Anybody can violate animals and exploit them for their fur. Just for the sole fact of showing off that we can afford such an expensive fur coat. That is all it is about. After all, we do not depend on animal fur as we did one thousand years ago. We even have artificial materials that are far cheaper and easier to maintain. But no - people with money e.g. Jennifer Lopez, a successful musician of the twenty-first century, has to wear a real fur coat so she receives attention. If she just likes how fur looks, she could buy an artificial coat. But since animals have no rights, nobody will stop her or anybody else from wearing them. .
Fortunately, there are people, e.g. Linda McCarteny, who think animals should have rights and fight for animals because they cannot voice their own opinion and defend themselves. Just as black people had Martin Luther King as a spokesman, it is our responsibility to consider the weaker and minorities, and give them a voice, as well. We cannot let happen that the more powerful make use of whatever is available to them as long as it serves their majority. This is described as "Utilitarianism" ,in the article "Animal Rights Revisited" by Jan Narveson, established through the philosopher J.S. Mill(51-52). For example slavery; Rich people needed cheap workforce, so they bought people from Africa. .
How practical it is to sometimes ignore morality and reflective thinking. Which isn't this what some people claim makes the big difference between humans and animals-"the ability to think reflective" (Animal Rights, Carl Cohen, 25)? .
Before we consider Carl Cohen's opinion that animals cannot have any rights because they are not able to "think reflective" (27), let us consider the case for animal rights. A well-known fighter for animal rights and member of this animal liberation movement, which established in the seventies, is Peter Singer.
