The present study explores the problem of compliance with animal rights. The methods used in the paper include information analysis and literary review. In the first stage, the relevant literature was selected, where one found evidence of the current problem’s topicality. In addition, the current paper will demonstrate the importance of work related to animal rights compliance. The problem is that people use animals for their own purposes and cause harm to living beings. Moreover, the paper will identify the types of animal rights violations and how unacceptable attitudes affect their health and life. Besides, it has been established that in some cases, the violation of animal rights brings additional profit for people but harms beasts. Finally, it was determined that animal exploitation included unacceptable transportation, housing, and feeding conditions.
Animal rights is an urgent challenge nowadays as there are several problematic points. It includes the right to live, eat, drink, and have freedom (Levey, 2002). Due to the inappropriate living conditions caused by the weekly movement, animals are frequently placed in cages or tiny stalls without access to graze or mobility. Besides, animals do not have an accessible approach to food, water, or territory to explore. Animals are illegally killed for meat, fur, and other things one may sell from them. They are slaughtered for sport, tested with drugs and various medical procedures, and for scientific reasons. The failure of animal activists to coerce their enforcement or create legal standing to bring lawsuits against private entities resulted in the fact that circus animals have experienced severe maltreatment. Despite the active struggle, the treatment of animals is a serious problem, which consists of many points of violation of animal rights.
Today, there is an active striving for the proper treatment of animals, despite the difficulties that arise. The idea that animals are wild and aggressive and consequently should not be given any rights and support that may be comparable to those of people has long served as the foundation of civilization (Beverage, 2010). Animal protection critics contend that if animals have privileges, they would be required to perform duties and obligations that they cannot totally understand. Using animals for research, killing them for meat, and maintaining them in zoos and circuses are at the heart of the ethical issue. In addition, how animals are transported and in what conditions they live are of serious concern as well. To save money, the organizers often do not use the total amount of finances allocated for transportation, food, and accommodation in case of a need to move (“The Circus of the Scars”, 2000). Thus, the animals are transported in terrible conditions, do not have adequate food and water, and live in unsuitable environments. All this causes stress, lowers the animal’s immunity and leads to illness or exhaustion.
As society changes, a variety of associations and companies have been able to speak in favor of the introduction of animal life since animals are also seen as living organisms like humans. The main ethical problem is that animals may not fully realize that they are being used. The person is more developed and uses this factor based on one’s capabilities for one’s own purposes. In addition, animals cannot adequately express their feelings or unwillingness to participate in shows or performances (Redmond, 2009). Many people like to visit circus shows, where animals perform various stunts and demonstrate spectacular movements. However, for many animals, the noise in the circus, the crowd, and the flashes of cameras are irritants that cause stress (Levey, 2002). Moreover, this is not a reason to stop the performance, which articulates cruelty.
In this regard, to correct the situation, it is necessary to develop tough measures that would be implemented concerning violators. These may include significant fines, a ban on continuing operations, and confiscation of animals and property (Verburg, 1995). In addition, a special commission should be created to carry out inspections, which would conduct unexpected raids. Such a measure would have a significant impact on the observance of animal rights and would correct the problem of exploitation.
The idea behind animal welfare is that all living things should be entitled to the freedom to live, pursue their interests, and do so without pain or mistreatment. Since killing an animal is illegal, it should be protected and given the same attention and rights as people. Animals are a lower species than people. Hence their rights must be preserved and valued since, as people, they experience pain and suffering as a result of their existence. Despite the widespread opinion that animals should not be maintained in captivity to demonstrate acrobatics for people, certain media organizations continue to endorse circus animal shows (“Abuse of Circus Animals”, 2011). Animals have a prerogative for the greatest care possible, yet they are occasionally treated unfairly and periodically slaughtered for sport, violating their protections.
