ANIMAL RIGHTS BILL 1 - Tom Regan speaks.

Does the Animal Kingdon Require a bill of Rights. Dr Tom Regan author 'The Case for Animal Rights' opens the debate. Please leave comments and keep them child friendly.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• animals
• human
• thought
• feelings
• thinking
• think
• mind
• brain
• emotion
• Diesel
• Bodine
• Tom
• Regan
• Animal
• Rights
• Bill
• debate

[cochinealake]

Good video, first is important to stop to eat all kind of animals. Just with this decision is avoiding killing hundreds of creature in one human life.

A meat eater can't complain about pollution or global warming, because raising animal for food is one of the major sources of deforestation for give land to factory farms.

[NEUHEITEN100]

What a pity he wont live to see the emanzipation of animals.

100 years after he died people will look back on our society as we look back on slave keepers and nazis.

all spezies will have a equal right to live unharmed and free.

There will be Tom Regan and Peter Singer Memorials...

Its just a long and hard stuggle till then.. but we ll make it if we keep fighting!

[Poldark3]

I am a lover of animals & I believe firmly in a bill for animal rights.The cruelty towards them is sickening all over the world,WHEN,WHEN,WHEN, will they be treated as equals under law,homelife,internationally if you please.

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 4. Also the British goverment has accepted farm Animals are conscious so I don't think their statement that the welfarist don't accept self awareness is true in England.

I think the thing I really don't like about them is when they say things like 'going Vegan' can take you to 'complete non violence' - Complete Rubbish.

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 3. I agree with their moral attacks on welfarists. I don't think they are attacking single welfare acts but more the philosophy behind it. Everyone should be pleased with the end to hunting Circus etc. But groups like the RSPCA have definitly held back Animal rights in the past (although it is now been infiltrated by more aggressive people)

The welfare groups I know of all accept animals as self aware. MTF

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 2.Their philosophy is based (as far as I can tell) on Peter Singers Animal Liberation. This book had no effect on me at all. True Animal Rights Philosophy started for me with Regans 'The case for Animal Rights,' everyone in the world should read this book. It's a much stronger position because it is put across form a Human position. Regan states that any qualities in Humans that give rise to rights must logically be extended to Animals if they posses the same qualities MTF

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 1. I don't like the statement 'Moral Baseline' when refering to veganism. The Abolitionist's morality is based on any creature that 'be sentient' and have 'cognitive awareness'. Veganism is the action to be taken to realise this morality. That makes sense.

You can't make the act of Veganism a moral philosopy it is a response, not a thought process.

You fall down a well. You have a right to live so my response is to throw a rope.and haul you out. The rope is not moral. MTF

[TheTvrulesthenation]

conn6m

As i keep saying please refer to Gary Franciones online articles at Abolitionist approach.com, you'll get a full read (rather than 250 characters) & it much better explained + no tennis match debates.

I don't really understand however how you thought my last message correlated to hunting as morally acceptable?

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 'Veganism should be the moral baseline...' How do you justify that statement?. As far as I know the moral baseline is Dr Tom Regans philosophy. This philosophy is not all encompassing and Regan only says we should give the Animals not covered the benefit of the doubt. So how can you justify this emotive word 'Murder' in this case?. Also, does this mean that as a Vegan I can now go out and indulge my passion for hunting. I promise I won't eat what I kill.

[TheTvrulesthenation]

conn6m

You misread me, as i said veganism should be the moral baseline most people care about animals & get stressed when they see slaughter videos etc they don't want to be part of all this murder for food & such. Of course very few will go vegan straight out, so we should encourage people to eat less meat etc but show them how veganism is the only consistent ethical model. But we shouldn't be so pessimistic as to say ''oh well not many will go vegan so lets promote welfarism''

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 4. The problem I see with purists is that they isolate themselves from people, They have nothing to do with people who eat meat and don't empathize with them, There are a lot of examples of this on you tube. You get statements like 'The Human race should be destroyed with Atomic Bombs' or 'dosn't deserved to survive'. Well; I don't want to be part of those thought patterns.

[conn6m]

@TheTvrulesthenation 3. When I was at University I was engaged in a debate on Animal rights with a group from the socialist workers party (they lost). In that situation I argued pure Animal rights because it was appropriate to do so,

What I do not like above anything else is suffering, whether in Humans or Animals. If Suffering can be alleviated or reduced in any way possible, by any argument, then I will use it. MTF