The purpose of this study is to compare and analyze the position of non-human animals in modern moral philosophy. Arguments from four different philosophers from opposing sides are described, analyzed and compared in a methodical way. As well as analyzing the arguments of non-human animals’ moral position, our human moral responsibilities towards animals are also looked at. The philosophers whose arguments are analyzed are Peter Singer, Tom Regan, Carl Cohen and Ingemar Nordin. The analysis is going to showcase and problematize what premises their arguments stand upon, and valued accordingly. The result is going to showcase some of the problems with Singer’s utilitarian point of view, as well as Cohen’s and Nordin’s perspectives. Out of the four philosophers, Regan’s application of right ethics holds up the best in this analysis.