In text APA references
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. ( 1754). Discourse on Inequality. Paris : GF Flammarion, pub 1992.
Schweitzer, Albert. (1919). Reverence for Life: Sermons. Irvington Pub,1993
The rabbit problem of Australia.(N.D), zhidaobaidu, retrieved Sep, 18,2009 from http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/69851058.html
Twain, Mark. (1835). The damned human race. Farra, Straus, and Giroux, pub 1994
Tuesday, 22 September 2009
APA references
10 Article links APA reference
Bigger Food Chains （N.D）, We make learning fun, retrieved, Sep, 10 from http://www.sheppardsoftware.com/content/animals/kidscorner/foodchain/foodchain2.htm
Campaigns (N.D), simpatico, retrieved, Aug, 29 from http://www3.sympatico.ca/taniah/animal/campaigns.html
Colleen Carroll Campbell, Animal-rights extremism endangers human rights, retrieved, Aug, 27 from http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/columnists.nsf/colleencarrollcampbell/story/0EF04F127D2A29C686257609007E21ED?OpenDocument
Do these like coats to you? (N.D), simpatico, retrieved, Sep, 10 from http://www3.sympatico.ca/taniah/animal/fur.html
Hunting, (N.D), simpatico, retrieved, Aug, 27 from http://www3.sympatico.ca/taniah/animal/hunting.html
Is killing painless okay?（N.D）, Animal rights change.Org, retrieved, Aug, 26 from http://animalrights.change.org/blog/view/is_killing_painlessly_okay
No rights for animals! (N.D), WorldNetDaily, retrirvrd, Aug 27 from http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35022
Rabbit problem costs $206m a year (N.D), The Australian, retrieved, Aug 29 from http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25950157-5013871,00.html
The extreme animal protectionists (N.D), Procuratorial daily, retrieved, Aug, 29 from http://www.jcrb.com/n1/jcrb831/ca380296.htm
Why animals do not have rights (N.D), BBC home, retrieved, Aug, 26 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/rights/rights_3.shtml
The animal rights - Final
The animal rights
In today's society, animal play a very important part in our lives, no matter for the pet dog at home or the tracker-dog for police. However, do many people know that many animals are now being maltreated or even become extinct forms? Based on the “campaigns” and “hutting against animal rights” those two articles there are giving us a clear record that More than 100 million animals are killed each year in the US. Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued in Discourse on Inequality in 1754 that animals should be part of natural law, not because they are rational, but because they are sentient. And just like Mark Twain said "Of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it."（Mark Twain） We need a fully implement law which can protect the animal from maltreated and also need to avoid ecological imbalance resulting by animal extinction.
Every one should have rights, of course it including animals. In article “why animal do not have rights” says Animals don't think and they don`t have intellect so they don`t need rights. However, there was a news said that in United States, a couple was Diverging in their divorce settlements, the reasons was who can have the ownership of the pet. Also in article “Is Killing Painlessly Okay?” said if we kill the animal without pain, that won`t infringe the animal rights. Even if the animal died without pain, but if human hunting them for a large of number, that will cause them become extinct ，then that is infringing animal rights. Article “Does thee look like coats to you?” said trapped the animal in the cage and restrict their freedom, kill the animals and use their fur to make cloth, which is cruel. The human killed animals without restraint also infringe the own ecological balance for human being. For example in 2003 SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) was outbreak in almost Asia. At that time someone guesses, because of the people whom live in Guangdong, China has eaten the animal called Paguma Larvata then caused the avian influenza outbreaks.
We need to protect our animals sensibly, because too much protect them will result in another ecological imbalance. The article “The extreme animal protectionists” was talking about that in American there are six British extreme animal protectionists are use to use different says to attacks one of the British life science company in New Jersey, in order to stop that company to use animal to do the examination, I think it is absolutely ridiculous. The reason we use the animal to do the experiment, just because they are the most similar living beings of human. If we use human to do so, does somebody else could say we infringe the human rights? We often hear that people says “whether we eat meat infringe the animal rights?” Because there are some extreme animal protectionists even think that we should not eat meat, because that is another way of cruelty to animals that was said in article “Animal-rights extremism endangers human rights”. But I got different point of view for this, because human also needs the protein and other nutrients which comes from the meat in order to balance the own health. Moreover, the excessive protection of animals will cause their growth too fast. In “Rabbit problem costs $206 Million a year in Australian” this article said the rabbit in Australia has no natural enemy, therefore they growth too fast. Since 1950, the number of rabbits in Australia from the initial five increased to 500 million, and then cause the Australia government need to spent more than 206 million dollars to control the rabbit problem! The articles of “Bigger Food Chains” said over-protection or hunting animals will damage the animal food chain. For instance, if we are over-kill the mosquito or pest classes that will result birds become extinct because they got nothing to eat. Therefore, we should use the appropriate and rational way to protect these animals.
