Defensive Killing Of Nonhuman Animals Analysis

183 Words1 Pages
Abbate argues the liability in the defensive killing of nonhuman animals. She breaks it into three parts. First, the reviews the animal rights position by explaining the granted rights that are “protected against being ignored or violated simply because this will benefit someone else,” the author is referring to human beings (108). Secondly, the overriding the rights of nonhuman animals in self-defense. The author argues that nonhuman animals cannot be granted “those rights will always trump other rights that may be held by humans or nonhumans” (110). Thirdly, theories of self-defense and liability. This means that there has to be some rules “that identifies under what conditions a being’s right to life (or right not to be harmed) can be diminished”