Animals and Humans: Are They Equal?

I. Introduction
A. Even though we have an ethical responsibility to animals, people argue that animals are treated unequally than humans.
II. Position Statement
The equality of consideration that we give to humans is moral equality and should be extended to non-human animals.
A. “Equality is a moral idea, not a simple assertion of fact. There is no logically compelling reason for assuming that a factual difference in ability between two people justifies any difference in the amount of consideration we give to satisfying their needs and interest. The principle of the equality of human beings is not a description of an alleged actual equality among humans: it is a prescription of how we should treat humans” (Regan & Singer, 1989, pp. 148-162).
1. This argument demonstrates that equality is a moral idea and that extending equality to non-human animals is deserving of equal consideration.
2. This argument supports the claim that we should give the same treatment to non-humans as we do to the lives of humans.
III. Supporting Reason
A reason why moral equality is an idea and not a statement of fact is due to the insurmountable issues against the equality of humans because of differences.
A. “Like it or not, we must face the fact that humans come in different shapes and sizes; they come with different moral capacities, differing intellectual abilities, differing amounts of benevolent feeling and sensitivity to the needs of others, differing abilities to communicate effectively, and differing capacities to experience pleasure and pain. In short, if the demand for equality were based on the actual equality of all human beings, we would have to stop demanding equality” (Regan & Singer, 1989, pp. 148-162)
1. This quote argues despite the fact that individual differences exist; equality has no dependence on these differences.
2. Shows that if this demand for equality was based on actual equality of all humans—those demands would have to be stopped.
IV. Opposing Reason
The mission is to show that equal rights are based on the capacity for suffering.
A. “This principle of equality that our concern for others ought not to depend on what they are like or what abilities they possess—although precisely what this concern requires us to do may vary according to the characteristics of those affected by what we do” (Regan & Singer, 1989, pp. 148-162).
1. This information deals with the question and capacity for suffering and shows that our consideration vary towards those affected by our actions and treatment to them.
2. This supports the argument that despite the differences and/or similarities between humans and non-human animals—it leaves us to resolve that all animals are equal.

Reference

Singer, P. (1989). All animals are equal. In T. Regan & P. Singer (Eds.), Animal rights and human obligations (pp. 148-162). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Retrieved from http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/phil1200,Spr07/singer.pdf

Anderson,E. (2004). Animal Rights and the Values of Nonhuman Life.Retrieved from http://rintintin.colorado.edu