Some people think that a large amount of time and money spent on the protection of wild animals and others think should be better spent on the human population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion
Nowadays, one of the hottest topics many people talk about is how to allocate the money. Some people argue that it is manifest that human rights should come first. Others including sociologists advocate that we should give some pure land to our closed friends—wild animals. Personally I totally agree with the side of the later view.
There are probably countless reasons for my holding the view. I want to explore three of the most major causes. In the first place, animals also have their minds; they have the same living right as well as the human beings. When we hurt them, they will feel painful. It is quit crucial to ignore their feelings.
Furthermore, in chasing huge profits, we have seriously devastated wild animals’ standards. Their living environment becomes so brittle, we cannot hurt them anymore. Cutting the forests, polluting the rivers even killing the wild animals, all of these create trust ability between human and wild animals. The whole world just sunk in a chaos.
Finally, more and more animals face fiercely crisis. Now due to the poor conditions of their living homes, a large amount of animals have disappeared in the world per year. If we don’t save them, our offspring can only see the pictures or bones of the wild animal in the museum.
Although human’s benefits are also very important, comparing with the poor wild animals it seems trivial. In addition, we can’t be so selfish; we should give mercy to our poor friends.
All in all, we can’t live alone. We must pay more money to save our good friends—wild animal. We should share happy, afford sad together with them. Let love waft through the air and spread all around the world. Come on; take actions to give wild animals a pure land.
