There has been an ongoing debate on whether it is logical to have animal rights or not. You can either say that animal rights is foolish because animals are not developed enough to understand human behavior and they do not experience the same struggles as humans, therefore, they should not be given the same rights. On the other hand, one who supports animal rights, might say that animals should be given rights because even though they may not have the same human experiences, they do experience physical pain, emotion, and stress. They are still living beings, which makes it our responsibility to preserve the welfare of animals. Well what do you think? In Jeremy Rifkin's article "A Change of Heart about Animals", he discusses how animals are not so different from humans, they crave affection, form relationships,
…show more content…
Lastly, he concludes his article questioning the morality of animal testing and animal captivity, suggesting that we should be advocating on giving animals equal consideration, considering that they have the same basic abilities just like humans, for example, pain and emotions, are as important to our ecosystem just like every other human being living on this planet. I acknowledge that Rifkin’s argument is very true but I also believe that it is flawed at the same time. In all of the examples that Rifkin gives in his article only accounts for maybe less than 1 percent of the animal population that possesses these unusual traits. Not all animals can understand sign language or is able to fashion a tool out of a wire stick. Instead, I thought that he should have focused more on common, everyday scenarios that affects society as a whole, such as human and animal relationships as pets, keystone species, and the effects that animals have on
Lastly, he concludes his article questioning the morality of animal testing and animal captivity, suggesting that we should be advocating on giving animals equal consideration, considering that they have the same basic abilities just like humans, for example, pain and emotions, are as important to our ecosystem just like every other human being living on this planet. I acknowledge that Rifkin’s argument is very true but I also believe that it is flawed at the same time. In all of the examples that Rifkin gives in his article only accounts for maybe less than 1 percent of the animal population that possesses these unusual traits. Not all animals can understand sign language or is able to fashion a tool out of a wire stick. Instead, I thought that he should have focused more on common, everyday scenarios that affects society as a whole, such as human and animal relationships as pets, keystone species, and the effects that animals have on