Close? Keys? Words: 8200 words in senior one and senior three.

Words: 8200 words composition

This article is suitable for: senior one and senior three.

Composition source:

This composition is about 8200 words in Grade Three. The topic is "For all animals not to be abused". Everyone is welcome to contribute enthusiastically. Welcome to reading "Composition: Protecting All Animals from Abuse", and "Composition Network" updates more excellent "Junior One Composition" for you every day, so please pay attention!

Bears are those animals. If they are full, they also accumulate enough fat in their bodies. They would rather sleep in tree holes or secluded places for more than half a winter. However, the bears in the zoo have no such choice. They can only eat rations every day, and even in winter, they come out to see tourists every day. Their habits are not important, but for zoos, showing them is the most important thing. The black bear in Beijing Zoo is such an ornamental bear. They meet too many people every day, some just threaten with strange voices, some throw some odds and ends, and many plastic bags that are still inedible. However, they may never think that someone will really hurt them with sulfuric acid and caustic soda. Source: Composition Network zw.liuxue86.com Liu Haiyang hurt the black bear in Beijing Zoo with sulfuric acid, which aroused people's indignation. Many people comment from the angles of law, morality, psychology and education, and at the same time, they regret the injuries to animals. This is really comforting, because it is a manifestation of conscience. However, when we look back on our society's attitude towards animals through the incident of hurting animals in Liu Haiyang, we see more than that. There are still many sad places in the actual practice of animals in our society, and our moral concern does not extend to the friends of human beings. "Liu Haiyang thinks that his favorite is biology. Why did he hurt life instead? " In our education system, there is a lack of love education and animal care education. Many people think that Liu Haiyang's behavior of harming animals should be considered from the perspective of education. In the eyes of ordinary people, Liu Haiyang is a student who received a "good" education since childhood, and his university is even the best university in China. Every school can ensure that he learns technical knowledge. In such a "perfect systematic education", he is a "student with excellent academic performance": for example, he studies well, especially in mathematics and physics. In fact, in an exam-oriented education system, whether you study liberal arts or science, everything becomes concrete knowledge; Knowledge becomes a series of exercises. What do they have to do with the colorful world? What does it have to do with real life!

As long as you work hard to go to college, you are good, and the rest will disappear under this value. The concepts of cooperation and mutual assistance, caring for the weak and respecting life have little weight in this education system, and so do love and goodness. This is not his problem alone, nor is it his parents' problem. The whole society is encouraging such "good students". Liu Haiyang thinks that his favorite is biology. Compared with physical chemistry and electrical machinery, this is a subject that is most closely related to organic life, so why does it endanger life instead? The content of middle school biology class, from plants, animals to people, to DNA, cells, genetic variation and so on. , pay attention to the introduction of knowledge, but lack of equal awareness of the earth as the home of all life, rarely talk about human responsibility to nature and other creatures. Although the latest biology textbooks have the idea of "strengthening the relationship between animals and people", they attach importance to "infiltration education of thoughts, feelings, attitudes and values". However, its specific content still reveals a narrow view of biology and discrimination against animals. Animals are divided into beneficial and harmful, while the value to people is mainly "useful". Even in junior high school biology textbooks, it began to write that "wild ducks are delicious, and feathers can be used as filling materials for bedding and can also be used to make various handicrafts"; "The skins of large snakes such as pythons can be used to make leather and musical instruments, the venom of many poisonous snakes can be used to make medicinal liquor, and snake gall can be made into Chinese herbal medicines"; And "Oviductus Ranae air-dried Oviductus Ranae is a famous tonic"!

In such an introduction, the national wildlife protection law was even ignored. This is indeed an uncontrollable subconscious at work: what is the value of living things if they are not used by people? Let's take a look at its animal experiment class again. Now the animal experiment class in biology class is really a cruel training. Textbooks so easily say "take a live frog or live fish or live bird", "cut its body cavity" and "look at its internal structure" ... every student should cut open a live frog or rabbit with a knife to see how it bled, trembled and died painfully. It is conceivable that at that immature age, students will cut animals reasonably and arbitrarily, and impose knife-like punishment in the middle of the year, so that a completely helpless frog or rabbit will die painfully in front of their eyes. Why is it easier to treat animals as tools rather than respectable life in biology class? I once heard a biology teacher in a middle school say that he had done a spinal fracture experiment in rabbits, that is, cut off the rabbit's head and see how its nerves beat. I think it's more like slaughter training. The so-called knowledge you get by twisting the rabbit's neck can be obtained by common sense. You don't need to ruin a rabbit's life to prove it. If this is an experiment, how many innocent animals do people have to kill to verify it? Does every generation have to do experiments that have long become common sense to kill animals? How sacred the word "science" is, it is reasonable for a thing to be called "scientific experiment". In the name of scientific experiments, it seems justified for people to cut and destroy life at will. Many institutionalized tortures on animals, in the name of scientific experiments, are gradually getting used to by people. In today's society, how many abused animal experiments are unnecessary and how many are excessive and meaningless? In some so-called experiments, various animals are forced to endure terrible pain to verify extremely boring results, such as forcing small animals to swallow lipstick, paint, detergent, synthetic essence and so on, until they can't stand it, and most of them die. Of course, not all animal experiments are unnecessary, but we should be very cautious when using animal experiments, pay attention to the suffering of animals, and pay attention to people's unfair mentality towards animals. There should also be laws and various measures to strictly limit the number and methods of animal experiments. In fact, most animal experiments can find alternative methods, without wasting many animals' lives or even taking animals seriously. Liu Haiyang argued that he burned the black bear with caustic soda and sulfuric acid for experiments. Of all the excuses that can excuse yourself, doing experiments is the most "reasonable" reason. In class, isn't it reasonable and legal for everyone to hurt animals? At least he wants to win some sympathy or legitimacy for himself. Is there any connection worth reflecting on? Assuming that Liu Haiyang really studied biology, what kind of experiments would he legally do with animals in this secret corner of the laboratory? "Doing so-called experiments with living animals in middle schools is harmful to students' minds, not nourishing health. "People have many ways to learn, depending on how they look at the world. If you think that everything in the world can be used by people and that people are the center and master of all living things, you will ignore the value of other lives and take it for granted that you will abuse and hurt other creatures with low abilities at will. If we regard ourselves as a member of the same life on earth, we will find that many of our practices are worth reviewing. For example, doing so-called experiments with small animals in middle school is an inhuman design, which is a kind of harm to students' minds, rather than a healthy nutrition. Even some students have realized this. However, our education system and adult teachers are not reflected. A student from a middle school affiliated to a famous university made many representations with the school and the teacher because he opposed this cruel experimental class, pleading with the teacher not to hurt the frog, or to divide into groups and dissect a frog together, instead of a person. However, she didn't succeed in persuading, so she decided to refuse to go to school that day. This is the first time she has dropped out of school all semester. I don't know whether her courage has attracted attention or become a truly meaningful obstacle to the next similar experimental class, but I am really proud of the love and courage of this middle school student. She doesn't bully because her life is weak, and she doesn't do it because she is so small. At present, many countries have cancelled live animal experiments in primary and secondary schools. This is the result of environmental ethics and moral progress in recent decades. Biology has been established for many years and has written