Moral Dilemma Of Inherent Animal Rights Sociology Essay Example

responsible for maintaining a doghouse that housed over 54 pit bull terriers primarily used for fighting and gambling. The evidence of animal cruelty included chaining the dogs for fights, forcibly breeding female dogs, administering performance-enhancing drugs, using training equipment, and participating in Billy nines. Vick was eventually caught lying about directly killing these dogs and received a two-year prison sentence. Over the years, there has been widespread awareness of animal abuse, especially within the film industry.

In the past, animal abuse used to occur during film production. However, nowadays it is more common for such mistreatment to happen off the set or behind the scenes. An example of this is The Hobbit, a popular Lord of the Rings spinoff released in 2012. Unfortunately, this production failed to provide proper care for their animals away from the filming location. As a result, around 27 animals lost their lives because of inadequate cage techniques and unsuitable conditions. One horse even suffered a broken back while on set, and others died while trying to escape through sharp and unsecured fences. Additionally, weaker animals were placed near predators which led to fatal consequences for those confined with their natural enemies.

In addition to the 27 reported cases of sexual diseases, there were multiple instances where unhealthy animals were kept near healthy ones. This led to the spread of debilitating worm infestations among the goats and sheep. PETA was infuriated by this study, resulting in their request to boycott the movie release in 2012. Moreover, we should also consider that animals are exploited for food. Animal abuse has been happening in the agriculture industry for many years, dating back to the

seventeenth century when Irish farmers used tail ploughs instead of manual labor despite it being more effective. The cheap cost of ploughs made them a preferred option and eliminated the issue of opportunity cost associated with manual labor.

While factory farms play a crucial role in the agricultural sector by contributing to food supply, they often prioritize efficient and profitable food production over animal welfare, which unfortunately results in significant issues in animal care and treatment.

In 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture disclosed that there were over 33 million cows, 104 million hogs, 2 million sheep, 9 million milk cattle, and more than 8 billion chickens in the United States. Additionally, animal agriculture in Ohio alone generates an annual revenue exceeding $93 billion. These figures prompt inquiries regarding how factory farms can efficiently attain such large quantities to optimize profits. Factory farms excel at utilizing limited space by confining animals within cramped areas where on-site born animals seldom encounter life beyond the farm.

These living creatures are often kept in unsanitary conditions and given an excessive amount of contraceptive drugs and antibiotics to prevent future bacterial infections. These medications are commonly given without proper supervision from a veterinarian and are often misused and overused, potentially leading to opportunistic infections, altered animal tissue quality, and sometimes premature death. Additionally, it is not uncommon for these farm animals to receive excessive amounts of external hormone replacement therapy in an effort to produce a larger animal more quickly. However, this comes at the expense of animal health and meat quality. Surgical mutilations are also performed to make animals more manageable or to maximize animal production beyond normal physiological capabilities.

In certain

cases, a pore, referred to as an artificial opening, has been created on the cow's abdomen. This pore allows for the direct introduction of food into the cow's stomach or small intestine by hand. The process is comparable to blending food in a blender. The underlying idea is that a person can physically feed the cow more food than it can consume at once, and we can also remove partially digested food from the cow's stomach and replace it with fresh food by hand. This manipulation is done to maximize the cow's digestive surface area and natural movement for optimal growth. These pores are approximately the size of a hoop and often leave the cow's abdomen exposed to external elements. Excessive use of such procedures, which may not provide any essential medical benefits, can increase the risk of infection or intestinal blockage in the cows.

Furthermore, veterinarians typically do not monitor nutrient utilization. Consequently, there has been a renewed concern for the welfare of farm animals in the United States. In order to tackle this problem, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and PETA have collaborated to apply pressure on industrial farms. Their objective is to ensure that proper care for animals is guaranteed through appropriate labeling. These instances serve as examples of mistreatment and exploitation of animals, which significantly influence one's perspective on what constitutes animal cruelty.

Understanding human rights and their development is essential in order to determine the similarities between human and animal rights. It also helps to assess the evolutionary process of animal rights and differentiate between humans and animals in terms of their rights. These considerations raise questions about the

inherent rights of animals and whether they should be treated with higher or equal standards as humans. They also lead to discussions about human stewardship and the responsible use of power over the beings we have the responsibility to care for on Earth.

When it comes to the injustice of rights, our worlds and animals are not so different. There was a time when humans unfairly oppressed others for political gain or power on a large scale. Numerous unjust biases, unfounded perspectives, and even malicious agendas were responsible for tragedies like the Holocaust. The pursuit of profit often leads to humans inflicting inhumane treatment on other humans in various ways.

Sierra Leone's history is marked by a well-documented record of human development and abuse, particularly in relation to the exploitation of diamonds. The issue of human trafficking is a worldwide problem whereby individuals prioritize their own greed over the wellbeing of those less fortunate. The Holocaust stands as a harsh illustration of this injustice, resulting in the persecution and death of over 6 million Jewish people. The rise to power of the Nazi regime in Germany occurred in 1933, but it was not until the surrender of German forces during World War II in 1945 that these injustices were finally halted.

During this period, approximately 11 million individuals lost their lives and more than two-thirds of Europe's Jewish population was annihilated. The Nuremberg Laws deprived Jewish people of their civil rights and citizenship, compelling them to relocate from their residences to cramped ghettos within urban areas. Once confined in these ghettos, many were trapped within the boundaries as they lacked access to transportation or shops. Eventually, they were

transported from the ghettos to concentration camps where they were subjected to forced labor and ultimately confronted death. Sierra Leone experienced a notorious conflict involving blood diamonds which resulted in over 200,000 fatalities and the displacement of over 2 million individuals. Moreover, more than half of Sierra Leone's women endured rape and torture. President Charles Taylor gained control over Sierra Leone's diamond trade and utilized the profits for acquiring weapons.