Animal have rights, also they need to protect by human beings, because they are our best friend. Like Albert Schweitzer said “Ethics consist in my experiencing the compulsion to show to all will-to-live the same reverence as I do my own. A man is truly ethical only when he obeys the compulsion to help all life which he is able to assist, and shrinks from injuring anything that lives.” (Albert Schweitzer）Therefore, we should reduce the number of hunting, and Create a fully implement law to protect them. However, because humans and animals are co-existing, so I do not agree to protect animals will not be able to eat meat such extreme claims. Based on the above remarks we should protect the animal under both of the human beings and animal ecological balance.
In today's society, animal play a very important part in our lives, no matter for the pet dog at home or the tracker-dog for police. However, do many people know that many animals are now being maltreated or even become extinct forms? Based on the “campaigns” and “hutting against animal rights” those two articles there are giving us a clear record that More than 100 million animals are killed each year in the US. Jean-Jacques Rousseau argued in Discourse on Inequality in 1754 that animals should be part of natural law, not because they are rational, but because they are sentient. And just like Mark Twain said "Of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it."（Mark Twain） We need a fully implement law which can protect the animal from maltreated and also need to avoid ecological imbalance resulting by animal extinction.
Every one should have rights, of course it including animals. In article “why animal do not have rights” says Animals don't think and they don`t have intellect so they don`t need rights. However, there was a news said that in United States, a couple was Diverging in their divorce settlements, the reasons was who can have the ownership of the pet. Also in article “Is Killing Painlessly Okay?” said if we kill the animal without pain, that won`t infringe the animal rights. Even if the animal died without pain, but if human hunting them for a large of number, that will cause them become extinct ，then that is infringing animal rights. Article “Does thee look like coats to you?” said trapped the animal in the cage and restrict their freedom, kill the animals and use their fur to make cloth, which is cruel. The human killed animals without restraint also infringe the own ecological balance for human being. For example in 2003 SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) was outbreak in almost Asia. At that time someone guesses, because of the people whom live in Guangdong, China has eaten the animal called Paguma Larvata then caused the avian influenza outbreaks.
We need to protect our animals sensibly, because too much protect them will result in another ecological imbalance. The article “The extreme animal protectionists” was talking about that in American there are six British extreme animal protectionists are use to use different says to attacks one of the British life science company in New Jersey, in order to stop that company to use animal to do the examination, I think it is absolutely ridiculous. The reason we use the animal to do the experiment, just because they are the most similar living beings of human. If we use human to do so, does somebody else could say we infringe the human rights? We often hear that people says “whether we eat meat infringe the animal rights?” Because there are some extreme animal protectionists even think that we should not eat meat, because that is another way of cruelty to animals that was said in article “Animal-rights extremism endangers human rights”. But I got different point of view for this, because human also needs the protein and other nutrients which comes from the meat in order to balance the own health. Moreover, the excessive protection of animals will cause their growth too fast. In “Rabbit problem costs $206 Million a year in Australian” this article said the rabbit in Australia has no natural enemy, therefore they growth too fast. Since 1950, the number of rabbits in Australia from the initial five increased to 500 million, and then cause the Australia government need to spent more than 206 million dollars to control the rabbit problem! The articles of “Bigger Food Chains” said over-protection or hunting animals will damage the animal food chain. For instance, if we are over-kill the mosquito or pest classes that will result birds become extinct because they got nothing to eat. Therefore, we should use the appropriate and rational way to protect these animals.
Animal have rights, also they need to protect by human beings, because they are our best friend. Like Albert Schweitzer said “Ethics consist in my experiencing the compulsion to show to all will-to-live the same reverence as I do my own. A man is truly ethical only when he obeys the compulsion to help all life which he is able to assist, and shrinks from injuring anything that lives.” (Albert Schweitzer）Therefore, we should reduce the number of hunting, and Create a fully implement law to protect them. However, because humans and animals are co-existing, so I do not agree to protect animals will not be able to eat meat such extreme claims. Based on the above remarks we should protect the animal under both of the human beings and animal ecological balance.
Saturday, 19 September 2009
The animal rights (draft)
The animal rights
In today's society, animal play a very important part in our lives, no matter for the pet dog at home or the tracker-dog for police. However, do many people know that many animals are now being maltreated or even become extinct forms? Based on the “campaigns” and “hutting against animal rights” those two articles there are giving us a clear record that More than 100 million animals are killed each year in the US. Just like Mark Twain said "Of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it." We need a fully implement law which can protect the animal from maltreated and also need to avoid ecological imbalance resulting by animal extinction
-Mark Twain-
Every one should have rights, of course it including animals. In article “why animal do not have rights” says Animals don't think and they doesn`t have intellect so they don`t need rights. However, there was a news said that in United States, a couple was Diverging in their divorce settlements, the reasons was who can have the ownership of the pet. Also in article “Is Killing Painlessly Okay?” said if we kill the animal without pain, that won`t infringe the animal rights. Even if the animal died without pain, but if human hunting them for a large of number, that will cause them become extinct ，then that is infringing animal rights. Article “Does thee look like coats to you?” said trapped the animal in the cage and restrict their freedom, kill the animals and use their fur to make cloth, which is cruel. The human killed animals without restraint also infringe the own ecological balance for human being. For example in 2003 SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) was outbreak in almost Asia. At that time someone guesses, because of the people whom live in Guangdong, China has eaten the animal called Paguma Larvata then caused the avian influenza outbreaks.