thousands of books. There are still various models, maps and audio-visual networks to learn. However, under the slogan of "catching up with the experimental level of developed countries", we should try our best to set up living animal experiments. Indeed, in the past history, some western countries have carried out countless experiments to kill animals. However, with the strong impact of animal protection philosophy and bioethics, the actual resistance of animal welfare organizations has been greatly recognized, and the savage animal experiment course in middle schools has been gradually cancelled, replaced by observing the life of animals in natural habitats or dissecting animal carcasses to learn. Why do we have to do cruel experiments that are being abolished by others? What knowledge should I learn from torturing animals in middle school? Perhaps, what we need to catch up with is not the experimental level of biology class, but other things, such as the attitude towards animal life. When Wen Shilin, a pioneer of environmental protection in Hong Kong, recalled how he embarked on the road of protecting nature, his biology teacher, his former biology professor, came to mind first. This foreign teacher is his first leader who cares about nature. On one occasion, they went to the coast of Hong Kong for a coastal ecological survey. Standing in the mud at low tide, the teacher told the students who were looking for biological samples: You can take them up for observation, but you should put them back when you are finished, because they belong here. We are observers of nature and should not destroy or disturb the balance of nature. Standing in the mud, the barefoot teacher has been guiding his students to live a life of respecting life and caring for nature. I am convinced that this is education. Learn to be kind to nature and animals. No one is born with this attitude. "Not only zoo animals, but almost all animals-domestic animals and wild animals-depend on people's behavior and ideas." Education does not exist in isolation. What kind of knowledge and atmosphere a society has about nature and life will be shown in education. If we want to "analyze Liu Haiyang", we should also analyze our society's attitude towards animals. Let's say the zoo. The so-called black bear garden, tens of square meters in size, is completely underground, paved with cement, cement floor and cement fence. They have nowhere to hide, so malicious tourists can easily hurt them. This is naturally built for people's ornamental needs, and it is designed with people as the center, without considering the interests of animals at all. It can be said that this is the problem of captive zoos. Everything is based on the convenience of people. Animals are people's ornamental objects and slaves of people's desires and wills. In the hottest summer, the maximum heat energy of street surface temperature in Beijing reaches about 50℃. There is not a tree or a grass in the bear garden, which is made entirely of cement. Black bears can only hide in the shadows under high walls. 1995 that summer afternoon, I saw two black bears there, curled up and half lying by the wall, panting painfully with their mouths open, and it was uncomfortable to look at them. How many summers can they survive? Not to mention the harm caused by tourists feeding garbage, plastics and various wastes. The experience of black bears is not a case in zoos, and Beijing Zoo is not a particularly bad example in zoos everywhere. Unfairness to animals is common in zoos all over the country. People-centered animal life design seriously limits people's consideration of the basic interests of animals. Reinforced concrete cages are not suitable for animal nature. Small space and constant fear of tourists make animals unable to get basic rest physically and psychologically. These are extremely unfair and harmful to animals. Judging from the media reports in recent ten years, the number of abnormal deaths of rare animals in zoos is surprising. Most of the abnormal deaths of these rare animals are related to poor management, rough treatment of animals and various human injuries in zoos. On March 27th, 1997, a national second-class protected animal seal in Shanghai Zoo died in Liuzhou. This is the second seal that died tragically in Liuzhou Liugu Zoo within a week. After autopsy, it was found that there were more than 10 plastic bags, stones, nails and toothpicks in the stomach of this three-year-old seal. The seal's stomach was badly damaged, leading to death. Another seal died for exactly the same reason. Don't say love, it seems that people are full of hatred for innocent seals. 1996, a female giraffe in Xi 'an Zoo died of gastrointestinal obstruction due to eating plastic bags fed by tourists by mistake. The giraffe presented by Japan died unborn. The female giraffe in a zoo in Nanjing suffered the same fate, and no fetus was born when she died. There are not only plastic bags in its belly, but also wire, wire, glass and other things!

