The defense of using animals in the circus

There is no problem, as long as the animals are well cared for.
This is a tautology by definition. Who determines when animals are well taken care of? Some people consider that to be by providing good food, drink and housing and others consider living in natural conditions a minimum requirement.
The circus has an educational function.
The circus does not demonstrate how an animal behaves in nature, it merely shows the tricks the trainer has taught them. Furthermore, the circus suggests that humans have control over all wild animals, which is an entirely false impression.
Prohibiting wild animals in the circus is not a solution for the animals, but (controllable) regulations would be.
It is an animal right not to be exploited in an unnatural environment. This cannot be compensated by regulations.
Prohibition of wild animals in the circus would mean loss of a culture.
Throughout history, many unjust cultures have been prohibited and lost. The practice of using wild animals is relatively new and there is a future for acts without use of animals.
Training is stimulating for the animals.
Circus animals perform the same tricks for long periods of time, often unwillingly.
Circus animals get more exercise than animals in a zoo.
This may be true, but in both situations animals suffer under the unnatural conditions of being locked up in small spaces.
Circus animals have become adjusted to being held in captivity.
Circus animals often display disturbed behavior. This means that they do not react well to captivity.
Animals do well in the circus because they live longer than animals in the wild.
Animals in the circus live longer because they are not hunted; they always have good and sufficient food available to them and there is medical care to heal or prevent disease. However, animals in captivity cannot do as they please and so they have less pleasure in their lives.
The animals may not have much room, but neither do the people who work in the circus.
People can chose themselves how long they stay in a small space, animals do not have this choice.
If animals are taken out of the circus, it is no longer a circus but a touring theatre company.
Circus means circle. It merely refers to the environment. It does not mean that animals should be in it. And what is wrong with a touring theatre company?

This article is part of a series on falsities and demagogy.
Some arguments used in debate on the topics in the title simply are invalid. That goes for pro and contra. We selected a few of the most rigid arguments from different situations and placed an appropriate counterargument. Because a more clear and honest way of reasoning helps improve the circumstances animals live in. Mail us if you encounter other or new (counter)-arguments. Apart from the specific issues there are the types of arguments in general. Fallacies are deliberately or accidentally used in a debate. So be aware of the principles and the integrity of an opponent. Click here for tips on how to react to animal-unfriendly behavior of others.

Non-valid arguments (deceptive arguments) for different groups