The Universal Declaration of Animal Rights (eng . Universal Declaration on Animal Rights, Udar) is both the explanation of a project and the explanation of the principle. " uncaged " has taken the fiftieth anniversary of the original Declaration (1998) as an occasion to announce its intention, the objective of anchoring the animal rights in the policies of the United Nations on until the 10th centenary of the declaration Dezember 2048th Since we could not find a German translation of the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights ", we have created a custom. The explanation you can listen to it.
Universal Declaration of Animal Rights (Udar) - 1998 "It is a logical and inevitable step in the development of ethical thinking to attribute even to animals moral and legal rights and these to anchor in a statement the animal rights of the United Nations. "
On 10 December 1948 agreed the United Nations in a General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) to. The Declaration enshrines the principle that people are not treated more before the law or of public order as a mere tool of the powerful or as subjects of the state, but that they have a their own value and allowing them an opportunity to be given to her to live life according to their own needs and priorities that need not violate the rights of others. The establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights symbolizes the triumph of humanity in a time after the most devastating war in human history, in a century, the already devastating become human history was.
so incomplete and inadequate our enforcement of the principles of human rights since 1948, was also, it is the UDHR but the beginning of a new era of human morality and rhetoric, in compassion, justice and the rights of the individual ultimately prevail over the dictates of have power.
We salute those who shape their vision and where the Declaration of Human Rights have drawn up and before the efforts of all those who have contributed to achieving this ideal. We are aware of our responsibility to put the abuse of human rights in the world to question and overcome. But we believe, can we respect the idealism of 1948 primarily from the fact and continue to exist, that we recognize the limitations of our own ideals and try to give the morale of our time and our future in the same manner form as the drafters of the UDHR to their Time did.
We believe that in the future not about the ideals of 1948 to shield against external influences and solidify, but to expand it. In particular, we believe that the time has come, the moral imperative in its holistic approach to recognize and thus also include non-human animals in the protection that is granted by the declaration. Mankind has long recognized that animals not only instruments of our desires or our will, and that to experience the reality of their ability, pleasure and pain, happiness and sorrow, forces us to recognize that moral principles in dealing with non-human life should also apply as in the handling of human life.
It is therefore a logical and inevitable evolution of this principle to award animals also moral and legal rights, and to anchor them in a declaration of animal rights through the United Nations. Therefore we are presenting below such a Universal Declaration of animal rights before:
The differences between Homo sapiens and other animals are manifold, but evolution teaches us that we, on a basic Level, are linked by profound similarities with each other. hardly be distinguished genetically from our closest relatives, the primates, we humans are not the top, but only a small branch in the great tree of evolution.
Evolution teaches us to count on in almost every respect to the similarities between human and nonhuman life forms.
Teaching Science as well as the experience that we can not assume more that mere animals or machines, only instinct and reflex control: they thrive in freedom or languish in oppression, as we are. We can no longer take refuge in ignorance.
animals may not be able to express their interests in our language or their rights with us. But that they have interests and needs is beyond question. All the animals try to protect their lives to preserve their freedom to seek, what gives them pleasure and avoid what will cause them pain and resentment - in short, to live their lives according to their own priorities. Moreover, animals possess and display characteristics that distinguish them as individuals and they differ from their peers. In all these respects they are similar to humans, as strong as their way of life in detail and may differ from ours. If animals suffer pain and trying to get their lives to protect their freedom and their joys, as we do, on what basis we can then continue to deny them the protection of their rights - the rights that protect our lives, our freedom and pleasure?
It is claimed that animals is not entitled to rights because they lack our intelligence, our capacity for emotional bonds, or our sense of morality, or because they assume obligations and be able to do what is expected of members of a society is. While few would deny that almost all people have these skills to a much greater degree than animals, was never justified, however, why this should refuse to protect animals from exploitation or harm. In the absence but also many people in these qualities: very young or those with mental impairments resulting from illness, or those with a disability or injury. We recognize, rightly, that these people no less, but earn even more protection: not the denial of their rights but to strengthen them to take effect. We have become a special responsibility to those who are not in a position to own the benefits of full participation in society and defend their own interests effectively. In this regard, conflicting principles of human and nonhuman beings apply with respect to, therefore, means to make the unjustified discrimination guilty.
animals are not denied their rights because of significant or relevant differences between human and non-human life, but for the same reason that people were also denied their rights and be: because it would bring the freedom of the powerful to sway them grant rights. Human rights have been obtained in resistance of the rich and powerful and at the expense of their privileges. The source of resistance to this emancipation of animals is not reason or justice, but a false idea of human self-interest.
ultimately threaten the rights of Animals the freedom of some people who use their own discretion and thus promote their own interests want. Keep the arguments against animal rights was neither logical nor ethical test because they brought up the rear of an outdated threadbare philosophy.