Some animals will have nearly two kilograms of indigestible plastic iron sheets and other sundries in their stomachs after death!

From south to north, this kind of tragedy is everywhere, which can reflect the universal quality of our society and people. For so many years, in such a place where bad tourists keep coming, why can't the zoo provide animals with a safe distance away from tourists? Is this a difficult thing? Doesn't the zoo have any other responsibilities except catching or buying animals and locking them up for display? What prevents people from thinking about the basic interests of animals? 1997165438+1October19 In Xilamulun Park, Tongliao City, Inner Mongolia, a Siberian tiger was brutally killed and skinned. According to reports, the scene was "terrible": the iron gate of the tiger cage was unlocked and "the lock on the door was gone". The secretary of the Municipal Bureau of Landscape Architecture said that due to the shortage of funds, the park can only do general feeding management, such as "preventing wild animals from coming out to hurt people or escaping on their own." As for anti-theft, there are no strict measures, which are beyond the scope of park management and care. Animals are kept in cages in the park, but their safety is "beyond the scope of park management and care"!

The tiger was bound by its hands and feet, but it was not taken care of safely and had to be slaughtered. 1July 996 19, a flood broke out in Liuzhou, Guangxi, and the city zoo was the hardest hit. During the flood season, the zoo did not take the initiative to transfer animals. When the flood came, the animals trapped in cages had a premonition that disaster was coming, and they were terrified, but they could not escape. As a result, a lion died of exhaustion due to high panic. A 4-year-old leopard was restless, refused to eat, ran desperately in the cage, and finally died of hunger strike and fever. After death, the leopard got pneumonia and there was a foreign body in his esophagus. In this big water, nearly 90 precious animals in Liuzhou Zoo died of drowning and disease, accounting for 1/4 of the total number of zoo animals. These animal lives, which were kept in cages for people to watch and have fun, didn't move out of danger with a little thought when disaster came. Animals also have the feeling of fear and the instinct to survive. This point has been largely ignored by people. Now, there are more and more zoos with various names all over the country. All cities and counties should have zoos. The public should do it, and the private should also do it. As a result, more and more animals are imprisoned and become human ornamental. Do people love animals more and more? In fact, things may be just the opposite. Many zoos are built under the drive of commercial interests, which only shows people's ruling mentality and irresponsibility. In terms of system, we have no strict qualification examination and restrictions on the establishment of zoos, which also makes the construction of zoos more and more rampant. In addition to captive zoos, there are more and more so-called free-range zoos or wild zoos. However, the management of animals in many so-called wildlife parks is also full of loopholes. 1In March, 1998, a private wildlife park in Zhuhai was unable to realize the follow-up plan due to financial problems, so it raised animals in Dalin Mountain area. Due to "bad feeding conditions, 1 South China tiger died of illness, and 5 hummingmonkeys died one after another". It is said that the place where tigers are raised stinks like a pigsty. Such a bad so-called wild zoo can legally raise the country's most precious animal, the South China Tiger, and it is almost silent when it is fed to death. Although the animals in the zoo live in the zoo, their fate is closely related to human society, and their living conditions and welfare are also closely related to people's attitudes. In fact, not only animals in zoos, but almost all animals-domestic animals and wild animals-depend on people's behavior and ideas. "People can't be cruel to a wild animal, nor can they be cruel to a domestic animal." After human skills greatly surpass all other creatures on the earth, the living state of animals has been closely linked with human behavior. In the world composed of human beings and animals, human beings have all the advantages, so the fate of animals is not only an animal matter, but also related to human morality and conscience. However, in the past, people didn't think that how to treat animals was related to people's virtue. It was just a matter of income. However, with the continuous expansion of people's moral vision and the continuous expansion of moral care objects, the ethical content has gradually expanded from people's interests to the consideration of animal welfare. It is worth noting that people's thinking about animal welfare first pays attention to the animals around them, not just wild animals. In the case of Liu Haiyang injuring a black bear in the zoo, many people think that the injured black bear should belong to wild animals. Because it seems that Liu Haiyang's behavior is more serious and worse, and there is more basis to punish him. Obviously, in our consciousness, hurting a wild bear with sulfuric acid has different meanings from hurting a domestic bear or raising pigs at home. This certainly shows that people have a sense of protecting wild animals, but is it really different to hurt domesticated bears or raise pigs with sulfuric acid at home? Doesn't it hurt to domesticate bears or raise pigs at home? Is there a hierarchy between the suffering of domestic animals and that of wild animals? I haven't thought it over carefully. Domestic animals and wild animals feel the same pain and suffering when they are seriously injured. In this sense, cruelty to wild animals is as evil as cruelty to domestic animals. Man cannot be cruel to a wild animal, nor can he be cruel to a domestic animal. In fact, cruelty to livestock is more frequent. 1996165438+1October 8, CCTV exposed the phenomenon of water injection in pig breeding in Guangdong. You can see what kind of "feeding" this is: strong men forcibly hold down a pig, forcibly open the pig's mouth, put a thick tube with a diameter of about six or seven centimeters into the pig's mouth until it reaches the upper jaw and throat, and then forcibly pressurize it to fill the pig with four or five barrels of so-called feed like yellow soup. This process was completed in the desperate screams and painful struggles of pigs. It is reported that pigs from Hunan, Hubei, Sichuan and other places have been forced to inject water continuously after entering Guangdong. After being perfused, the pig's stomach is bulging, its legs and feet are trembling and stagger, showing extreme pain. Some pigs are squeezed on the car board, with yellow water in their mouths and dying. Before arriving in Guangzhou, pigs usually have to go through such "maintenance" four or five times. It's not hard to imagine how many terrible tortures pigs have to endure. These pigs were transported to the slaughterhouse, and most of them died in less than an hour. After the slaughter, the pig's stomach was taken out to see. It is as big as a basketball and weighs about 10 kg. This is already the case after reflux absorption. Most pigs are supported to death alive. This happens every day, and it's not just in Guangzhou. Sadly, this "torture" applies not only to pigs, but also to poultry and livestock. It is reported that someone bought a live chicken and picked the fattest one. The result was a "fat chicken" filled with water. Nowadays, people have become accustomed to this. A turtle expert bought a water-injected turtle by mistake when buying a cultured turtle. As a result, all the breeding turtles died soon. Think about how ruthless this torture of small animals is. How painful it is to inject half a catty to a catty of water into such a small chicken or turtle. What an evil act it is to leave animals in an impossible state and beg for death!

