The '''animal rights''' movement (sometimes called the animal liberation movement) is a [[liberal]] philosophical movement which seeks to get [[animal]]s the greater same rights in society; some advocates even believe animals and that [[human]]s should have equivalent rights. Most animal rights activists oppose the practice of using animals as [[commodity|commodities]] or [[property]].<ref name="about.com">[http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalrights101/a/ARtenets.htm The Basic Tenets of the Animal Rights Movement] </ref>Typically, animal rights activists oppose [[hunting]], [[animal testing]], wearing [[fur]], and the consumption of [[meat]]. Many practice a [[vegetarian]] or vegan diet. Some activists (especially those who identify themselves as animal liberationists) even disagree with the practice of owning [[pet]]s and seeing-eye dogs.<ref name="acmain">[http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/21 ActivistCash.com]</ref>
Detractors to the animal rights movement argue that since animals do not have the capacity to make [[morality|moral]] decisions they can not be given the same rights as humans.<ref name="about.com" /> Some opponents even argue that the goals of the movement are not animal liberation, but placing restrictions on the lives of other people.<ref>[[Center for Consumer Freedom]], [http://www.consumerfreedom.com/issuepage.cfm/topic/8 ''Animal Rights'']</ref>
However, philosophers such as [[Peter Singer]] have suggested that their goal is a diminishment of suffering by sentient animals. Their argument is that very few people believe animal cruelty should be allowed, and presumably in most cases this is because they believe that the pointless or arbitrary suffering of sentient creatures is wrong. Accordingly, Singer argues, it is similarly wrong to cause suffering in animals for the purposes of food or clothing when entirely viable alternatives exist. Thus, many advocates say that it is morally inexcusable to consume meat or leather and thereby encourage the suffering of animals, simply because it "feels good" or "tastes good," when there is no need to do so.
[[David Gelernter]] argues: