Pretty much, yep. Some of it depends on language and what a "right" entails. I presume it entails some level of understanding, which is why you can't give the right to vote to a cat (or a baby human). But, to me it's reasonable to believe that animals (a) can suffer and (b) would prefer to be left alone without suffering, even if the animal can't explain those concepts to me. "I would rather you not set my tail on fire" doesn't seem like it'd require a lot of abstract reasoning capability.
Legally, though, there isn't such a thing as "animal rights"; laws restrict what rights we have to do things to animals. I don't see a practical alternative, since animals can't understand the concept of duties--like a duty to obey the law.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2002-04-29 18:32 (UTC)Legally, though, there isn't such a thing as "animal rights"; laws restrict what rights we have to do things to animals. I don't see a practical alternative, since animals can't understand the concept of duties--like a duty to obey the law.