Animal Experimentation

[connolpm]

I'm just curious what your opinions are about this topic.

[sesdk]

Completely opposed.

[1952Sniper]

Me too.  If we're going to do testing, do it on humans.  Willing ones.

[cleveland]

Go for it!  I wonder how they would have come up with "no tears" baby shampoo without animal testing.  I wonder how they got those cute little furry bunnies to hold open their eyes for the testing?

[SkidMarkSteve]

Cleveland, they cut their eyelids off.

I picked the first one.

[dp1one]

Me too.  If we're going to do testing, do it on humans.  Willing ones.

Screw that, do it on death row inmates and lifers.


>awaits the flames<

[SkidMarkSteve]

*flames* :wink:

[connolpm]

I must say I'm surprised sniper!  I'm not sure I can describe why I'm surprised, I just am. Just so I understand your position correctly, you are completely against animal testing, even if it would help cure cancer or help someone survive heart attacks and so forth?

-Patrick

[ducktapehero]

If it is absolutely necessary and no other way can be found to experiement I have no problem with it.

[sesdk]

Screw that, do it on death row inmates and lifers.

Now theres an idea!!

[1952Sniper]

I must say I'm surprised sniper!  I'm not sure I can describe why I'm surprised, I just am. Just so I understand your position correctly, you are completely against animal testing, even if it would help cure cancer or help someone survive heart attacks and so forth?

-Patrick

Yes.  Animals are not capable of giving their consent.  They feel pain just like we do.  I think we have a duty under God (or nature, if you will) to be kind to animals.  Hunting is different because we are part of the food chain and that is nature's way.  But scientific testing on animals is not natural.  I find it wrong.

And aside from that, such testing would be most accurate on humans anyway.  There are plenty of idiots out there who are perfectly willing to be guinea pigs for a few bucks.  Your research dollars will be better spent testing on humans who can consent to the testing, and without the moral issues of testing on unwilling animals.

[connolpm]

Ahh yes, but would you say that an "idot" can truly give informed consent?

[galahad]

I'm surprised too.  Animal research is the modern "food chain" with us humans using animals to prolong our lives.  Food prolongs our lives, so does medical research.

Which doesn't mean that animals should be subjected to torturous testing without the use of pain reducing drugs.  I'd be dead right now if they hadn't been able to test heart stents on pigs, etc.   As for doing it on death row inmates, sure, that happens now.  There aren't enough of those men willing to be test subjects to continue research.

So, I believe that animal testing is an OK thing, when properly monitored.

[1952Sniper]

Ahh yes, but would you say that an "idot" can truly give informed consent?

More so than an animal, I can assure you.

This subject ties in with my deeply held spite for the way our culture operates.  We take, take, take.  Never asking.  We strip nature of everything it has in our eternal greed for more material possessions, more money, and longer life.  We are a sick culture.  We are like a plague in the way we use up every resource nature has without so much as a hint of remorse.

This doesn't mean I'm a bunny-hugger by any means.  But I do think our culture has a marked lack of respect for nature or the Earth.  You can see it in our air, our water, and our ground.  You can see it by the number of species we've driven to extinction and by the shape of our landscapes.

And it's all in the name of vanity and greed.

[galahad]

But I do think our culture has a marked lack of respect for nature or the Earth.

HEAR HEAR!!!  I just saw an guy actually sitting on a big four legged animal and making it RUN.  The poor animal couldn't say NO because it had this steel thing forced into it's mouth and held on with leather straps.   This kind of thing should be stopped, NOW!!!  :wink: