why is it that if you dare to put the needs of a human above those of an animal you get lynched?

Question

ok so not a physical lynching but people get all emotional and hysterical and want you bannished from society .I dont see the same level of vitriol when the" cause "is entirely human

Answer 1

I think as a nation we have become too "soft". Yes we are a nation of animal lovers - hence RSPCA but we should care more for our fellow humans. Years ago, dogs were kept for use, as were cats and horses - now people treat them like extensions of their family, as "babies" - though not horses, I guess.
I love animals, have cats and give to animal charities but not to the exclusion of human charities. I deplore cruelty of any sort but am not a vegetarian - if we all became vegetarian the only animals we would see would be working animals [ie horses, guard dogs and pets] and those kept in zoos to remind us what cattle, pigs, chickens etc looked like!
Not sure what needs the questioner means - if food, obviously a pet cannot open it's own can, so should be fed first. If shelter the same applies if you own an animal you should take responsibility for its' welfare. Or is it the question of animal testing that raises the hackles? This is a very emotive subject and difficult to answer. The needs for cures to disease is certainly a strong reason but not, in my opinion for shampoo, skin and cosmetic reasons.

Answer 2

a million) 26 2) woman 3) Animal Lab Tech at a study facility 4) sure, they might desire to no longer be taken means of merely because they are no longer waiting to speak for themselves. 5) i think of animal finding out demands to be heavily regulated which it regularly is. In an suitable international there could be no use for animal or any living products to learn a ailment or new drug, even however regrettably science can maximum useful go do far. have self belief me on the same time as I say there are various very strict rules on what's authorized, how the animals are housed, dealt with, what's a acceptable consequences, there may well be to be no pointless soreness (meaning somewhat sore from surgery is okay, even however have have been given to settle for medications to assist, no sticking them with concerns without a anesthetic or some concern) and various others. 6) If there are distinctive the form to get consequence (computer products, synthetics, and various others) then by using all way go that course. it is actual the dissimilar needs in plenty studies (they might desire to fulfill particular national needs for finding out, then circulate a undeniable institute board it is not any longer merely created from distinctive researchers, which they grill the researchers on why they might desire to apply a undeniable animal, why they have self belief they choose the quantity they do, why they are no longer waiting to apply a computer type, in the event that they are waiting to refine some concern to make it much less invasive or risky to the animals, and various others. actual, I take exhilaration in that usually a living type is the only answer to get ultimate consequence. After working in an extremely enormous study facility, I know that the animals care is maximum rational priority over the test consequence (have persons to look after the animals cut back loose those doing the study to hold an purpose eye on the care the animal gets) and greater often than no longer it rather is the important answer to assist further some study.

Answer 3

I think it's all about choice. Humans have the ability to choose, animals just have the instinct to live. If we want things tested that are for our benefit then it should be tested on humans, not animals. If humans get cancer (little girl or 90 year old man) then so be it. It's unfortunate but it's wrong to sacrifice animals for our own selfish need.
If animals could talk and you could ask them what they wanted then fine, but animals get no such choice and who are we to decide their fate?
The way i look at it, everyone (animal or human) only gets one life and we won't ever get that life back and every life is equally as precious. so what gives us the right to take another's away?

Answer 4

Because animal research and cosmetic testing are very emotive subjects.
You are bound to get the fringe element from both sides on this.
Mind you, I'd rather it was a lab rat that got whatever pill or injection that was given to those six(?) students that nearly died testing someting!

Answer 5

Well my husband and I have an amazing dog, she is our life and sorry, but for us we would put her needs above most of the humans we know, she has given us more love, loyalty and trust than most people, so for me my dog first, others second.

Answer 6

Human needs should come first, but not at the expense of needless suffering to animals.

Answer 7

in what situation do you mean? i personal think if you have to chose in a given situation you have to chose people before animals, but I like animals more than people [in general] most times people get them self into there situations on there own but animals cant help themselves thay also give unconditional love thay are not just users like some people

Answer 8

well that is to tell you how animalistic humans have become. however it is not to say that you should not try to help a human in need because whatever we do for others always comes back to us. if you help a human in need you get helped when you are in need.

Answer 9

I don't see a lot of lynchings, so I'm not sure what you're referring to, could you be more specific?

Answer 10

I would much rather 10 million bunnys die than one little girl with cancer. So test away!!!!