Protecting Animal Rights

A "sentient being" is any animal that's behaviour is directly related to it's avoidance of pain and/or suffering and it's desire to maintain well-being and happiness. Moral reasoning, is making a conscious decision between right and wrong, and usually only concerns the human race. Although there is evidence that supports that some animals are capable of moral reasoning on some levels. Animals are sentient beings, in that they do experience pain and/or suffering. For example, when a dog is kicked it whimpers and howls. When an animal is cornered it cowers, or in some instances attacks because it feels threatened. Animals feel the cold and heat, and react to these situations. Animals become in a state of panic when they lose their young. Animals care for and nurture their young, proving that there is a sense of family and unity amongst them. These examples which I have provided prove that animals do act as sentient beings and therefore should be taken into moral consideration by humans, who do have moral reasoning. Plants, rocks, trees, etc. are not considered sentient beings because there is no displayed behaviour of pain and/or suffering. Not to say that future evidence could prove otherwise. But as it stands, they are not considered sentient beings and therefore shouldn't be taken into moral consideration by humans. Although plants, rocks, and trees shouldn't be morally considered by humans, they are beneficial to our survival as a species. Destroying a whole forest of evergreens is destructive to the wildlife, and disrupts the delicate balance of our ecosystem, and to a certain extent are protected by humans. You pose two questions that I will proceed to answer. First question, "Why should we protect animals when they are not sentient beings?" My response, is that animals are sentient beings because they can feel pain and/or suffering. Even if they weren't sentient beings like the plants, rocks, and trees, we still have a moral responsibility to preserve and protect these things because it is crucial to the survival of our own species. Second question, "What is the purpose of protecting something that can not decide for them self between right and wrong?" My response, is that a baby can not decide what is right or wrong, a mentally disabled person doesn't have the rational capability of deciding what is right or wrong. You say "what is the purpose of protecting something that can not decide for them self between right is wrong?" The answer is that babies deserve to be protected from abusive parents, the mentally disabled should be cared for properly by their caregivers, animals (sentient beings) should not be tortured, abused, or maltreated by their owners. And the reason why it should be taken into moral consideration, is that we should not inflict excessive pain and/or suffering onto any sentient being that strives to live in happiness. Just because "something" doesn't have the capability of moral understanding, doesn't permit humans who are capable of moral understanding, to say that they don't count, and therefore shouldn't be taken into moral consideration. It is because we do have the capability of moral reasoning that it is our duty as humans to decide what is right and wrong for the future of all other species.