There are many extinct animals’ species in the world. Some people think we should protect animals from dying out, while others believe we should spend more time on problems of human beings. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

A highly controversial issue relates to whether to have animal protection reinforced or not. In

this

essay, I am going to examine

this

question from both points of view and

then

explain why I believe the arguments for animal defence is stronger. It is commonly believed the benefits of animal protection considerably outweigh its disadvantages. The main reason for believing

this

is that thousands of animals have been dying around the world, which includes domestic and wild ones, in the

last

decades. It is

also

possible to say that animals

such

as human beings have rights for surviving in good conditions. To illustrate, there are several organizations as Greenpeace, WWF and suchlike, which combat thousands of whale hunters yearly that look for them in order to sale their skin to the black market.

On the other hand

, it is thought by some that protecting animals is only a matter of wasting people's money. It is often argued that despite the money come from humans it is not used for their purposes. They have

this

opinion because by using

this

money to help animals will not bring about any benefits for humans at all. A

second

point is that animals are not important for human development but entertainment. A good example here is the Zoo, which is considered a hub for bringing together people owing to get to know different types of animals. In conclusion, I believe that both arguments have their own merits. On balance,

however

, I feel that animals should be protected at any cost since they are living beings; as a consequence, they own the same rights as humans so they need an exclusive defence since they can not do it for themselves.