We need to protect our animals sensibly, because too much protect them will result in another ecological imbalance. The article “The extreme animal protectionists” was talking about that in American there are six British extreme animal protectionists are use to use different says to attacks one of the British life science company in New Jersey, in order to stop that company to use animal to do the examination, I think it is absolutely ridiculous. The reason we use the animal to do the experiment, just because they are the most similar living beings of human. If we use human to do so, does somebody else could say we infringe the human rights? We often hear that people says “whether we eat meat infringe the animal rights?” Because there are some extreme animal protectionists even think that we should not eat meat, because that is another way of cruelty to animals that was said in article “Animal-rights extremism endangers human rights”. But I got different point of view for this, because human also needs the protein and other nutrients which comes from the meat in order to balance the own health. Moreover, the excessive protection of animals will cause their growth too fast. In “Rabbit problem costs $206 Million a year in Australian” this article said the rabbit in Australia has no natural enemy, therefore they growth too fast. Since 1950, the number of rabbits in Australia from the initial five increased to 500 million, and then cause the Australia government need to spent more than 206 million dollars to control the rabbit problem! The articles of “Bigger Food Chains” said over-protection or hunting animals will damage the animal food chain. For instance, if we are over-kill the mosquito or pest classes that will result birds become extinct because they got nothing to eat. Therefore, we should use the appropriate and rational way to protect these animals.
Animal have rights, also they need to protect by human beings, because they are our best friend. Therefore, we should reduce the number of hunting, and Create a fully implement law to protect them. However, because humans and animals are co-existing, so I do not agree to protect animals will not be able to eat meat such extreme claims. Based on the above remarks we should protect the animal under both of the human beings and animal ecological balance.
In today's society, animal play a very important part in our lives, no matter for the pet dog at home or the tracker-dog for police. However, do many people know that many animals are now being maltreated or even become extinct forms? Based on the “campaigns” and “hutting against animal rights” those two articles there are giving us a clear record that More than 100 million animals are killed each year in the US. Just like Mark Twain said "Of all the animals, man is the only one that is cruel. He is the only one that inflicts pain for the pleasure of doing it." We need a fully implement law which can protect the animal from maltreated and also need to avoid ecological imbalance resulting by animal extinction
-Mark Twain-
Every one should have rights, of course it including animals. In article “why animal do not have rights” says Animals don't think and they doesn`t have intellect so they don`t need rights. However, there was a news said that in United States, a couple was Diverging in their divorce settlements, the reasons was who can have the ownership of the pet. Also in article “Is Killing Painlessly Okay?” said if we kill the animal without pain, that won`t infringe the animal rights. Even if the animal died without pain, but if human hunting them for a large of number, that will cause them become extinct ，then that is infringing animal rights. Article “Does thee look like coats to you?” said trapped the animal in the cage and restrict their freedom, kill the animals and use their fur to make cloth, which is cruel. The human killed animals without restraint also infringe the own ecological balance for human being. For example in 2003 SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) was outbreak in almost Asia. At that time someone guesses, because of the people whom live in Guangdong, China has eaten the animal called Paguma Larvata then caused the avian influenza outbreaks.
We need to protect our animals sensibly, because too much protect them will result in another ecological imbalance. The article “The extreme animal protectionists” was talking about that in American there are six British extreme animal protectionists are use to use different says to attacks one of the British life science company in New Jersey, in order to stop that company to use animal to do the examination, I think it is absolutely ridiculous. The reason we use the animal to do the experiment, just because they are the most similar living beings of human. If we use human to do so, does somebody else could say we infringe the human rights? We often hear that people says “whether we eat meat infringe the animal rights?” Because there are some extreme animal protectionists even think that we should not eat meat, because that is another way of cruelty to animals that was said in article “Animal-rights extremism endangers human rights”. But I got different point of view for this, because human also needs the protein and other nutrients which comes from the meat in order to balance the own health. Moreover, the excessive protection of animals will cause their growth too fast. In “Rabbit problem costs $206 Million a year in Australian” this article said the rabbit in Australia has no natural enemy, therefore they growth too fast. Since 1950, the number of rabbits in Australia from the initial five increased to 500 million, and then cause the Australia government need to spent more than 206 million dollars to control the rabbit problem! The articles of “Bigger Food Chains” said over-protection or hunting animals will damage the animal food chain. For instance, if we are over-kill the mosquito or pest classes that will result birds become extinct because they got nothing to eat. Therefore, we should use the appropriate and rational way to protect these animals.
Animal have rights, also they need to protect by human beings, because they are our best friend. Therefore, we should reduce the number of hunting, and Create a fully implement law to protect them. However, because humans and animals are co-existing, so I do not agree to protect animals will not be able to eat meat such extreme claims. Based on the above remarks we should protect the animal under both of the human beings and animal ecological balance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