The rise of actions initiated by him had far-reaching consequences in the constitutional democracy, often resulting in the mutilation of those who opposed their agendas. Dissenters were punished by rebel forces through amputation of a limb, typically the hand, enabling them to continue working as laborers for the rebels. In 2003, Taylor faced charges of war crimes, including murder, rape, and looting. Although he managed to flee into exile initially, he was eventually captured in 2006. These acts of human injustice and moral struggles have greatly influenced our current governance. It can be argued that animal rights and their corresponding challenges have not received fair treatment or resulted in similar policy advancements. Many of the injustices humans inflict upon animals bear resemblance to the injustices we impose upon ourselves.

The primary concern is that animals lack the ability to recognize unfair mistreatment or regulate their behavior independently, unlike humans. Animals also do not have a collective voice or representative, so it is up to humans to establish and protect their rights. Those who act unjustly have a responsibility to govern themselves with fairness and selflessness. Opponents of granting animals equal rights as humans point out the difference in their evolutionary level.

Some organizations support animal rights and seek

to promote rights that are akin to human rights. These groups advocate for limited animal rights and the capacity to take legal measures on behalf of an animal, with a human representative. Furthermore, there is a movement advocating for granting human-like rights to highly intelligent animals like chimpanzees and gorillas. While I do not believe in absolute equality between animals and humans, I also do not object to finding alternative approaches if current practices are suboptimal for both parties involved.

Ignoring the suffering of lower-value sentient beings due to their potential role in food production is incorrect. It is crucial to avoid inhumane practices and show kindness towards all beings, despite our right to raise animals for food. Ensuring that animals are not mistreated and that any necessary killings are done humanely should be a priority. The agricultural industry is currently controlled by large industrial companies.

The shift from numerous farms providing food for the masses to a limited number of large agricultural works that also cater to the masses has led to a concentration of power. This concentration grants a few governing bodies authority over livestock trade and animal care standards. Given that the primary objective of large industrial farms is financial profit, it is legitimate to raise concerns about decisions related to animal housing, care, and treatment. However, unlike other animal rights matters, the complexities surrounding agriculture are not as clear-cut. Activities such as using animals for entertainment or inhumanely killing them are unequivocally unethical. Hence, it appears reasonable to implement legislation discouraging unnecessary animal abuse and penalizing offenders who openly defy policies aimed at upholding humane treatment standards.

Regulations are crucial in discouraging cruel practices,

both intentional and unintentional, in animal abuse within the entertainment or film industry. It is essential to recognize the different roles animals fulfill, including being a vital source of food for our survival. As humans, we have a duty to fulfill our responsibility and safeguard Earth's animals.

As sentient beings, we have a responsibility to care for those who cannot care for themselves. The mistreatment of any being usually arises from greed, and personal agendas frequently result in unfairness. To address this issue, it is crucial to discover methods to reduce the motivation for greed. When the value of a product is determined by its capacity to generate limitless profits through unrestricted manufacturing, individuals with greedy intentions will prioritize production above all else. In animal agriculture, constraints primarily revolve around physical space and physiological limitations.

These regulations have been modified to maximize profits at the expense of animal welfare and humane treatment, even at the expense of consumers buying lower quality food. One way to reduce the abuse of power regarding fair treatment of animals would be to decrease the demand for large-scale food production, which tempts companies to overlook humane treatment in order to maximize production. If individuals were to take control of their own food by consuming more wild game and smaller, less visually appealing animals like small fish or rabbits, or by consuming more beans and legumes, this would relieve the burden on major industries to produce food at such high levels. By reducing the demand for food production at such a high quantity, it could open opportunities for smaller farms to produce food and potentially decrease the non-competitive pricing on food. It appears

that first world countries have prioritized processed food to a certain extent, leading to a negative perception or disregard for alternative sources.

Putting the burden of supplying most of our meat on big agricultural agriculture has led to greed, resulting in the mistreatment of animals. In conclusion, there will always be varying degrees of injustice as long as we live on Earth. It is also worth noting that all beings have experienced some form of injustice caused by humans, whether it is human on human or human on animal. In my opinion, achieving total equality between animals and humans is not possible and advocating for such equality can lead to extreme perspectives that do not benefit life on Earth. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that animal injustice is similar to the injustices we inflict upon ourselves as humans, and we have a responsibility to care for the beings that rely on us to coexist on this planet. As humans, we must not abuse the power we have been given to care for less capable beings.

We should avoid the unnecessary development of animals for pleasure or financial gain.

Bibliography

1. Animal Contending instance Study: Michael Vick. Animal Legal Defense Fund web site. Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: //aldf.org/article.php? id=928. Accessed April 6th, 2013
2. Arluke, Arnold, Just a Dog: Understanding Animal Cruelty and Ourselves: Temple University Press,2006
3. Cahill, A.L. A Window to the World of a Cow 's Stomach: Research workers Cannulate Cattles
4. Available at. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.thelantern.com/2.1345/a-window-to-the-world-of-a-cow-s- stomach-1.89665 # .UWC96aIyySo. Accessed April 6th, 2013
5. Gannett, Jennifer: Reappraisal of Piers Beirne 's Confronting Animal Abuse: Law, Criminology, and Human-Animal Relationships: Journal for Critical
   

Animal Studies Volume 9, Issue 3, 2011

Accessed April 3rd, 2013

hypertext transfer protocol: // hypertext transfer protocol: //www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-hobbit-movie-is- no-fantasy-for-animals-8411487.html. Accessed April 5th, 2013