See also: Animals in Islam Christianity and animal rights and Animal rights in Jainism, Hinduism, and Buddhismįor some the basis of animal rights is in religion or animal worship (or in general nature worship), with some religions banning killing of any animal, and in other religions animals can be considered unclean. Congress with the enactment of laws, including the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, allowing the prosecution of this sort of activity as terrorism. Certain forms of animal-rights activism, such as the destruction of fur farms and of animal laboratories by the Animal Liberation Front, have attracted criticism, including from within the animal-rights movement itself, and have prompted reaction from the U.S. Another argument, associated with the utilitarian tradition, maintains that animals may be used as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering animals may have some moral standing, but they are inferior in status to human beings, and any interests they have may be overridden, though what counts as "necessary" suffering or a legitimate sacrifice of interests can vary considerably. Ĭritics of animal rights argue that nonhuman animals are unable to enter into a social contract, and thus cannot be possessors of rights, a view summed up by the philosopher Roger Scruton (1944–2020), who writes that only humans have duties, and therefore only humans have rights. (outside Jainism), and animal-like bacteria (despite their overwhelming numbers) hardly any. Other animals (considered less sentient) have gained less attention insects relatively little Outside the order of primates, animal-rights discussions most often address the status of mammals (compare charismatic megafauna). As of November 2019, 29 countries had enacted bans on hominoid experimentation Argentina has granted a captive orangutan basic human rights since 2014. Some animal-rights academics support this because it would break through the species barrier, but others oppose it because it predicates moral value on mental complexity, rather than on sentience alone. The animals most often considered in arguments for personhood are hominids. Francione, support the extension of basic legal rights and personhood to non-human animals. In parallel to the debate about moral rights, law schools in North America now often teach animal law, and several legal scholars, such as Steven M. Multiple cultural traditions around the world such as Jainism, Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shintoism and Animism also espouse some forms of animal rights. They maintain that animals should no longer be viewed as property or used as food, clothing, research subjects, entertainment, or beasts of burden. Ryder adopted the term -arguing that it is a prejudice as irrational as any other. Īdvocates for animal rights oppose the assignment of moral value and fundamental protections on the basis of species membership alone-an idea known as speciesism since 1970, when Richard D. More narrowly, "animal rights" refers to the idea that many animals have fundamental rights to be treated with respect as individuals-rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture that may not be overridden by considerations of aggregate welfare. Broadly speaking, and particularly in popular discourse, the term "animal rights" is often used synonymously with "animal protection" or "animal liberation". The plaque in this statue of Valluvar at an animal sanctuary in South India describes the Kural's teachings on ahimsa and non-killing, summing them up with the definition of veganism.Īnimal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth that is independent of their utility for humans, and that their most basic interests-such as in avoiding suffering-should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. 5th-century CE Tamil scholar Valluvar, in his Tirukkural, taught ahimsa and moral vegetarianism as personal virtues.