Cece's Facts Essay

Submitted By CWilliams15
Words: 1110
Pages: 5

Tom Regan and the issue of animal rights affect everyone around the world. He feels that humans in a way can somewhat relate to what animals go through when they are being mistreated. But the one thing I question is how do animals compare to human beings? How can the rights of animals affect human beings in a way to make them feel that they have anything in common? According to Regan, animals and humans do have some sort of connection to one another. But we would have to look deep into detail in the different ways that it can be proved. Regan started an animal rights movement with three goals in mind. He wanted to abolish the use of animals in science, dislocate the use of commercial animal agriculture, and get rid of commercial expert hunting and trapping. When it comes to this point, I would have to agree with him when it comes to the case of animal rights. They have just as much right as we as humans do to be treated fairly. According to Regan, most of us refer to humans as “resources” being that we use animals for food, surgical manipulation, and exploit them for sport or money. If we take more time to realize that animals deserve to be treated with respect it’ll be easier for them to maintain their rights as animals. In one of Regan’s works Defending Animal Rights, him along with others basically give their point of view on the use of animal rights. Throughout his book he broke down what animal rights really were by giving a deeper meaning. He stated that it was more than a philosophical idea, and it was also more than a social-political movement. He referred to it as the animal rights movement, along with a group of advocates they soared to accomplish their goals by getting rid of exploitation one piece at a time. They believed that in order to be more effective, there would have to be more animal welfare-based systems in our society. Regan stated that his view of animal rights is the right philosophy; he backs this up by arguing that his position on animal rights is the best argument that he has come up with. Basically in Defending Animal Rights, he is giving his point of view on how and why we should support the rights of animals. Another one of his works would be Frey on Interest and Animal Rights, it explains the view of Regan and it explains the view of R. G. Frey and the subject of animal rights. It contains Frey stating that Regan’s interpretations failed to show that animals can satisfy the criteria for right possession according to McCloskey’s advances. He states this argument by supporting the fact that he isn’t an advocate for animal rights. He thinks that for Regan to put so much energy into convincing others that animals do have rights is just a waste of time. Regan responded to Frey’s statement by arguing that McCloskey view is inappropriate when it comes to discussing animals. He realized that he had the right to state what felt about animal rights, but it would’ve been more convincing if he came about it another way. Regan compared Frey’s argument to babies and people with mental health issues in order to state his argument. He said that if we still find interest to interact with babies and those with mental disabilities, then we can take the time to see the rights of animals. I like how Regan compared the two and linked it with the use of animal rights, providing a good argument and backing it up with valid evidence. When it comes to using animal rights Regan would do anything to support the fact that animals do have rights. In the journal article Utilitarianism, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights, Peter Singer gives his view on what animal rights mean to him. He stated that some animals are similar to human beings in all relevant respects, meaning that animals have the right to live. Regan responds by acknowledging the fact the Singer respects the animals just as much as he does. They connect in a way that makes them both feel that animal rights are the right thing to aim for when it