The pretense that human affairs isolated from all other living beings on our planet is not considered and thus can be acted differently, no longer viable. Evolution teaches us not arrogance, but humility, and the great follies of our technological century serve to reinforce the lesson that the world around us, neither our property nor do there, to serve us. Also, the further pretext that the exclusion of other types of benefits of compassion and justice can be justified by our status as the dominant species is untenable. Power is no longer the measure of moral value. That is the lesson of our age.
Just as the drafters of the UDHR in both the long-established philosophical tradition of the Enlightenment as a reaction to the atrocities during the first half of the 20th Century acted, were also the authors of the Declaration of animal rights both by the humanist philosophical tradition but also by the unprecedented nature and extent of animal exploitation at the end of the 20th Century motivated.
Factory farming, the destruction of the natural environment and the introduction of novel scientific techniques such as cloning and xenotransplantation represent the abuse of animals and the interests of animals in a way that was unthinkable a half century ago. The juxtaposition of the recognition of human rights on the one hand, and the institutionalized abuse and exploitation of animals on a global scale on the other hand, represents an ethical challenge that can not be ignored and which, we believe the development of morality and necessarily determine the civilization in the coming century.
The declaration of animal rights is both the explanation a project as well as the declaration of the principle. We have noted the fiftieth anniversary of the original declaration as an occasion to announce our intention, the objective of anchoring the animal rights in the policies of the United Nations on until the 10th centenary of the declaration to achieve Dezember 2048th Human society must be challenged to define their understanding of progress to be innovative in that it recognition and protection of animal rights as a barometer of the maturity of our culture such as the recognition and protection of human rights. The development of human civilization, its principles and its practice will not end with the twentieth century: the citizens the next century, the children and young people of today will work out the moral progress of their time just as we have defined our own. The future belongs to them, but it begins with us. Today.
On 10 December 1948 agreed the United Nations in a General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) to. The Declaration enshrines the principle that people are not treated more before the law or of public order as a mere tool of the powerful or as subjects of the state, but that they have a their own value and allowing them an opportunity to be given to her to live life according to their own needs and priorities that need not violate the rights of others. The establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights symbolizes the triumph of humanity in a time after the most devastating war in human history, in a century, the already devastating become human history was.
so incomplete and inadequate our enforcement of the principles of human rights since 1948, was also, it is the UDHR but the beginning of a new era of human morality and rhetoric, in compassion, justice and the rights of the individual ultimately prevail over the dictates of have power.
We salute those who shape their vision and where the Declaration of Human Rights have drawn up and before the efforts of all those who have contributed to achieving this ideal. We are aware of our responsibility to put the abuse of human rights in the world to question and overcome. But we believe, can we respect the idealism of 1948 primarily from the fact and continue to exist, that we recognize the limitations of our own ideals and try to give the morale of our time and our future in the same manner form as the drafters of the UDHR to their Time did.
We believe that in the future not about the ideals of 1948 to shield against external influences and solidify, but to expand it. In particular, we believe that the time has come, the moral imperative in its holistic approach to recognize and thus also include non-human animals in the protection that is granted by the declaration. Mankind has long recognized that animals not only instruments of our desires or our will, and that to experience the reality of their ability, pleasure and pain, happiness and sorrow, forces us to recognize that moral principles in dealing with non-human life should also apply as in the handling of human life.
It is therefore a logical and inevitable evolution of this principle to award animals also moral and legal rights, and to anchor them in a declaration of animal rights through the United Nations. Therefore we are presenting below such a Universal Declaration of animal rights before:
- Given the numerous evidence that many animal species in are able to sense emotions, we condemn in the strongest terms that our fellow creatures inflicted suffering and their needs will be trimmed, unless this happens to own their benefits.
- It is unacceptable that only a difference in the way (just as a difference in the race) the wanton exploitation and oppression in the name of science and sport and the use for food, commercial profit or for other human purposes justified.
- We believe in the evolutionary and moral kinship of all animals and believe that all sentient beings have a right to life, liberty and have natural joy.
- We therefore call for the protection of these rights.
