is the liberal thought process where we consider all animals to have basic rights that would protect them from being subjected to torture, starvation, slaughtering, etc. for our benefits.

There are a lot of disagreements regarding animals having rights. Some people argue that animal rights should be protected, while others argue that there is no need for animal rights.

People who say that animals have no rights, think it to be true because they view animals as commodities that we can exploit whenever required. Some people think that animals are created for our pleasure and our needs since we are at the top of the food chain. These people are largely mistaken.

All animals have souls and are living beings just like us. They have sensations and can feel everything around them just like humans can. Hence, we are morally obliged to acknowledge the rights of animals and not harvest them.

10 Lines on Animal Rights Essay in English

1. Animal rights are the concept that animals have similar rights as human. 2. Many people support animal rights, and many people don’t. 3. Many believe that animal rights should be established to protect the basic needs of all animals. 4. Others believe that animals don’t require any rights, and are present to satisfy the needs of humans. 5. It is a wrong thought that animals are commodities for humans, and can be used as objects. 6. Animals are projected to cruel treatments in places like animal farms, animal testing labs, etc. 7. The animal rights issue is a hotly debated topic. 8. All animals are living organisms and can feel like us. Hence, we should treat them as such. 9. Humans are superior to other animals in terms of evolutions, but we belong to the animal kingdom as well. 10. Humans have morals, unlike other animals. We should use it to support the cause of animal rights.

FAQ’s on Animal Rights Essay

Question 1. What are animal rights?

Answer: Animal right is the idea that animals deserve similar rights like a human. People who are supporters of animal rights believe that all animals have fundamental rights, such as the right to live and not tortured.

Question 2. What is animal testing?

Answer: Animal testing is the method of using animals as test-subjects for testing drugs and products on animals.

Question 3. Why is animal right relevant?

Answer: We use animals as a commodity and use them as we will. As human beings who have morals, we can think about considering the rights of animals too.

Question 4. Why should we give rights to animals?

Answer: Like human beings, animals also are living being who can feel what goes on around them. Hence, animals should have the basic right to survive.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Animal Rights Essay. Research Paper on Animal Rights

Published by gudwriter on January 4, 2021 January 4, 2021

This sample animal rights essay features an outline, 1000+ words, and a list of credible references.  If you would like to write a high quality research paper, ideas from this sample will give you a head start and the much needed inspiration. Animals are entitled to rights also that’s why MBA essay writers from Gudwriter are experts in writing such kind of essays 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 Argumentative Essay Outline

Introduction.

Animals are entitled to fundamental rights.

Paragraph 1:

Animals have an inherent worth just like human beings and this value is completely separate from their usefulness to humans.

• They should enjoy the right to freedom from suffering and pain.
• It wrong for society to view them as existing solely for human use
• They have emotions
• Animals have rights just like human being rights .

Paragraph 2:

Denying animals their rights is based on no meaningful argument but prejudice that is conducted by humans.

• It is only prejudice that makes humans to deny others the rights that they expect to have for themselves
• Prejudice is morally unacceptable in the society whether it is based on species, sexual orientation, gender, religion, or race.

Paragraph 3:

Animals are sentient just like the human species and it is only speciesism of animals that makes humans treating them differently.

• Speciesism is the assumption of human superiority leading to the exploitation of nonhuman animals
• Speciesism is wrong because animals suffer when they are tortured

Paragraph 4:

Human rights opponents may argue that animals do not deserve rights because rights should be accompanied by responsibilities.

• This is wrong because animal rights are essentially about allowing animals to live freely
• This is a fundamental right that any creature should naturally enjoy by virtue of being a living being

Paragraph 5:

Opponents may contend that animals do not have the capacity to make free moral judgment

• However, some animals such as chimpanzees at times show behaviors that are truly altruistic
• Moreover, humans do not always make moral judgments
• Animals should have rights because they are living beings with the right to live freely
• They have an inherent value that cannot be separated from them just like humans
• There is no moral ground upon which humans should deny them their rights

Essay, term paper, research paper:  Animal Rights  

Almost everybody grew up going to zoos and circuses, wearing leather, and eating meat. People also visited pet shops and bought and kept their beloved “pets” and even went fishing and wore clothes made from silk and wool. Well, it turns out that while people did not care to find out the effects of all these activities on animals, they were going against animal rights. The debate about whether non-human animals have rights still rages on with some people saying they do while others saying they are non-human and thus do not. This debate is however irrelevant because animals, just like humans, are entitled to fundamental rights.

