That's right, animal behaviour: their (and our) natural right.
I don't believe animals should have any legal rights because it would be pointless. I do believe mankind should be forced by law to observe certain standards of behaviour towards them, however, which gives animals "reflected" legal rights, if you like. I expect we would be in broad agreement what those should be.
Yes: ALL animals. If a mosquito is squashed for biting you, or because it is a malaria risk, that's one thing, and we can kill it for our own self-protection; but if its proboscis, wings and legs are torn off while it lives, for idle amusement, that's quite another.
One should have compassion for any living thing one is able to empathise with.
Quote: by Tom:
I stated a belief: I believe that ...Originally Posted by ThisYouWillDo
This bring me back to the beginning of this thread: do, or should animals have rights: I believe man has a duty to treat all animals compassionately, and where laws have been passed to protect animals from abuse, this is a good thing and the laws should be enforced.
This brings up the constant question where this duty comes from? A duty is something we're bound moraly or legaly to do. Who's law are we talking about? who's morals? If it's up to humans to decide it isn't a duty, but your opinion.
But where a formal jurisdicition imposes laws, or where convention applies a moral code to protect animals, then it is to those laws and conventions I allude. I am not questioning their validity.
TYWD