The differences between Homo sapiens and other animals are manifold, but evolution teaches us that we, on a basic Level, are linked by profound similarities with each other. hardly be distinguished genetically from our closest relatives, the primates, we humans are not the top, but only a small branch in the great tree of evolution.
Evolution teaches us to count on in almost every respect to the similarities between human and nonhuman life forms.
Teaching Science as well as the experience that we can not assume more that mere animals or machines, only instinct and reflex control: they thrive in freedom or languish in oppression, as we are. We can no longer take refuge in ignorance.
animals may not be able to express their interests in our language or their rights with us. But that they have interests and needs is beyond question. All the animals try to protect their lives to preserve their freedom to seek, what gives them pleasure and avoid what will cause them pain and resentment - in short, to live their lives according to their own priorities. Moreover, animals possess and display characteristics that distinguish them as individuals and they differ from their peers. In all these respects they are similar to humans, as strong as their way of life in detail and may differ from ours. If animals suffer pain and trying to get their lives to protect their freedom and their joys, as we do, on what basis we can then continue to deny them the protection of their rights - the rights that protect our lives, our freedom and pleasure?
It is claimed that animals is not entitled to rights because they lack our intelligence, our capacity for emotional bonds, or our sense of morality, or because they assume obligations and be able to do what is expected of members of a society is. While few would deny that almost all people have these skills to a much greater degree than animals, was never justified, however, why this should refuse to protect animals from exploitation or harm. In the absence but also many people in these qualities: very young or those with mental impairments resulting from illness, or those with a disability or injury. We recognize, rightly, that these people no less, but earn even more protection: not the denial of their rights but to strengthen them to take effect. We have become a special responsibility to those who are not in a position to own the benefits of full participation in society and defend their own interests effectively. In this regard, conflicting principles of human and nonhuman beings apply with respect to, therefore, means to make the unjustified discrimination guilty.
animals are not denied their rights because of significant or relevant differences between human and non-human life, but for the same reason that people were also denied their rights and be: because it would bring the freedom of the powerful to sway them grant rights. Human rights have been obtained in resistance of the rich and powerful and at the expense of their privileges. The source of resistance to this emancipation of animals is not reason or justice, but a false idea of human self-interest.
ultimately threaten the rights of Animals the freedom of some people who use their own discretion and thus promote their own interests want. Keep the arguments against animal rights was neither logical nor ethical test because they brought up the rear of an outdated threadbare philosophy.
The pretense that human affairs isolated from all other living beings on our planet is not considered and thus can be acted differently, no longer viable. Evolution teaches us not arrogance, but humility, and the great follies of our technological century serve to reinforce the lesson that the world around us, neither our property nor do there, to serve us. Also, the further pretext that the exclusion of other types of benefits of compassion and justice can be justified by our status as the dominant species is untenable. Power is no longer the measure of moral value. That is the lesson of our age.
Just as the drafters of the UDHR in both the long-established philosophical tradition of the Enlightenment as a reaction to the atrocities during the first half of the 20th Century acted, were also the authors of the Declaration of animal rights both by the humanist philosophical tradition but also by the unprecedented nature and extent of animal exploitation at the end of the 20th Century motivated.
Factory farming, the destruction of the natural environment and the introduction of novel scientific techniques such as cloning and xenotransplantation represent the abuse of animals and the interests of animals in a way that was unthinkable a half century ago. The juxtaposition of the recognition of human rights on the one hand, and the institutionalized abuse and exploitation of animals on a global scale on the other hand, represents an ethical challenge that can not be ignored and which, we believe the development of morality and necessarily determine the civilization in the coming century.
The declaration of animal rights is both the explanation a project as well as the declaration of the principle. We have noted the fiftieth anniversary of the original declaration as an occasion to announce our intention, the objective of anchoring the animal rights in the policies of the United Nations on until the 10th centenary of the declaration to achieve Dezember 2048th Human society must be challenged to define their understanding of progress to be innovative in that it recognition and protection of animal rights as a barometer of the maturity of our culture such as the recognition and protection of human rights. The development of human civilization, its principles and its practice will not end with the twentieth century: the citizens the next century, the children and young people of today will work out the moral progress of their time just as we have defined our own. The future belongs to them, but it begins with us. Today.
______________________
This work by www.tier-time.de is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. The use of texts, documents, audio files and graphics on this site indicating the source of animal-Time eV is allowed and encouraged.
0 comments:
Post a Comment