Animal suffering

Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse or animal neglect, is both the unintentional (animal neglect) and the intentional infliction by humans of suffering or harm upon any non-human animal, regardless of whether the act is against the law. More narrowly, it can be the causing of harm or suffering for specific achievement, such as killing animals for food or for their fur; opinions differ about the extent of cruelty associated with a given method of slaughter. Cruelty to animals sometimes encompasses inflicting harm or suffering for personal amusement, as in zoosadism.

Laws concerning animal cruelty are designed to prevent the needless cruelty. Divergent approaches to such laws occur in different jurisdictions throughout the world. For example, some laws govern methods of killing animals for food, clothing, or other products, and other laws concern the keeping of animals for entertainment, education, research, or pets. Cruelty to animals is not necessarily the same thing as disrespect towards animals.

In broad terms, there are three conceptual approaches to the issue of cruelty to animals. The animal welfare position holds that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals for human purposes, such as food, clothing, entertainment, and research, but that it should be done in a way that minimizes unnecessary pain and suffering, sometimes referred to as "humane" treatment.

Utilitarian advocates argue from the position of costs and benefits and vary in their conclusions as to the allowable treatment of animals. Some utilitarians argue for a weaker approach which is closer to the animal welfare position, whereas others argue for a position that is similar to animal rights. Animal rights theorists criticize these positions, arguing that the words "unnecessary" and "humane" are subject to widely differing interpretations, and that animals have basic rights. They say that the only way to ensure protection for animals is to end their status as property and to ensure that they are never used as commodities.

Before modern biology revealed similarities between humans and animals, some thinkers considered humans completely distinct from animals; the controversy over animal welfare was virtually non-existent. Certain thinkers, however, still viewed cruelty against animals as an injustice. Renaissance polymath Leonardo da Vinci's regard for animal welfare, for example, is well-documented. He was particularly troubled by the sight of birds in captivity, and (according to biographer Giorgio Vasari) once purchased caged birds in order to set them free. Da Vinci also expressed anger within his notebooks with the fact that humans use their strength and power to raise animals for slaughter.

...
Wikipedia