Case Against Pets Essay

Pets The authors, Anna Charlton and Gary Francione, challenged the welfare of pets by questioning their existence due to their rights in the article The Case against Pets. Although people love their pets, the pets are not getting their rights and welfare (Paras. 1-3). Rights are only the protection of interest in which animals have no control over due to the fact that there is an underlying problem that dogs, like most animals, are treated as someone’s property (Paras. 4-6). The only time rights of animals come into effect is when there is conflict between the owner and the chattel slaves, comparable to humans, or when there are economic benefits (Paras. 7-9). As of now people have the right to essentially do what they want with pets, and these pets cannot do anything about their situations (Paras. 17-20). Pets do have one right to have minimal food and water, but are often not treated like a member of the family or a best friend (Paras. 21-24). Animal lives should be treated like human’s in regarding to death and assisted suicide in certain circumstances (Paras. 25-28). Animals that are domesticated cannot live without a human which can cause problems if the animals get abandoned by their owners (Paras. 29-32). If there was a perfect world, captive and domestic animals would not exist (Para. 33). …show more content…
The source was Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation, which was published in 1975. The source seems outdated as animals are treated much different now compared to several decades ago. The majority of information used in the article was probably composed by the authors based on their knowledge in law and their specialization in animal rights. The information given, tied emotions to the audience by comparing their loved pets to their main points. The authors are credible through their expertise in the law field but do not have any other credible sources. The authors used the