论文部分内容阅读
日前在全社会热议的“活熊取胆”事件引发人们对动物权益保护极其限度的思考,目前取缔“活熊取胆”面临影响我国传统产业发展、法律资源不足等多方面的阻力,但是这些阻力并非不可逾越,从长期来看取缔活熊取胆是应当并且可行的;西方思想史对动物权利多有论证,本文对以汤姆雷根为代表的动物权利论进行批判,而将动物福利作为动物保护与人类权益之间的平衡点,并对我国的动物福利立法建设提出建议。
A few days ago in the whole society, the issue of “living bears and taking bile” triggered the people’s utmost limit on the protection of animal rights and interests. At present, the ban on living bears and bile faces the resistance that affects the development of traditional industries in our country and the legal resources are inadequate , But these resistances are not insurmountable. In the long run, it is feasible and feasible to ban the living bears and gallbladder. In the history of western thought, there is much argument on the rights of animals. This article criticizes the animal rights theory represented by Tom Reagan, Welfare, as the balance between animal protection and human rights and interests, puts forward suggestions on the legislation of animal welfare in our country.