If animals suffer, feel pain, and seek to protect their own lives, liberty, and the pleasures, like humans, on what basis will continue to deny them protection and rights? What was the basis of homozygous recessive-they enslaved blacks? In December 10, 1948 the United Nations General Assembly ratified the Universal Declaration of human rights (UDHR). The Declaration enshrined the principle that human beings could no longer be treated as mere instruments of the rich and powerful or Affairs of State, but who possess inherent value and must be free to live their lives according to their own priorities in identifying themselves as. ..DOES NOT INFRINGE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. This ratification symbolizes the triumph of humanitarianism in the aftermath of the most destructive war in the history of mankind (World War), at the midpoint of what had already become like most destructive century in human history (XX). The UDHR marked the beginning of a new era in human morality and the rhetoric, that compassion, justice and rights of the human person, finally came to take precedence over the dictates of power. We have to recognize the responsibility on all of us to challenge and overcome human rights abuses around the world, but we also believe that the highest tribute that can be paid to the idealism of 1948 is recognizing the limitations of our own ideals and seek to shape the morality of our own future, in the same way as the authors of the Declaration of human rights in his time. We believe that the future does not belong to the entrenchment and consolidation of ideals of 1948, but their extent. Specifically, humanity is, since you started thinking, LATE at the time to recognize the moral imperative to include ANIMALS (non-human) in the sphere of protection that the Declaration establishes. A part already recognized that animals are not instruments of desire or willingness-and that the reality of non-humans to feel pleasure and pain, happiness and suffering, obliges all recognize that moral limits should apply to the processing of non-humans, as sure as the humans. The attribution of moral and legal rights for animals, and his consecration in a United Nations Declaration of the rights of animals is the logical and inevitable progression this principle. Dont accept any justification of the exploitation or oppression in the name of science or sport, or for use as food, for profit or for other purposes. I believe in evolutionary kinship and morale of all animals and declare my conviction that all sentient beings have rights to life, to liberty and to the natural pleasure. The exploitation of animals by humans is so deeply rooted in human culture of this century, as the exploitation of our fellow human beings was in the last century, but that unfortunately still continues. The irrational human assumption that animals cannot have rights because we havent given them rights belongs to the past. Must see the truth with an open mind, and in full awareness that the future always belonged to those with the courage and the vision to question the received wisdom of his day. The differences between homo sapiens and other animals is an evolution that teaches us who we are, on a fundamental level, connected by deep similarities. Genetically nearly indistinguishable from our closest Primate relatives, humans are not the pinnacle of evolution, but a small branch in your big tree. The lesson of evolution is that we must expect similarities between humans and non-humans in almost all aspects. It is impossible to assume that the animals are mere machines, computer programs, chemical reactions, or bundles of instinct and reflex: can flourish in freedom or languish under the oppression, as we do. Humanity cannot take refuge in his own ignorance. The animals may not be able to express their interests in human language, or explicitly claim their rights, but the absence of their interests is out of the question. All animals seek to protect their own lives, preserve their freedom, seek what gives them pleasure and avoid giving them displeasure or pain-IE-living their lives according to their own priorities. More than that, the animals have distinct characteristics and express themselves as individuals. In all these respects, they are similar to humans, however much the details of their lives may be different from ours. If animals suffer, feel pain, and seek to protect their own lives, liberty, and the pleasures, like humans, on what basis will continue to deny them the protection and rights? The unreasonable claim that animals lose the privilege of rights because they do not have our intelligence, our emotional links or our sense of morality, or because they cannot accept the responsibilities of the members of society. Many humans also do not have these qualities: the very young, or those who suffer from mental disabilities as a result of illness, disability, or congenital lesion. It is true that humanity has a special responsibility to those who are unable to reap the benefits of full participation in society, and who are unable to defend their own interests effectively. Have been denied rights to animals not because of any significant or relevant distinction between human and non-human, but for the same reason that humans continue to be enslaved. Because assigning them rights to animals threatens the EXORBITANT PROFITS of those in power (corporations and the WISHY-WASHY). Human rights were won at the expense of the privileges of the rich and powerful, and in the face of their resistance. The source of resistance to this emancipation of animals is not the reason or justice, but the false notion of self-interest. Ultimately, animal rights threaten freedom of some humans to use them as they see fit, or to promote their own particular purpose. In the arguments against animal rights do not reside logical or ethical grounds. The claim that the human affairs exist in isolation from all other living thing on Earth is no longer sustainable. The evolution teaches not arrogance, but the humility, and the greatest follies of our technological century serve to reinforce the lesson that the natural world is not property nor servant of anybody. The challenge for the human society is reset the understanding of progress in such a way that the recognition and protection of the rights of animals is much more than a meter of the level of civilization, as was the recognition and protection of the rights of human beings.
Posted on: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 00:29:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015