Animals In Jeremy Rifkin's A Change Of Heart

What is the difference between wild animals and humans? Humans live in a world of affection, where emotions and self moral rights matter. In the same manner as humans, wild animals live in a world like ours where they too feel emotions. So what is the correct answer to the question… Nothing in reality, wild animals are like humans. In a very similar matter, they both have common characteristics that relate to one another. In many researches today, it has been proven that animals feel the same effectiveness we have towards them. Studies have shown that animals are more like us than we understand; therefore, they deserve human rights. An animal 's heart is a stream connected to a human 's. In the article A Change of Heart, the author exemplifies different animals and tests based on how they feel toward one and other. He also explains how the wild creatures feel, sense, and can attract its own emotions. Jeremy Rifkin, a political science writer, the author of the article infers, “they [animals] feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love -- and these findings are changing how we view animals” (2). What the author has stated is that with the same moral features animals

Mistreating animals as if one does not care for them is the same as mistreating humans. By mistreating poor doubtless animals it affects them and can sometimes lead into suffering stress. If humans are able to protect each other from harm, then why cannot animals do the same thing by having rights? This question is usefully asked for those who try to protect the rights of animals. In the article Of Primates and Personhood the author Ed Yong, a science journalist, contends, “I feel we should extend rights to a wide range of nonhuman animals… ‘all creatures that can feel pain should have a basic moral status’” (5). Personally I agree with his saying, if animals are allowed to have a basic moral status, then chances are that less harm towards the animals will be