Animal Rights v. Human Rights

My Comment: This is the second such incident in the recent past when a zoo exhibit has been killed to save a human life. Yes, it is correct that a person or an animal can be killed to save an innocent life: in this case it was just a four year old kid.

But the bigger question is what are animal rights vis-à-vis human rights. Humans kill animals for food even though they can well live on just vegetables, grains and fruits. What’s the use of having a mind if it can’t be used for self-restraint! Humans are not constraint by their instincts. But they act even worse than animals. They kill animals not only for satisfying hunger but also for deriving pleasure from food. They kill them, cook them, garnish them, convert them into dishes, prepare their menus, and sell them on internet. Is this what we call humanity! I think the animals act far better. They never kill humans if they have alternative preys. They don’t kill till they are hungry or frightened. They work only by instinct, not for pleasure derived from the application of mind. There should be a strict ban on non vegetarian food for pleasure — and a country like France should be banished for having a tagline that each chicken has the right to be served on the dinner plate of a Frenchman; how convenient!

I think there should be a complete restraint on the zoos as well. If the humans want to watch animals, they should do so in the animals’ natural habitat. They should cage themselves while watching animals rather than caging the animals in zoos.

About the Author

Ankur Mutreja
Ankur Mutreja is an advocate-cum-writer, and his blogs are amongst his modes of expression. He has also authored six books: "Kerala Hugged"; "Light: Philosophy"; "Flare: Opinions"; "Sparks: Satire and Reviews"; "Writings @ Ankur Mutreja"; and "Nine Poems"; which can be downloaded free from the links on the top menu.

Be the first to comment on "Animal Rights v. Human Rights"

Trolls Welcomed :-)

%d bloggers like this: