Topical Discussion - Please try to get overly angry/upset

Cromcruaich · Post by **Cromcruaich** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:42 pm

Banana wrote:theyve known for ages that rabbits mice etc are very dissimalar from humans.
Theyre just used now cuz theyve always been used and monkeys/dolphin have a better spokesperson

The rodents should squeal.

Post by **Xest** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:54 pm

It's probably something to do with mice being small enough to store yet complex enough to test on. I'm sure they could model things quite well on horses or something if they wanted, but a lab full of horses could be a pain in the arse to look after

Also I guess mice/rats are often seen as vermin so there's probably lower potential for outcries of animal testing than if they used cute little puppy dogs all the time.

Post by **Lairiodd** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:38 pm

Gandelf wrote: Testing on animals is different, because animals don't have a choice. They can't sign a "consent form".

Rights and responsibilities go together. Humans get their rights because they are smart enough to understand the responsibilities that go along with them. At its most basic, everyone agrees not to break other people's rights and in exchange they expect that their rights will be respected. You get the right to life unless you break other people's rights. If you kill someone, you either lose the right to liberty and are put in prison or lose your right to life and are executed.

Animals are not smart enough to understand any of this. We cannot make a deal with them not to break their rights and in exchange they will not break ours. There is the added issue that the balance of power is massively in our favour. We don't need their agreement as they are not powerful enough to break our rights.

On the other hand, if an animal mauls a human we don't respond by wiping out the entire species (though we do likely kill the specific animal if possible). We understand that they are not smart enough to link those consequencies with their actions and also not smart enough to take steps to make sure that none of their members does anything to humans.

However, I am sure that if an animal who was smart enough to negotiate an agreement (say a border) with us appeared, we wouldn't respond by killing them all.

Animal rights are not like human rights. A human gets his/her rights due to their ability to understand the deal. Animal rights are really rights of animal owners/lovers and thus aren't really rights at all. If they have to be classed as a right, they are a right to live in a world where animals are not subjected to unpleasent experiences. Some people would value such a right, others think it is worthless. On the other hand, the vast vast majority of people (even murderers) value the right to life.

In fairness, if we allow people to eat animals, then what is the problem with animal testing.

I'm not saying that what has happened is right or wrong, but highlighting the way some people may look at it.

I guess it comes down to a simple value question. How many mice are equal to one human?

Putting it another way, if someone lined up 100 mice, would you kill them in order to save a loved one ? At how many mice deaths would you draw the line ?

For this specific case, it shows the value of testing on animals. If we didn't allow animal testing, this would not be a news story as the development of nearly all medical treatments would result in some kind of side effects until the final version was developed. If it was on the news it would be "another X people die due to medical testing". Probably, it would include calls to relax the testing ban.

Cromcruaich · Post by **Cromcruaich** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:46 pm

Xest wrote:It's probably something to do with mice being small enough to store yet complex enough to test on. I'm sure they could model things quite well on horses or something if they wanted, but a lab full of horses could be a pain in the arse to look after

Also I guess mice/rats are often seen as vermin so there's probably lower potential for outcries of animal testing than if they used cute little puppy dogs all the time.

No, its more than that, mice are specifically good, something to do with having similiar physiolgical responses to humans. Was something I was taught many moons ago, but cant remember any of the detail. Can probably google it.

Ovi · Post by **Ovi** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:56 pm

Nice post Lair, I do think you oever estimate the average Human though

If you look at human actions in terms of "animal instincts" then a lot of the nasty things are more understandable.

Whilst as a species we are generally speaking more responsible, I think we have an awful long way to go.

"However, I am sure that if an animal who was smart enough to negotiate an agreement (say a border) with us appeared, we wouldn't respond by killing them all."

Thats why we kill our own in so many arguments over borders? If the beings over the boarder weren't human, then i am sure border conflicts would be significantly worse. Mainly due to the fact that any "different" tends to be feared, the fear in turn leading to violence against it.

There is plenty of racism around, between members of our own species, I think a different species would increase the problems no end.

Ovi · Post by **Ovi** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:57 pm

Cromcruaich wrote:No, its more than that, mice are specifically good, something to do with having similiar physiolgical responses to humans. Was something I was taught many moons ago, but cant remember any of the detail. Can probably google it.

I thought Pigs were the best though? Which would cause storage issues

Post by **Lieva** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:38 pm

yes pigs are the best

mice and rabbits are the worse as they respond completly different to humans :/

The thing is
yes animals cant understand
but can you really say that they have less rights than humans?

Look at the other places in the earth where people are treated by animals by other humans.

In fact i think some of the worst most evil people loved their animals more

Norcott · Post by **Norcott** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:53 pm

'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others ..

Kallima · Post by **Kallima** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:59 pm

Banana wrote:The thing is
yes animals cant understand
but can you really say that they have less rights than humans?

Look at the other places in the earth where people are treated by animals by other humans.

I'm afraid, when it really comes to a choice, I put humans above animals. Put it this way, if I was driving along the road and a rabbit and a child ran out in front of the car and I had to hit one of them, then the rabbit gets it.

Of course if it was a choice between a rabbit and an Albion, then the Albion gets it. :bunneh:

Thandruil · Post by **Thandruil** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 7:09 pm

Haven't read all posts, cause i cba. But imo those 6 men knew what they were up against and did it for a reason, be it money, or something else.
Animals don't have a choice, and if they get sick, they just get thrown with the rest of the garbage and new tests get done on other animals.