Why protection for the animals? That’s not the question, the question is: why we need to protect them? Who hurts the animals? Yes, the answer is US, I don’t know why, but the human need to saw more important than others, I think thats the reason, why many of us damage the animals.
But, some people know this, and they expect to make a change, that’s the reason I make this essay, to promote the animal protection.
Animal protectionism is a position within the animal rights movement that favors incremental change in pursuit of non-human animal interests. It is contrasted with abolitionism, the position that human beings have no moral right to use animals, and ought to have no legal right, no matter how the animals are treated.
Animal protectionists agree with abolitionists that the animal welfare model of animal protection—whereby animals may be used as food, clothing, entertainment and in experiments so long as their suffering is regulated—has failed ethically and politically, but argue that its philosophy can be reformulated. Robert Garner of the University of Leicester, a leading academic protectionist, argues that animal use may in some circumstances be justified, though it should be better regulated, and that the pursuit of better treatment and incremental change is consistent with holding an abolitionist ideology. Gary Francione, professor of law at Rutgers School of Law-Newark and a leading abolitionist, calls this approach "new welfarism." He regards it as counter-productive because it wrongly persuades the public that the animals they use are being treated kindly, and that continued use is therefore justifiable. Francione regards the abolitionist position as the only one that can properly be called animal rights.
Animal rights advocates propose that animals be viewed as persons, not property.[
Animal rights, is the idea that the most basic interests of non-human animals should be afforded the same...