: This paper analyzes how "animal welfare" is often restricted by an anthropocentric (human-centered) framework and argues that real well-being requires considering both welfare and rights
On the other hand, arguments for animal rights are compelling. For instance, animals have the capacity to feel pain and suffer, and it is our moral obligation to minimize their suffering. Additionally, promoting animal welfare and rights can have significant benefits for human health and well-being. For example, studies have shown that animal agriculture is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation, and that a plant-based diet can have significant health benefits.
is a philosophical position that moves beyond welfare. Rooted in abolitionist ethics, it argues that animals are not property. Proponents believe that many sentient beings—those capable of feeling pain, pleasure, and fear—possess fundamental rights, including the most basic right of all: the right not to be treated as a commodity.
: There are academic studies and research papers that explore bestiality from various perspectives, including legal, psychological, sociological, and animal welfare viewpoints. These studies can provide valuable insights into the complexities of the issue.
Ultimately, the debate over is a mirror reflecting our own values. Welfare asks, "How much suffering are we willing to allow for our benefit?" Rights asks, "Do we have the right to use another sentient being as a resource at all?"