Mapping the world's opinions

About us Style guide Log in  |  Sign up

Animals do not have souls or rights

Animals are lesser beings and do not have a consciousness

Proponents

Context

Enter the background of the argument here ...

The Argument

In both Judaism and Christianity and Islam, animals are described to be subservient to humans. This suggests that they are in fact lesser and their whole purpose is to provide for humans. Animals are also seen to be soulless so that, as in Christianity, animals do not go to heaven or hell. Therefore, Animals are not soulless beings with no purpose, consciousness or rights, furthermore they're purpose is to serve humans. For these reasons it is meant by God for humans to use animals, including for food.

Counter arguments

Although animals are for humans to use freely. If we are not in need of the animals, on the premises that animals feel pain, we should not harm them

Premises

Enter the formal premises of the argument here ...

Rejecting the premises

Enter the technical rejections of the premises here ...

References

Content references here ...

Do you agree?

Sign up or log in to record your thoughts on this argument

Explore the next argument

This page was last edited on Friday, 28 Jun 2019 at 12:11 UTC