Animals have an inherent worth just like human beings and this value is completely separate from how they might be seen as being useful to humans. Every being that has a will to live should be able to enjoy the right to freedom from suffering and pain. It is thus wrong for society to view nonhuman animals as existing solely for human use. When it comes to such emotions as fear, loneliness, joy, love, and pain, the same feeling a human being has is the one an animal has. Each attaches immense value to their life and fights to keep it and that is why animals too try to avoid harm as much as they can (Smith, 2012). It is surprising that humans see no wrong in snatching this freedom from animals. Moreover, determining whether a living being has rights or not should not rest on whether it can reason or talk but on whether it has the capacity to suffer. Thus, humans should consider the extent of harm or suffering they would expose animals to before subjecting them to certain acts. This is because the capacity to suffer has more sensitivity and significance as compared to other characteristics such as the capacity to think, talk, or worship. Animals undergo suffering when exposed to harm just like humans do, and can also succumb to pain. They can feel pressure, frustration, and motherly love as well.

Denying animals their rights is based on no meaningful argument but prejudice that is conducted by humans. This is because it is only prejudice that makes humans to deny others, including animals, the rights that they expect to have for themselves (Smith, 2012). Prejudice is morally unacceptable in society whether it is based on species, sexual orientation, gender, religion, or race. It is this prejudice that makes humans to think of some animals as food and others as companions or pets. If a dog should be kept at home for security purposes, why should a cow for instance be butchered for its meat? Society should give similar levels of attention it gives to different forms of prejudices against humans to prejudices against animals because they are not justifiable.

Animals are sentient just like the human species and it is only speciesism that sends humans into treating them differently. Cochrane (2012) defines speciesism as the assumption of human superiority leading to the exploitation of nonhuman animals. Out of this assumption, humans have developed an incorrect belief that they are the only species among all species that deserve to be treated morally. Speciesism is wrong because when animals such as chickens, pigs, and cows are slaughtered, tortured, or confined for their meat, they suffer. Such sufferance is unjustified because morally, there is no reason that creates a distinction between nonhuman animals and humans. The reason for which people have rights, which is to prevent unjust suffering, is the same reason why animals should have rights.

Animal rights opponents may argue that animals do not deserve rights because rights should be accompanied by responsibilities. They may say that humans are granted rights and are at the same time expected to be responsible by for instance abiding by universal laws. Since animals may not be in a position to exercise such responsibility, the opponents feel they should not be entitled to any rights (Cavalieri, 2004). People promoting such an argument are however forgetting that animal rights are essentially about allowing animals to live freely, free from human exploitation and use. This is a fundamental right that any creature should naturally enjoy by virtue of being a living being. It is not like animal rights involve animals coming to scramble for economic, social or political opportunities with humans or compete with them in any manner.

Opponents may also contend that animals do not have the capacity to make free moral judgment and thus deserve no moral treatment. It is for example often argued that animals are selfish in their behavior and are only interested in their own wellbeing and not of other beings. The argument goes on that on the other hand; humans will always offer a helping hand to others even if it means getting disadvantaged in the process. This argument fails to recognize that some animals such as chimpanzees at times show behaviors that are truly altruistic (Isacat, 2014). Moreover, it is not true that humans will always help fellow humans since there are situations in which a person would actually rejoice when another person is experiencing difficulties.

Animals should have rights because they are living beings with the right to live freely as long as they have the will to. Humans are not in a position to determine when an animal should die or what its life should be like. Animals have an inherent value that cannot be separated from them just like humans. They value their lives very much and are sentient and this is why they try to avoid any harm that may come their way. There is no moral ground upon which humans should deny them their rights. Moreover, granting them their rights will take nothing away from humans.

Cavalieri, P. (2004). The animal question: why nonhuman animals deserve human rights . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cochrane, A. (2012). Animal rights without liberation: applied ethics and human obligations . New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Isacat, B. (2014). How to do animal rights . Raleigh, NC: Lulu.

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, 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…