That we should ban zoos

what is the definition of zoo? an establishment where wild animals are kept for preservation ,study and display to public.on the one hand we are calling them wild animal ,on the other hand we keep them in confined area.this contradiction is creating a wrinkle. why should they be called wild animal if we are not  keeping them in their natural habitat.

secondly science says wild animal were present on earth even before us .through the process of evolution , humans came into existence from primitive animals.so if we claim that planet earth belongs only to us,we are wrong.like every human ,every single animal on earth has got its rights to live freely. lets define what is right? according to one definition a right is entitlement to something like concepts of justice, freedom, ownership of something.as much as we want freedom ,justice , love ,so are the animals ,because we are also animals,the difference is only that we are smarter than other animals.this gives us upper hand to us.And we feel proud in being so.so we do whatever we desire,even at the cost of someone's freedom and right.right of freedom demands that everyone should be allowed to live freely ,and no one can snatch ones freedom unless one desire so.please tell me, before putting animals into small barred cages ,does anyone even seek their permission let me remind u one important fact.they are living creatures as are we.they feel what we feel,the only difference is they cant express it through speech..that is the difference between a slave and free man. no one bother to ask a slave what he wants or not.that is what we do with animals,snatching their good days, in the warm lap of their mother, we simply capture them to tame for our selfish amusement.we dont even hesitate to think for a single second what if animals were more smarter than us,and same was being done to us without our will.if we look back into past ,we see slave trade and slave keeping. their freedom,opinion, idea were restricted by their masters, they could not even eat unless their master wanted so.they had no opportunity to express their freedom.it seems as if they were without voice.so tell  me what is difference between those slave keeping era and keeping animal without their will into zoo.our ancestors used to prison and kill slaves for their amusement, and now we keep animals for our entertainment. plz tell me who are we to decide so. what rights we have to bound animal even if for the betterment of them.i believe every single animal has been given survival instincts. each animal can survive its own.those fail to do so,it is either nature decide so for them or human activities shorten their generation life span over planet earth. which is no different than killing innocent with guns. according to 2013 study by dr.Paul o'donoghuen,those species who are about to extinct they have less "genetic integrity".my point is if want freedom , justice or other ethical rights, we should give speechless animals their freedom first ,justice by freeing them into their on natural environment.they were living their for million of years.they made it through all these years by themselves, they can do same again. what we all have to do is to eradicate our selfish approach to less powerful. that is all for round one.

Firstly I don't intend to defend all zoos. I think we should close down zoos which don't meet high standards of animal welfare, but I don't think that the existence of bad zoos should lead to a blanket ban. What I intend to do instead in this debate is show why zoos are essential for the preservation of endangered species and the environment more broadly but before I do that I'll address my opponents main argument.

So why are zoos beneficial and here I will provide two reasons.

Firstly: Zoo provide a means of protecting endangered species and provide a home for animals which can no longer live in the wild.  Without Zoos we would loose millions of dollars and thousands of experts dedicated to preserving endangered species and looking after animals which have lost their habitats. The zoos public dimension makes this financially possible, without zoos these efforts would never get off the ground.

Secondly: Zoos provide a way to educate the public and generate an interest in the environment in a way nothing else can. If we want people to care and activate politically to preserve the environment we must make them care enough  to do so and there is no better way to do this than make them experience it first hand.

The above two arguments mean that even if we accepted that zoos violate some rights of animals, that is a cost the neg is prepared to wear because of the benefits the broader environment gains from zoos existing.

So because we think Zoos benefit the environment and because we think they can do so without causing harm to animals I happily oppose this motion