Should Animals Have the Same Rights as People?

Recommend (10) Comments (1)

Introduction

The topic is called "Should Animals Have the Same Rights as People?" while the poll question asks "Do Animals Have the Same Rights as People?" The difference between these questions is significant and, along with the topic description (which has nothing to do with rights) only further confuses an already confused premise, particularly because the term "rights" is so widely misunderstood.

It will be helpful start by distinguishing between moral and legal rights. These two classes of rights are similar in at least one respect: in both cases, a right protects a person’s interest by providing that person with a claim against any party who interferes with the satisfaction of the person's protected interest.

Legal Rights

The law identifies that certain interests ought to be protected, even if infringing upon those interests would serve the interests of another person, or the interests of the greater good. When a person's legal right is violated by another party, then the right provides the person with a justified legal claim against the violating party.

Valid legal claims can lead to various legal sanctions against the violating party, including financial penalties and/or imprisonment. Legal rights are generally codified and enforced by a political institution, such as a government, and they are held by certain entities functioning as legal "persons," such as humans and corporations.

Moral Rights

Moral rights derive from objective morality, not from governmental authority. They can be understood to have approximately the same logical structure as legal rights, but they are not backed up with the same sort of protection offered by legal rights. However, the claim a person has against another party who infringes upon a moral right is no less valid. Violating moral rights can lead to repercussions ranging from a personal demand for an apology to being ostracized by one's community.

Moral rights and legal rights are distinctly different, but they are closely related. We can think of a moral right as an underlying, pre-legal form of a right. Whatever moral rights a being holds will ideally (if not now, at least some day) be reflected in the legal system. For instance, our moral right to liberty is reflected in our legal right to that liberty. As public opinions about right and wrong shift, laws generally evolve along with them. Humans enslaved in the United States before 1865 possessed the same basic moral right not to be used as property as every other human, but this moral right was not reflected in U.S. law until the 13th Amendment was passed.

It is possible for legal rights to clash with moral rights. For example, some animal rights advocates believe that all sentient beings have at least one basic moral right: the right not to be treated exclusively as a resource by others. This moral right conflicts directly with the morally indefensible legal right humans have to own nonhumans. 

Other Considerations

A basic right typically does not need to be understood by someone who possesses that right in order to receive its protection. For example, the interests of children and mentally incompetent persons are protected by rights. Claims to these rights can usually be made on their behalf.

Only legal persons (humans, corporations, et al) have legal rights. The law recognizes nonhuman animals not as persons, but as property. California's Proposition 2 and similar measures do not provide animals with rights. They merely attempt to regulate how persons treat their property.