Question

speach about cruelty to animals

Answer 1

Cruelty to animals must be stopped right now as they are also some living beings who have life and feeling. They must be respected as they way we respect our fellow beings. They must be given a beautiful life to their life's end, if they show a little love they are sure to give you thousandth the love of it

So stop the cruelty against animals and treat them well. The people who ill-treat animals should be punished severely

Hope it helps!
Thank you

Pls mark as brainliest

Answer 2

Cruelty to animals


Domitian, one of the 17 macaquemonkeys experimented on during theanimal experiment in Silver Spring.

Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse,animal neglect or animal cruelty, is the infliction by omission (animal neglect) or by commission by humans of suffering or harmupon any non-human. More narrowly, it can be the causing of harm or suffering for specific achievement, such as killing animals for foodor for their fur; opinions differ about the extent of cruelty associated with a given method of slaughter. Cruelty to animals sometimes encompasses inflicting harm or suffering as an end in itself, defined as zoosadism.

Divergent approaches to laws concerning animal cruelty occur in different jurisdictions throughout the world. For example, some laws govern methods of killing animals for food, clothing, or other products, and other laws concern the keeping of animals for entertainment, education, research, or pets. There are a number of conceptual approaches to the issue of cruelty to animals.

For example, the animal welfare position holds that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals for human purposes, such as food, clothing, entertainment, and research, but that it should be done in a way that minimizes unnecessary pain and suffering, sometimes referred to as "humane" treatment.

Utilitarian advocates argue from the position of costs and benefits and vary in their conclusions as to the allowable treatment of animals. Some utilitarians argue for a weaker approach which is closer to the animal welfare position, whereas others argue for a position that is similar to animal rights.Animal rights theorists criticize these positions, arguing that the words "unnecessary" and "humane" are subject to widely differing interpretations, and that animals have basic rights. They say that the only way to ensure protection for animals is to end their status as property and to ensure that they are never used as commodities.

Definition and viewpoints

Main articles: Animal welfare and Animal rights

Man beating a chained pitbull terrier with a strap. The strap is visible in the foreground.

Throughout history individuals have condemned various practices that they considered to be cruel to animals. Renaissance polymath Leonardo da Vinci, for example, was troubled by the sight of birds in captivity, and (according to biographer Giorgio Vasari) once purchased caged birds in order to set them free.[1] He also expressed anger within his notebooks with the fact that humans use their strength and power to raise animals for slaughter.[2]

René Descartes contrarily believed that non-humans are automata, complex machines with no soul, mind, or reason.[3] In Cartesian dualism, consciousness was unique to human among all other animals and linked to physical matter by divine grace. However, close analysis shows that many human features such as complex sign usage, tool use, and self-consciousness can be found in some animals.[4]

Charles Darwin, by presenting the theory ofevolution, revolutionized the way that humans viewed their relationship with other species. Darwin believed that not only did human beings have a direct kinship with other animals, but the latter had social, mental and moral lives too. Later, in The Descent of Man(1871), he wrote: "There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties."[5]

Some philosophers and intellectuals, such asPeter Singer and Tom Regan, have argued that animals' ability to feel pain as humans do makes their well-being worthy of equal consideration.[6] There are many precursors of this train of thought. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, famously wrote in his An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789):[7]

"The question is not, can they reason nor can they talk? but, can they suffer?"

These arguments have prompted some to suggest that animals' well-being should enter a social welfare function directly, not just indirectly via its effect only on human well-being.[8] In one survey of United States homeowners, 68% of respondents said they actually consider the price of meat a more important issue.[8

Animal cruelty can be broken down into two main categories: active and passive. Passive cruelty is typified by cases of neglect, in which the cruelty is a lack of action rather than the action itself. Examples of neglect are starvation, dehydration, parasite infestations, allowing a collar to grow into an animal’s skin, inadequate shelter in extreme weather conditions, and failure to seek veterinary care when necessary. In many cases of neglect in which an investigator believes that the cruelty occurred out of ignorance, the investigator may attempt to educate the pet owner, then revisit the situation. In more severe cases, exigent circumstances may require that the animal be removed for veterinary