I must admit I spoke too soon;
In my opinion, animals (as HoreTore stated) animals should be protected against human cruelty. Rights is a bit of a vague term in this case. As far as we know (thanks for all the fish) animals lack the consciousness that humans have. The situation is even more difficult because we don't know any species who have the same consciousness (or close to) that humans have.
I prefer this being tested on humans. If we wish to mess around with natural selection, I'd say that we are responsible. Animals should not be made to suffer because of benefits to humans.*If it's some unnecessary thing, sure, I'd put that in the "sadistic nuts plaything"-bin. But if it's something vaguely useful, then sure. They are, afterall, our underlings, and again, who said they should be given a right against being used in medical experiments?
Generally, I do not see animals as underlings, but just as different beings on this planet. In many aspects, I think their lives to be better of that of humans because they lack conscience. They work in perfect harmony with nature. Stephen Fry once said:
"If you look outside, the only ugly things you will see are manmade. Everything in nature, be it a desert, swamp, lake, plain is beautiful in its own right."
The same goes for animals, in my opinion. Not so much that they have extraordinary beauty (a rabbit with Shopes Papiloma can be quite revolting, but in the sense that they live in harmony with nature, which humans have trouble with at points. I'm not saying we are incapable of doing so, but in animals it is innate, for humans it has to be learned.
This might be my Buddhist philosophy coming up though.
Bookmarks