People and animals: not the same but comparable interests

“Animal rights are the subjective rights of animals. Animal ethics examines the extent to which animals, possibly including humans, have such rights from a moral point of view. In addition, animal rights are discussed as part of a state legal system”. (Wikipedia)

From the Austrian animal ethicist and philosopher Helmut F. Kaplan

Animal rights in a philosophical context

The prerequisite for realizing animal rights is that one first has a concept of animal rights.
And that is a comprehensible and practicable concept of animal rights.
So far this has not been the case.

There is only such a thing as rough versions of the concept of animal rights embedded in various theoretical contexts.
In my book “Animal Rights: Against Speciesism” I am now developing what I believe to be a comprehensible and practicable basic concept of animal rights.
It is based on the principle of equality proposed by Peter Singer.

No sane person asserts that humans and animals are in a factual sense alike.
People and animals – like people among themselves – have different interests.

It would therefore be completely wrong to treat humans and animals equally because different interests justify and require different treatment.
In contrast to humans, dogs, and cats, for example, do not need religious freedom or the right to vote – because they cannot do anything with it.
And, unlike women, men do not need maternity leave – because they cannot get pregnant.

Animal rights based on the principle of equality

What the principle of equality demands is simply this: Where people and animals have the same or similar interests, we should also take these same or similar interests into account:

Because everyone has an interest in inadequate food and shelter, we should take this interest into account equally in all people – and not discriminate arbitrarily on the basis of race or gender.

So no racism and sexism.

And because both humans and animals have an immense interest in not suffering, we should take this interest into account in humans and animals equally – and not make arbitrary discrimination based on species.

So no speciesism.

We said: The same or similar interests of humans and animals should be considered equally.

In other words: animals have the right to have their interests taken into account in the same way as comparable human interests.
Animal rights are then the sum of the claims resulting from this equal consideration. The decisive sentence that characterizes this concept of animal rights is:

Animals have the right to have their interests considered in the same way as comparable human interests.

 

Helmut. F.Kaplan- https://tierrechte-kaplan.de/

And I think…The cause of all crimes against animals is the perverse ideology of the Carnists to reduce the world to edible parts.
Animals that use us for this purpose may be enslaved, exploited, tortured, slaughtered.
And no one regards this crime as a deprived right because we regard and treat animals as lawless anyway.

For the animals who are our slaves today, life is an uninterrupted nightmare

My best regards to all, Venus

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: