Read
the articles and commentary below about animal rights extremists and
the recent car firebombings. What rights, if any, do animals have? Why
or why not? Is the type of violence discussed in these articles ever
justified as a means to stop animal research?
Animal Research Activists Firebomb Car
Press Release from UCLA Newsroom
More on the UCLA Firebombing
From the LA Times
Commentary on Animal Rights Extremists
From Adventures in Ethics and Science Blog
Due Saturday, June 30th
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
I do believe that animals should have rights; they should not be abused or mistreated by anyone. I believe that they think and feel just as we do. They have emotions like humans, can feel pain and happiness. They should be treated with respect and dignity. Animals did not cause the diseases that we have today and to experiment on them I feel is wrong. Although it may be for beneficial reasons I can not imagine an animal being turned into a “lab rat”.
The acts in these articles should never be justified. There are plenty of other ways to go about things legally and peacefully. I think committing violent acts to prove a point does not get you the kind of attention that you seek to make a difference. No one is thinking "hey we got to stop animal research so they will stop bombing cars", they've definitely gotten the attention of law officials to be brought to justice and prosecuted. I think they will have a better chance at being heard by the right people if they take a calmer, aggressive approach.
Animals have rights in terms of being abused, malnourished, neglected and abandoned. There are police with the ASPCA (in AZ) that will enforce laws against those things being done to animals that are pets. I do not think there are many rights offered for lab animals. The purpose of these animals is to be a test subject for drugs, tests, treatments, cures. These animals are put in place because they most likely have similar biology related to what is being studied for humans. I feel that human life is superior and worth more than an animal. That does not mean that testing things like shampoo and perfume on them should be allowed. In this case, I think that medical testing should win out over marketing tests. Obviously we cannot test medical devices, medications and treatments on humans until they are nearly perfected, so what other living things can be tested? Well, a plant isn't going to react like a living human, so I believe that is why they test on lab animals. How could we find cures or medications for treatment if there was never a test done on a living animal that may react much like a human would? We couldn't.
I do not feel that this violence that was portrayed is ever a good solution to stop animal testing. Violence is almost never the correct answer. I think the term "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar" is a true statement even for people. They will perhaps be more open to compromise if the advocates were more peaceful and did not threaten with violence. I also think that no matter what animal activists do, even if they are violent, it will not stop scientists from performing these tests on lab animals. Just like the third article mentioned about abortion, just because people start killing off doctors who perform abortions, does not mean people will stop getting them. You have to pick your battles and justifying violent acts against people who are ultimately trying to find cures for HUMAN diseases, is just silly. Maybe there are better things to experiment on, but science has not gotten that far yet. Until then, I think testing animals in moderation is key. I love animals, just as much as the next person, but when it comes to finding possible cures to real diseases that our loved ones are facing by hooking a rat up to an IV drip, I say it may be the lesser of two evils.
As defined by Webster, "rights" are used to indicate one's agreement with a suggestion or to acknowledge a statement or order. By definition animals are merely property with no rights because they cannot indicate if they agree with statements or the order of things. If this is so, why dogs growl and whimper at things that they disapprove of? Why do they wag their tails and fill with excitement when comforted with love? Just because an animal can not say "yes" or "no" does not mean that we need to take advantage of animals. In my opinion every animal has their own rights to a certain extent. Meaning, that though we are superior to animals, there is a certain decency in which animals should be treated. There is no need to abuse animals for selfish gains or to demean the animal in anyway. They emotions and sensations just like humans. Their is no need make them suffer. Whether its physical abuse or simply running tests on animals; in my opinion, its not acceptable. Run the tests on humans, they are the ones who are to benefit from this information anyway.
I think even though animal testing is wrong, the actions of the activists are absurd. They hide their potentially hazardous actions by posing as activists by representing a good cause. Their bombings and other damage-dealing crimes give their "good" cause a bad name. Instead of being known as a group that represents the decency of animals, they will be known as the "revenge seekers" for the animal. I think that their actions should not go unpunished because it is only a matter of time till they step up their crime level. Before you know it, extremists my start taking the lives of animal researchers just because they do not agree with their beliefs/animal treatment. Their group could protest these animal tests with others ways other than violence. Instead they form a sort of terrorist group and intimidate their rival with violence.
According the FDA animal testing is required before any testing on humans can be done. In the eyes of the government test animals do not have rights the way other animals do. I once worked at a living museum and we raised mice and rats for the sole purpose of feeding carnivorous animals used for public education. Those rats did not have rights either; they were raised to be food. They never had a chance at a life of anything else. I cannot say that is unethical. I would need to know if the lab animals are bred specifically for this purpose or if they are hunted down and captured for such experiments to form a proper opinion.
Violence is never justified as a means to stop animal research. For one, it makes people wary of animal rights groups making it more difficult to rally support for the cause. Violent acts deter most people from supporting such organizations, even if they agree with them. Citizens have the right to assembly, they have the right to protest, but they do not have the right to harm others for their beliefs or practices.
I don’t know of any rights that animals are officially given here in the United States. There are laws against animal abuse by pet owners, as well as leash laws and laws regarding what kind of animals can be domesticated. So, these are somewhat laws protecting animals from certain types of abuse, unofficially. I am not sure exactly why the laws are so non-protective against animals; I assume that it has something to do with wanting to put more energy in protecting human rights.
I feel that the type of violence discussed in the articles is not justified for animal research studiers. I am so glad no one was hurt, but the person or group that preformed the arson could not be one hundred percent sure that no one was around, and that no one would be harmed. When violence is used to protest violence, it is worthless and unethical.
I personally believe that animals should have rights. I think that animals are able to be happy, sad, angry all the feelings that we have its just they are unable to communicate in the verbal language that we speak but just like babies who are too young to talk we are able to understand body language and see pain and suffering no matter the species. I believe that lots humans have become arrogant and self centered only caring about themselves and not understanding that we are to share the world. We have already taken over lots of land and put animals in smaller confined areas for our benefit then visit their habitat and hunt them kill them if they were to kill a person as if to teach them a lesson? We as a intellectual species should be smarter than that and take the responsibility to look out for the care of ourselves and all other animals. These tests are done for human benefit and im sure the animals did'nt sign up for it so i believe if it is for human benefit then run these tests on humans... or maybe we can just clone humans and breed them to be tested on for that purpose.... Just an idea.
As far as the actions that the anti testing groups have performed, i dont think they are justified. I can see how they may feel so strong about whats going on and every second that goes by more animal research is being preformed possibly injecting chimps with Hiv to see if we can cure it or who knows what else so maybe they feel something drastic would speed up the process but unfortunately that's not how it works. This will be an issue that will take a long time to get the change they are looking for ... Just like Civil Rights but violence shouldnt be the answer. All they have to do is wait until human greed and selfishness destroys the world significantly and then maybe they will change their minds thats how we usually work .... mess everything up and even hurt ourselves in the process then say ooops that was dumb of us and try to fix it {i.e. most of the endangered species right now... wonder how they became that way or maybe the BP spill or the ozone lol} and we are supposed to be the smart ones. I think once more people understand what is going on in these labs and see it they may get their point across and get the change they were looking for or atleast stricter guidelines so the key is education not violence.
I feel animal have the right to live freely as they please because they are animals. They should not be caged up. Coming from a christian family I learned animals were made for us to eat, some were clean and other were not o.k. to eat. I think what is mention in the Bible is that we are higher then the animals and we can kill them for food.
The crimes that animal rights extremism committed were not sane, how do they think a problem can be resolve by creating for problems.
I’m not sure what right animal path legally. But there are laws to protect this animal from abuse. I don’t believe testing with marketing purposes is justified but testing for medical purposes is justified. But this testing should be done in the most humane way possible. Certainly the medical testing cannot be done on humans and the animal probably is the closes thing to a human biology. Just think if you had a child with cancer and there was a potentially life saving drug available. You would not want your child to be the test subject. And it would be much more reasonable to test an unknown drug on an animal rather then a child. I don’t see another way around it until science can develop a testing model that is similar to the human body. But with that said these animals should be treated humanely and with respect. But certainly no matter how you feel about this kind of animal testing does not give one the right to be violent to the testers. The abortion example I think shows this clearly. If someone does not agree with abortion it does not give them the right to kill doctors who perform abortion. There are legal ways to express your objection about animal testing and do not involve violence. I think you loose the message that you are trying to send and resort to violence. A more effective way of expressing your objection to animal testing would be to make a YouTube video that shows what goes on in these labs.
I believe that there is a very fine line between animal abuse and animal testing. Now, we can argue the different types of animals that are tested, but it is not what we have as domesticated pets. Typically rats are tested with medications and potential cures, but for the greater human good? Yes, I believe that if it gives us a chance to find cures to cancers, multiple sclerosis etc. then we have to do what is needed to find answers. It feels like a cop out of sorts, but we must realize that without a chance to test, as inhumane as people make it. We have all had family members or friends that have died because of an incurable sickness. Wouldn’t you want there to have been a cure or treatment for your friend? I know of multiple occasions where it would have been nice to have had a cure already.
Animals have rights, but it is rights that have been given by humans. We have decided that there are animals that can be tested without guilt, but from who is the guilt? Numbers of different animals have been used to test product safety, and there are groups of people that disagree with any testing. I pose a question to all, “At what point do we stop caring and do what we need to do to survive?” It is in our best interest that we continue to test and push for cures. All in all, I do believe that animals have feelings and are sensitive to their surroundings, but if we can test in a way as to exercise restraint, I believe we should continue.
Animal rights activists are opposed to using animals for medical research because humans do not have the right to use animals. With few exceptions, we do not experiment on human subjects without their consent. Just as we do not experiment on humans who are incapable of consenting to experimentation, we should not experiment on non-human animals. Non-human animals cannot give informed consent, and the vast majority of experiments using animals are so invasive and injurious, we would never even consider allowing humans to consent to being subjects in such experiments.
There are many groups that say they are speaking for those that have no voices. The animals are who they are speaking for. But how is violence against those who do medical testing on animals going to make the "animals" be heard? These activists are talking about getting the violent testing on animals stopped and the way they try to get their message across is by blowing this up and causing damage to others.
While I believe that medical testing can be done other ways, there must be a more humane way for activists to get their messages across. How is causing damage and threatening others going to get their message across. I don't agree with how many groups turn to violence to get their messages out.
Post a Comment