Unformatted text preview: AD07 Josh Moulton November 5, 2009 In this article, the definition of a right was stated. This helped support premises. The premises were that to have rights you have to have certain moral capacities that humans hold, and then that animals don’t have these mental capacities, therefore animals do not have rights. Then the article goes onto explain since animals have no rights, there should be no laws around them. Here this point is strengthened when we say animals cannot commit criminal acts. To support this, the definition of what a criminal act is, is shown. However one of the premises is wrong, which means this argument is wrong. There is a quote in here that compares humans to animals and explains how we compare and what it really meant to be human. The problem with this argument comes from the fact that not all humans hold the same mental capacity that others do. Some humans are mentally challenged; others are just very young in age. Then the question, “where’s the limit” comes about. This is a good question because in age....
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 12/02/2011.
- Fall '09