Animal testing for medical purposes has saved millions, if not billions of human lives, and the value of it outweighs any arguments about the 'right' of humans to kill animals.
Fur looks kind of stupid, and is hard to keep clean, but a fur coat or fur hat only kills a handful of animals and has no further environmental impact. Can you say the same thing about your Gore-Tex jacket? Do you even know what toxic byproducts are dumped into rivers and streams following whatever industrial processes are used to form those synthetic materials? And what about the animal testing that was probably done on all the precursors and catalysts used in the whole manufacturing chain? While a leather coat utilizes the skin of an animal that was being processed for food anyhow, your synthetic material jacket may have detrimental effects on the entire ecosystem for decades, even centuries. Considering that, how can anyone who calls themselves an environmentalist wear anything but fur?
Veal, I have to agree, is pretty hard to defend. The way it is produced in the modern agri-business corporate machine is pretty horrific, and it doesn't even taste good. If I want to eat pale, mushy stuff that tastes vaguely like weak beef, I'll go to McDonald's.
2006-07-17 09:45:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well as I see it, veal is a tastey tastey meat. Can you honestly tell me that if you were starving and the first animal you found was a calf that you wouldn't eat it? And beyond that, what makes it OK to eat an adult cow, but wrong to eat a baby cow. Do you honestly believe that a cow is thinking, "Well at least I lived a full life..." as it is going to the slaughter house?
As for animal testing, how else are we to know what side effects certain drugs are going to have. Would you really delay a cure for cancer simply because it was going to involve testing on animals? Are the lives of some bunnies, even cute bunnies, worth more than those of humans.
And as for fur...fur is warm. And if we are to say that we aren't supposed to wear the hides of animals, does that mean that I can't wear anything that has leather in it...well there goes just about out type of sturdy shoe.
Honestly, what is the problem of using animals as they were intended to be used. If were weren't supposed to meld animals to our use then why in the world are they here?
2006-07-17 15:29:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by greatpanisdead 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Then why did you ask?
Do you take medication? Ever have surgery? Ever have your teeth worked on? Is anyone in your family diabetic or have heart problems? Every single medication on the market must be approved by the FDA. Every single surgical device, and I mean everything, must first be approved by the FDA before being used. Before the FDA approves anything, it must go through clinical trials. Clinical trials begins in animal labs before going on to human trials and then being approved, or not, by the FDA.
Do you eat jello? Do you know where gelatin comes from? Animal bone marrow. Did you ever see that jello stuff that forms when cooked meat is cold? That's raw gelatin.
Is there leather on your sneakers? Purse? Keychain? Couch? Chairs? How about those bookshelves? Ah, yes, wood.....So how many birds and beasties are minus a home because you needed a book shelf? And that brings in the books themselves, made of paper which comes from trees.
Life is a cycle, honey, get over yourself. If you are so concerned for the leather, thank the totem spirit for it's sacrifice and have a steak. And that brings us to the menu the steak is printed on. How much petrolium is being used to make those menus? How many animals are killed when the petrolium is spilled? How about all the plastics taking up space in the dumps?
Shall I continue?
2006-07-17 15:32:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by ninusharra 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
to say that some one is sick or cruel is hardly a qualifying reason .you will do the cause more harm than good with this emotional argument.
Veal is a young cow ,it is a product of man ,,not an animal of Nature ,like he millions of sweet little Lambs .everybody eats in the restaurants
if you produce the animal .like chickens or pigs ,there is no moral argument that prevents Humans from doing what they like ,with their creations.
But these other things ,like animal testing for products that are meant for humans ,in the first place does not give compatible results ,and is cruel to imprisoned helpless animals ,that are treated no better than numbers .
}
the people who do this should be experimented on instead .to say the least,the results would have more meaning
And the fur from animals in Nature is a direct affront to Gaia ,these animals are components of Ecosystems ,that have taken millions of years to evolve ,they do not belong to Humans ,they belong to Nature and can only bre hunted if well paid for or with permision,this the Native Americans ,and European Pagans where well aware of.
a false and merciless ,political God told his people that he made them for them alone ,to do with what they wanted ,this lie has resulted in the extinction of many animals and aboriginal PEOPLE AS WELL.
if it was still possible this sorry excuse of a god should have the death penalty
2006-07-18 00:53:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
And you are a soft heade moron who relies on emotion rather than reason. If you disagree with animal testing you should prove your committment to animals by giving up modern medicine as almost every vaccine, and surgical procedure including blood transfusions came to be through animal testing. When you have gives don't have them vaccinated, convince all those you know who are diabetic to give up insulin and God forbid you or someone you love should ever need live saving surgery but if you do, turn it down (especially your children) because the person who perfected that surgery probably practiced on apes before they tried it on people.
After you've given up medicine come back in a few years and let those of us in the real world know jow it works out for you
2006-07-17 15:49:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
dont eat veal, animal testing should be used for medicinal/ health reasons only and when having a useful product, and fur is okay when the whole animal is used.
2006-07-17 15:23:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by got_deam_munalla 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Won't eat veal, I don't need a rabbit to suffer so my wife can have mascara and fur looks better on the original owner.
2006-07-17 15:23:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yummy Yummy!
2006-07-17 15:22:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by lover 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
they should stop animal testing all together and use convicted felons on death row for pharmaceutical and other testing.
2006-07-17 15:23:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Tortured Soul 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It all sounds great to me! God Bless you.
2006-07-17 15:23:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