Animal cruelty : Your views?

Question

I hate all animal cruely. I don't think we should ever do anything to purposely harm them. And why do people seem to think animal testing is okay-I mean, why should they die so we can live? We definately aren't exactly the most important beings on earth.

I know also about Puppy Mills, the Kill Box, etc. If any one has any good websites, not http://www.peta.com/ please, I would really like that! Thank you for all your reply's : I can put into perspective everyone's views.

To ThomasRobinsonAntonio : just to let you know, I actually make sure all the products I buy such as make up, cosmetics, and hair products are free from animal testing i.e BUAV approved. And anotherr point-if a person dies because of a disease, for example, it would be a natural death, and he/she would probably be in the comfort of a fancy hospital or his home, with relatives beside him for support. But when an animal dies unnaturally after spending a life in a steel, cold cage because it has been blatantly used so you can live a little longer, which do you think is worse? You should get your facts about me straight by the way. I know my stuff when it comes to animals.

Answer 1

I hope you stick to your principles and never - ever - take a medicine, use any cosmetics or agree to undergo any form of surgery because all of these have been tested on animals in order to make sure they're safe for humans. Obviously if you reject all testing on animals it would be highly hypocritical of you to accept any product or treatment which has been developed using animal testing. Remember also that many food additives have been tested on animals to make sure that they're "safe" for humans - how else would they come up with recommended daily maximum intakes and "safe levels" in foodstuffs.

Even well-accepted procedures such as blood transfusions and kidney dialysis were tested on animals. So whilst I respect your views (and I myself strongly object to all animal testing of cosmetics and tobacco) I find that most people with similar views tend to adopt a slightly different stance when it's themselves or a loved one in need of a treatment that was developed using animal testing.

Are you really saying that you would never take a pain killer (tested by placing mice on a hot plate and slowly turning up the heat to see how well the drug deadens the pain)? Or would decline chemotherapy (tested by inducing animals to produce tumours which are then experimentally treated with potential anti-cancer drugs)? Or would refuse life saving surgery like a heart or liver transplant (developed using pigs and sheep before the first attempts were made on humans)?

There are strict rules (in the UK, at least) governing the use of animals in testing:
* They must be well fed and looked after (this is essential in any event otherwise stress or disease would distort the test results);
* they must be treated humanely with the minimum of distress comensurate to the procedures needed for the test;
* No more animals must be expended than is necessary to obtain meaningful results;
* experiments where the results are known and accepted facts are not permitted to be gratuitously repeated;
* all scientists (from undergraduate students up) involved are subject to licensing and random unannounced inspection to ensure that the above are carried out.

The animals used are bred specifically for the purpose and would not otherwise even be alive. While computer modelling and tissue cultures can go some way to replacing animals in drugs testing, they will never be able to completely replace animals because no drugs company or government drugs licensing authority would ever risk the law suits that would result from any side effect derived from an untested drug. The ultimate alternative to animal testing is of course to experiment on humans - for this I would recommend that we start with the members of the Animal Liberation Front who always seem to be willing to put animals before human decency.

Answer 2

Yes I do think animal testing is a bad idea. It is something I would not support.

BUT compared to how some pet owners treat their animals I'm sure a laboratory would be paradise.

You have pet owners who get that cute little puppy for Christmas put a collar on him and by Jan or Feb is complaining about how bad the dog smells. This is because the colla is now grown into the dogs neck and is rotting his flesh.

Middle of winter and the poor dog is tied to a tree with no shelter and hungry from not being fed.

Animals kept in small cages that are never cleaned

all true stories that go on daily.

I think we should spend more time educating the general public on proper animal care and may be to will trickle to stopping the testing on lab animals.

Answer 3

All living things are sensitive -- and all living things have spirits. Even our aboriginal ancestors who lived much closer to nature than we do understood that.

Moreover, as we too have spirits, and as everything at a spiritual level is interconnected, we are actually connected to all living things.

So, we must take greater care not to needlessly harm any living thing -- if for no other reason than the selfish one that we would be actually harming ourselves -- albeit indirectly.

Routine animal testing is therefore definitely not OK.

There may be a few ethical exceptions in well founded cases for testing on animals -- just as there may be valid exceptions for testing on humans.

However these cases need to be scrutinised by well qualified ethics committees in my opinion.

Human spirits are very important -- although when you look at the quality of many human beings you would be forgiven for wondering, 'Why?'.

Answer 4

There are no "views" on animal cruelty. Cruelty is a defined word that, by definition, is bad.

As far as shelters go, there's no choice but to put animals down. Because pet owners are irresponsible, stray populations would be out of control and diseases would spread with them. If you doubt me, visit the Philippines and count the stray dogs. See how many DON'T have mange.

Furthermore, medicines MUST be tested. If they're not, they can't be used to help people.

Animal cruelty is intentionally causing unneccesary pain to an animal. It is our responsibility, as a society, to minimize that pain as much as humanly possible. But animal suffering will exist as long as there is human suffering. It is unavoidable.

Answer 5

only a notice - caged hens at the instant are not being set unfastened in 2012, the criminal cut back for the dimensions of their cage is being made very particularly better and that they might desire to have a perch and get admission to to a dirt bath section. some small progression, yet not a lot:( via the way, I even have been a vegetarian in the previous yet stopped after 6 years as I only did not experience healthful in spite of having what regarded an extremely healthful meals habitual. I now consume meat and that i take exhilaration in it yet I do attempt to purchase only unfastened variety eggs, welfare checked meat etc. when you consider that ingesting meat returned, i think greater healthful yet I do greater learn approximately the place meat comes from and how the animals are cared for as a result i might say being vegetarian isn't the only thank you to understand animals.

Answer 6

What can be considered strictly as animal cruelty? While not a connoisseur for makeup industry i must confess that sometimes i have to run search and destroy campaigns against some birds and rodents that threaten the crop of my small scale farming. From your standpoint it is propably a genocide whereas i see it a just fight for survival. If they stayed in the forest i would not kill them. By coming to my turf they expose themselves to survival of the fittest. We will lose it to the rodents in the long run i guess, but not without a fight. You should remember that humans have a right to live here too, just as other animals. For a species of primates we are, albeit a glorious one and the same laws of existence we must follow.

Answer 7

All animal testing should be stopped. I petition that all inmates on death row be subjected to testing, lets use those horrible people!
No? Then if testing is even too horrible to be used on the worst devils of humanity, then why would it be okay for defenseless animals?

Answer 8

My pet peeve (no pun intended) is when people smoke around their pets. Animals cannot make that choice. I've known many a pet to die early just because there was a house full of smokers. Just as bad as kicking the poor thing!!!

Answer 9

Myka, why don't you volunteer to have the new drugs tested on you and save some of the animals from helping mankind to cure such diseases as Parkinsons, M.S., HIV Aids, etc., etc., and not forgetting your favourite make-up, including lipstick etc.

Answer 10

I strongly agree with everything you have wrote. And I'm not sure if this site might help but if you go to the animal planet web site it has a lot of stuff there that might be interesting.