The article talks about animal rights

The article talks about animal rights. The source illustrates both argument, for and against, in his article. The writer starts by explaining the meaning of animal rights, which includes no experimenting, breeding, killing animals and no zoos or using animals for entertaining. The people for animal rights suggest that both human beings and adult mammals cast rights because they atomic number 18 both subjects-of-a-life. On the other hand, the people against animal rights argue that animals dont think, not conscious. Also animals these people argue that animals were put on earth to deal human beings.This view comes originally from the Bible, but probably reflects a basal human attitude towards other species. Christian theologians developed this idea St Augustine taught that by a most just ordinance of the Creator, both their animals life and their demise are subject to our use. They also argue that animals dont bedevil souls as Christian theologians used to teach that only be ing with souls be ethical consideration. In addition, animals dont behave morally and are not the members of the moral community.The arguments goes, why should human beings have obligations towards animals, if animals dont have obligations to other animals or to human beings? I agree that animals should have rights. In my opinion, animals are also analogous humans, they should also be given indisputable among of rights and respect. However, I think that the rights should be limited, as animals are not like human. They lacking in the ability to judge right or reproach and may behave immorally. Therefore, if full rights are given to animals, it may be rather ironic imagine punishing a dog for seize with teeth someone in the court.