Animal rights - protest gone too far?

Using animals for meat is one thing, but torturing them is a different aspect.
No shit we are smarter and more advanced than the other animals, but we are still animals. And if you say that we can cook up animals then what the hells wrong with cannibalism- I mean were just eating another animal to get food. Yet because this world is filled with hypocrits who don't know what they actually want, we have these dillemas.

To the person who said rats are scum... people eat rats every day, maybe no in the US as much, but in other countries. And if these rats are scum and these people eat them... well you are what you so to speak, and this in turn would make these people scum. Which would mean if they are scum then we can do testing on them like we do to their food. There stop posting about it until you've looked at all the angles of what you say.

[Secret Azn Man]

Dude, we all know the mice and dolphins are superior to man. We just THINK we're superior.

[Pablo Honey]

Originally Posted by Plinko

No shit we are smarter and more advanced than the other animals, but we are still animals. And if you say that we can cook up animals then what the hells wrong with cannibalism- I mean were just eating another animal to get food. Yet because this world is filled with hypocrits who don't know what they actually want, we have these dillemas.

.

Interesting point about cannibalism. Luckily enough, it leads rather nicely into what I was going to say.

A lot of people have said that we're animals just the same, and that a lion would eat us if we gave it half a chance; that's perfectly true. But here's where humans differ; our sentience affords us the capacity to take mercy upon other living things. It gives us a choice. The lion has no choice; if it's hungry it'll eat you, it's programmed to; we, as humans, could choose not to eat lesser animals, and choose to find other sources of nutrients that we know exist. We can choose. They can't. That's what sentience is.

Anyway, i'm getting off topic. I don't agree with testing on animals for lipsticks, but for useful drugs, of course. If they had to, they'd do the same to us in an insant, if we pretend for a moment that we're not the dominant species and another animal has need of testing to save members of its species. And I see now the difference between protesters and exremists. In a lot of ways, it seems like Al Quada and similar Middle Eastern terrorists giving all followers of Islam a bad name, causing prejudice towards them, you know, how every Muslim these days will get searched at an airport just for looking a certain way.

[Chez Daja]

Originally Posted by Plinko

To the person who said rats are scum... people eat rats every day, maybe no in the US as much, but in other countries. And if these rats are scum and these people eat them... well you are what you so to speak, and this in turn would make these people scum. Which would mean if they are scum then we can do testing on them like we do to their food. There stop posting about it until you've looked at all the angles of what you say.

Who gives a shit?
People eat rats to survive, dumbass, if you have a problem, take the place of a bunch of rats in testing. If people in other countries had the CHANCE to eat something that wasn't some ****ing rodent, they'd probably take that chance, don't you think?

Originally Posted by Plinko

Well, humans are not a 'higher species then animals' seeing as we are animals, your statement contradicts itself.
Why would rats and mice be fine? If you think back to the movie 'Planet of the Apes', I know it's just a movie but it's the closest, the humans didn't really like being treated how we treat 'lower classes animals'. Yes we know what going on, but don't the animals we harm or test on do?

So what you're saying is, that we should stop testing on animals for science and let cancers and diseases eat at us until we die. This isn't a movie, this is real, and if you can't get used to it, don't bother bullshitting about my ideas. You're not really proving anything, and you're pretty vague. You seem to think testing is wrong in all aspects, which is fine, but you don't seem to have much knowledge on this at all.

Originally Posted by Sasq.

We don't have to do it to our babies. Because animals aren't as important as humans, and we can do it to them.

How many dozens, if not hundreds, of cures or treatments for diseases have been found through testing on animals? How many millions, if not hundreds of millions, of human lives have been saved because of technology and medicine first tested on animals?

Finally, somebody with brains. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Pete

So long as it isn't a domesticated animal, it is basically nothing but another living entity. Granted, it's ****ed up to test cosmetics on animals, but trying to find a cure for cancer by treating mice and rats is a completely different story. I'm sure people with cancer would willingly subject themselves to radical and experimental treatments, but there is far too much danger and risk involved. Not by the drugs, but by family members trying to sue the drug corporations, saying that the family member who signed up was delirious or not in their right mind, and was taken advantage of and killed by the drug companies experiments. So they use mice, rats and other lesser animals.

Yeah, exactly. At least theres some people here who understand basic logic.


Odin has a good point also. I've already posted here before, so that's all from me.