Initiatives for the protection of animals from being used in scientific investigation and performances have gained traction. The tactics used by the organizations to combat people who violate animal rights range from radical to balanced. The morality of animal testing and animal inclusion in the circus is a major issue as animal advocacy groups expand. In fact, worldwide animal welfare research has come to the conclusion that certain animals, such as elephants and tigers, are inappropriate for living in a circus (“Call for Wild Animals”, 2009). At the same time, animal protection critics assert that animal welfare, such as oppression and torture for the purpose of medical research, is justified. Animals are often the ones that are employed when an illness has to be cured. The area of science will not be capable of progressing if animals are not involved in experimentation and empirical studies. Therefore, people would not use any animals for scientific reasons if they granted animals rights that were almost equal to those of humans.
It may not be in the greatest interest of humanity to use animals for entertainment or to keep them in zoos and circuses in order to generate profit. In such a situation, animal rights take precedence over human interests and desires. In addition, it is feasible to emphasize legislative issues since, periodically, animals cannot obtain medical treatment in the spheres of science and entertainment. Federal laws state that sick animals must receive urgent medical attention and a veterinarian’s approval before the performance; however, this is occasionally disregarded (Nelson, 2011). Wild animals grow best in their native habitats, which is a truth of nature. Consequently, keeping animals in zoos and circuses to prevent their ability to survive naturally at the price of amusing visitors is ethically immoral. Before advocating for legislation changes, the creators of animal rights initiatives should assess the advantages of employing animals in research and entertainment against the disadvantages. Only studies that help people and lessen the suffering of animals should be supported in terms of experiments and scientific testing on animals.
Concerning the issue of animal rights and animal protection, it is possible to state that the public can respond to certain evidence regarding animal abuse and mistreatment both in research and performance settings. The citizenry’s choices to not purchase circus tickets, among other entertainment expenditures, were influenced by the observations and facts of animal abuse (Greenwood, 2017). In this case, due to the proactive work of various organizations and groups, including those that underline animal rights initiatives and advertising programs, people in the average values have access to real information. The society, in this case, makes its decision related to the impossibility of causing harm to animals for all reasons. In general, the community can massively influence the protection and enforcement of animal rights due to the presence of modern means of communication and information dissemination, for instance, social networks.
Since they are continually in danger and have had their rights violated, many animal species are currently in a risky condition. Regulations have been enacted to prevent people from destroying forests or other wildlife habitats. Considering the animals’ entitlements and ethical status contributes to giving them more territory and natural habitats. Some supporters do not view the right as being fundamentally incorrect, which goes beyond simply providing the lab animals additional medication. When done in less-than-ideal amounts, this might make the condition worse. Animal rights advocates contend that creatures have intrinsic value that is distinct from their worth to individuals. People hold the belief that every living thing has a right to a pain-free existence. The social justice movement known as animal rights questions society’s long-held belief that nonhuman animals only originate for human purpose. Exclusively prejudice gives individuals the authority to reject others the same rights that we take for granted. It might be advised that people take crucial actions to eliminate senseless animal cruelty from their lives and to inform other individuals around them.
Having household animals neutered and spayed is one of the possible methods people may contribute to the decrease in the number of animals without a concrete place to live or home. This will contribute to a decrease in the number of stray pets and animals in facilities, which will result in fewer animals being put to death each year. Additionally, highlighting social action and initiatives, a pet’s wellness and manners are improved by spaying or neutering.
References
Abuse of circus animals. (2011). New York Times, 160(55423), 26.
Beverage, E. E. (2010). Abuse under the big top: Seeking legal protection for circus elephants after ASPCA v. Ringling Brothers. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, 13(1), 155–184.
Big-top cruelty. (1995). Animals, 128(4), 32.
Call for wild animals to be banned from the circus. (2009). New Scientist, 202(2709), 5. Web.
Greenwood, A. (2017). Ringling Bros. closure hasn’t stopped advocates from trying to ban other performing circus animals. ABA Journal, 103(8), 1.
Levey, C. (2002). A Three-Ring Animal Rights Circus. Wall Street Journal – Eastern Edition, 239(5), A18.
Nelson, D. (2011). The cruelest show on Earth. Mother Jones, 36(6), 48–57.
Redmond, C. (2009). Circus cruelty. New Scientist, 202(2714), 26–27. Web.
The Circus of the Scars. (2000). Earth Island Journal, 15(1), 15.
Verburg, P. (1995). Ditch the dancing bears. Alberta Report / Newsmagazine, 22(16), 18.