It is claimed, amongst others by United Nations with their principles and the Declaration of Human Rights, that it is reason enough being a human to be included in the moral sphere of regard and being entitled rights. That is to say that human beings have an inner worth that consists of the specific human qualities such as reason, rationality and a moral sense. Animals more or less lack these qualities, and above all it is this fact that has been keeping them and still is keeping them outside the moral sphere of regard.
Through history it generally has been considered there are no moral obligations taking regard to animals interests, and that they should not be ascribed rights on the same conditions as humans. Generally it is considered that animals’ lives and suffering are lesser important than human suffering. But the importance of preventing suffering and death does not diminish because of the fact that the individual who is suffering or killed does not belong the human species. The principle of equality has to be applied to concern every living being. Whether an individual should be given regards is not going to be decided by qualities and characteristics such as the number of legs, the grade of intelligence or the ability of thinking reasonably. What justifies regards is the ability to suffer and feel. These ones are the most fundamental characteristics of living beings. Just like human beings animals have faculty to suffer and feel, and that is the strongest reason to why they should be shown the same regard as humans are shown. So accordingly, animals interests of escaping suffering from animal testing and slaughter should be put before humans’ interests of scientific progresses and of satisfying their taste buds.
United Nations and their democratic societies claim that rights, such as the right to life, prohibition against torture and other cruel treatment, and prohibition against discrimination, will be respected and granted every human, which means that disregard due to sex, ethnicity, grade of intelligence or other qualities and characteristics may not be done. That is to say, UN and its states want to work for promoting of rights for every individuals independent of their qualities and characteristics, but yet they ignore big injustices just by individual- and qualities-related reasons. That is what they do when they do not grant other beings, which are the animals, respect and regard on the same conditions as humans.
Several animals are killed and exposed to suffering for example within the activities within slaughter respectively animal testing. The animals are denied the right to life when they are slaughtered. Animal testing is a form of grave torture since it is expressed in a very similar way; animals are exposed to electricity, are scalded and burned just like human beings have been exposed to during grave torture. FN claims that torture always is wrong and never may occur, but this resitance against torture accordingly intend only when it concerns human beings. Obviously FN is not against the act of torture itself and the suffering it bring about since it is allowed that animals are exposed to painful and tormenting experiments very like torture. This is a form of double standard of morality by FN and its states. If it is claimed that the difference is that in one case human beings are suffering and in the other case animals one has to explain why difference of species can make any moral difference of the two groups treatment. If it is wrong to cause suffering, it is wrong no matter who is suffering. An individuals ethnicity, sex, grade of intelligence and other qualities and characteristics are irrelevant characteristics for moral rights as well as belonging to species is.
Every living being should be treated with equal regard. The world should be a place full of happiness where every being is a friend.