Morality of Permissibility of Hunting in each of the Three Cases - Assignment Example

It is not appropriate that one would hunt animals for food and fun; the current generation is characterized by myriad ways of earning a living, animals just like humans have the right to live unless they are a threat to human well-being.

An animal rights activist would oppose the three cases; to begin with, it is a cruel act to shoot and kill animals as a means of controlling their populations. Secondly, the essence of game hunting for fun and food may endanger the survival of the animals, leading to their extinction.

According to Singer, the case of Kirk and the case of Howard Stancer is based on fulfilling their interests through hunting. Singer would argue that it appears that the interests of humans in such cases are perceived as more important than the interest of animals to survive and live, indicating a higher sense of prejudice.

However, in the second case where animals are shot to control their populations, Singer would argue based on animals’ rights to live just like humans, terming it as a prejudice towards the respect of the interests of animals to live.