Rights Theory Vs Virtue Theory

The two theory that can be applied to this case is rights theory and virtues theory. However, both of these two theories lead to different ethical outcomes. While rights theory supports the sex robots being made and used by consumers, virtue theory goes against the selling and product of sex robots giving the standard argument that lewdness feeds on itself.
First, virtue theory does not support the uses of sex robots. Virtue theory allows us to develop good moral characters. Some virtues that may conflict with this case is responsibility and discipline. Virtue theory, may claim that the distribution of sex robots may create vice such as lewdness. The sex robots may encourage the sexual fantasies to grow and seek to become more intense experiences. The idea can then lead to become a substitutes for many real life sexual abuses such as rape. By allowing anyone such as pedophiles and rapists to follow their immoral beliefs, we are suggesting that their beliefs are ok.
On the other hand, rights theory allows us to have negative and positive rights.
The right to be left alone, taking no action against us is a negative right. Negative rights allows us to do what we want to do, without anyone stopping us as long as we do not interfere with the negative rights of others. With this case, it primarily includes us the freedom right to make our own sexual choices. Individuals have the right to pursue their freedom of expression through sexual encounters with robots, since it do not violate any laws. It is also rather daft to suggest that one can rape a “thing” that is not sentient and thus does not want or not want anything. Therefore, the rights theory supports the sex robots being used since there aren’t any evidence that these dolls increase risks to interfere with other people’s right such as encouragement of sexual
abuse. The theory fits best would be rights theory. To simply assume that sex robots encourage any types of sexual abuse or lead to any crimes without actual evidence is a slippery slope fallacy. There are no evidences that these robots increase risks. It seems to me that they could just as easily do exactly the opposite by providing a release for folk who have those sorts of urges. We shouldn't let squeamishness dictate our response, there needs to be evidence. It is also rather daft to suggest that one can rape a “thing” that is not sentient and thus does not want or not want anything. Rights theory allows us to focus on what the sex robots does actually does. Whether it’s a toy, doll, or a robot it’s not the same as an actual human being, therefore using a robot for any sexual urges is not violating or interfering directly with another human being freedom rights.