What nation in the world would treat animals raised by themselves like this? Livestock have contributed their lives to human life. They should at least have a natural life and enjoy the general fun of life, instead of being abused to complete their lives. However, usually, people turn a blind eye to cruelty to animals, as if this is the fate of animals. This attitude leads to cruelty to animals becoming an evil under the sun. Unfortunately, in the reports about livestock (poultry) flooding, little attention is paid to the suffering of animals and the living conditions of livestock. What everyone is concerned about is that the immoral behavior of the perfumer harms the interests of consumers and makes the "vegetable basket" of the citizens incomplete. Of course, this is a big problem, but if we think deeply about the spiritual ugliness caused by this behavior, the problem is even bigger. In the history of China, there have been many examples of cool eating and using animals, but there has never been such a large-scale cruelty to animals. This may explain where the bottom line of moral degeneration is today. "A civilized country should make humane laws to protect animals from cruelty." It is immoral and illegal to torture animals with sensory abilities (whether wild animals or domestic animals) at will and let them die slowly in a state of unbearable pain. This is not only to avoid hurting people's feelings and conscience, but also because people have no right to treat animals like this. But in reality, it is impossible to punish this behavior according to the current Wildlife Protection Law, not only because there are no ordinary wild animals and livestock protected by this law, but also because it does not take into account the basic interests of animals, such as the right not to be abused. It is also inappropriate to punish the crime of injuring animals according to the crime of destroying state property. Animals are not ordinary so-called "property", they have sensory ability. Hurting them is much more serious than destroying ordinary property. Therefore, in order to protect animals from cruelty and enjoy a normal life under people's management, we should make laws prohibiting cruelty to animals. The objects of this law should include wild animals and domestic animals with the same sensory ability. These propositions are not temporary sentimentality, but serious moral, legal and political issues. In modern times, it was the British who first turned their sympathetic eyes to animals and solved this moral problem in legal practice. 1809, a British Lord put forward a proposal in parliament, demanding that the cruelty to animals such as horses, pigs, cattle and sheep be prohibited. This proposal was ridiculed by people at that time. Although the result was passed in the upper house, it was rejected in the lower house. This is not surprising, because many people's minds can't accommodate the interests of animals. Descartes' prejudice against animals has influenced generations. He thinks that animals can't think, so they don't feel pain. However, the great ethicist Bentham believes that Descartes' mistake is to confuse thinking with feeling bitter and happy. Bentham said: "The question is not whether animals can think or speak, but whether they can feel pain and joy." Bentham insists on humanitarian care for animals. He firmly believes that the color of skin is not the reason why a person is arbitrarily tortured by a tyrant. Similarly, "the number of legs, the fluff on the skin or the location of the end of the spine are not the reasons for all beings to suffer the same torture." Therefore, when judging the good and evil of human behavior, we should also consider the pain and happiness of animals. By 1822, the British people's ideas about animals were quite mature, so the first law against cruelty to animals in the world was really passed. It makes cruelty to animals a crime in itself. Previously, the crime of abuse must have a legal requirement, that is, treating the owner of the animal maliciously rather than the animal itself. Although this law only applies to large livestock, such as cattle, sheep, pigs and horses, excluding dogs, cats and birds, it is still considered as a milestone in the history of animal welfare protection. This law affects not only its own people, but also other countries. France also passed an anti-abuse law on 1850. Subsequently, Ireland, Germany, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands also passed anti-abuse laws. 1866, American ambassador to Russia Berg returned to new york and began to appeal against cruelty to animals. During his stay in Russia, he witnessed the groom beating the horse and felt extremely painful. Berg believes that cruel treatment of living animals will make people morally degenerate and become barbaric. And a nation can't stop its members from being cruel to animals, and it will also face the danger of endangering itself and the decline of civilization. With his efforts, the United States also established the Association for the Prohibition of Cruelty to Animals and quickly passed the Anti-Cruelty to Animals Act. This bill is considered to go beyond the British anti-cruelty law because it prohibits cruelty to all animals, including wild animals and domestic animals. The idea of benevolence in this period put forward that people should be kind to animals and extend the moral object to animals. Although people haven't seen the problem of animal rights yet, they want to help dumb animals not be abused and help people improve their moral standards. This directly promoted the improvement of animal welfare and laid the foundation for further thinking about animal rights. By the late 20th century, not only European and American countries, but also most countries in the world, including some countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa, had enacted laws against cruelty to animals, and animal welfare associations and various animal protection organizations emerged one after another. At present, it is generally believed that civilized countries should establish humane laws to protect animals from cruelty, and it is not correct to maim and destroy life. Caring for and promoting life is the basic responsibility of human beings. China also needs such laws. Although legislation cannot guarantee to solve all the problems in the relationship between man and animals in this era, such laws will prompt people to reflect on the way they treat animals and properly solve the practical problems of animal cruelty. In fact, the anti-cruelty law only expects a minimum humanity: that is, animals should not be placed in a state of pain at will, and animals should not be abused for fun or the basic living environment of wild animals should be maliciously destroyed. Law has the function of guiding people's hearts. Humane laws will make people understand that how to treat animals is kind and appropriate, and how to treat animals is unfair and inhuman. The Anti-Cruelty to Animals Law will effectively help people to establish these concepts and norms, cultivate people's virtues and punish offenders. As in the past, those acts of killing animals at will, such as throwing a live horse off a cliff just to make a movie, openly selling live quails to customers in the bustling farmers' market, or raising live bears to take courage, make them extremely painful, which will not only be condemned by people morally, but also punished by law. We have reason to expect a life full of humanity. Its significance is not only related to people, but also to animals and the relationship between people and animals. The excellent "Don't Abuse All Animals" is collected by the composition network, which comes from the network and members' contributions, for reference and study only. Please indicate the source for reprinting.