Question

it was discussed that animals should be treated the same as humans, that pain is pain, (Peter Singer). Kant, however, felt that humans were of a different order than animals, and so were accorded different duties and moral standing. SeaWorld has been heavily affected by those involved with PETA, shutting down and revising many of their shows. Between the two, Bentham and Kant, who is right and why? Think of an example that you can apply to which you can apply your argument.

Answer 1

I strongly stand by and agree with the concept of Bentham on animal rights as compared to Kant. This is because every being in this world is a creation of God and deserve to live a life of their own without pain irrespective of moral duties. Kant was of the opinion that human beings possess specific moral duties because they possess free will and rationale for the same based on circumstances. It is because of this reason that human beings are considered autonomous while other animals are not as they have no rationale per circumstances.
An example for the same is that we kill animals to satisfy our desire. Perhaps, we must note that the animals we kill are protecting us from other creatures that can possess a serious threat to mankind. Let us consider certain micro organisms whose host is an animal body. If animals perish, then naturally human being is the likely host which would not be good for mankind.
At some point Kant has also stated that our cruelty to animals will tend to increase cruelty among ourselves. I strictly stand by this point as it is quiet similar to that of one given by Bentham.