Quote:
Originally Posted by LaviniaHyacynth  That has long been an argument between Tom Regan's Animal Rights movement and Peter Singer's more utilitarian approach to animal ethics. I tend to agree with Singer as he believes animals should have equal consideration as opposed to equal rights. THere is a big difference as one speaks to welfare and the other to rights. I have been studying this in great detail as my artwork and graduate school work deals with animal studies...... I am considering getting my phd in animal studies/art. I will keep an eye on this as it proceeds through the courts but it is unlikely that a judge will rule in favor of the dog. It has encouraged conversation which is always valuable and something I aim for in my artwork. |
Good maybe you'll be able to explain it better, but the article I read seemed to have so many drawbacks. Glad you are thinking about pursuing this, I'm sure this area will have so many changes in the future, and I hope the changes will do what we want. I think most of us are more concerned with welfare not animal rights because it sounds like if animals really had rights, we couldn't have pets.
Also, it concerns me that some people would try to control what others are doing with their pets. So many people think it's abusive to dress our pets, others think it's abusive to ever leave them alone.