My animal welfare dilemma.

I turned vegetarian recently. My main reason for the change was realising that there is nothing about humans that makes us intrinsically better than other animals. Of course, we have all manner of bells and whistles granted us by evolution that make us more advanced mentally, but unless you want to invoke the concept of a soul, or some kind of spirituality, there's nothing you can really point to in humans that isn't simply a better-developed version of something you can find elsewhere in the animal kingdom. So I drew the conclusion that humans don't in fact have any kind of automatic authority over other living creatures.

But then it occurred to me that the same principle can be applied to animal testing, which can often be lethal for the animals involved. Going by what I just said, I should stay consistent and support bringing the practice to an end. Trouble is, my gut reaction to that point is that it's ridiculous. Animal testing is vital to medical research which has saved countless lives. Whenever I encounter animal rights fundamentalists like PETA, who would sooner allow lethal diseases to run rampant through the human population than support animal testing, I want to beat them with occasional furniture. Yet by my own reasoning, I've wound up agreeing with them.

So what should I do? The main thing I'm trying to do is avoid contradiction. I can't possibly deny the intrinsic superiority of human beings while cheerful waving animals into a vivisectionist's lab for the good of my own species. But to stubbornly refuse those same animals access to the lab while people die of aids, cancer and hundreds of other diseases seems just as immoral. It seems that I can either support animals dying in laboratories, or humans (possibly including myself) dying in the streets of disease. But if I accept that both types of life are equally valuable, how do I decide who to side with?

What do you folks think? Am I just being too rigid with my principles? Is there an easy way accept both animal welfare and animal testing that I haven't thought of? I suspect this is a problem which has been debated hundreds of times before, but I have to admit, it's got me stumped.

Tags: Animal rights, PETA, animal testing, animal welfare

Views: 244

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Scott Johnston on June 11, 2009 at 10:21pm
"Some day, hopefully, such testing will not be necessary. Today, frankly, it's the best we've got."

This is the main reason I can't say yet that I am completely against animal testing. i wish I could refute it on principle, however, I agree with it.
Permalink Reply by Anette on June 18, 2009 at 7:08am
It's a tricky one.

There's this element of humanity, which I suspect has been drilled into us through religion and philosophy over the ages, and that is..we should not have too much pride. IE pride in being a clever and sentient being, that puts it's own achievements above that of less sentient animals. Although I think they are right about pride, as it can lead too foolish and egotistical conclusions, there's nothing wrong with having a certain amount of pride.

And there's nothing wrong with being honest either.

If I am dying of a disease, I will in no way, shape or form, give up a cure because an animal will die in a lab to save me. This does NOT mean, I will not help support groups that try and rid the world of animal cruelty but being honest, I'd rather the cruelty to them, than to myself.

the ways in which we produce meat, is dreadful. MANY things can and should be done in this area, and I hope people like you will continue to support changes.

But at the end of the day, we are sentient beings. This is why I put us first. We know we are going to die, and we know exactly what is happening most of the time when we are suffering. It is my empathy that I feel toward others, that demands of me a solution to their pain. Yes..that may mean pain to an animal. I would love to avoid it as much as possible, but I will not choose another animal over a human.

The only exception I'd possibly make to this are other sentient animals, such as elephants, dolphins other primates and whatever other animal we discover that shows an element of self-awareness.

What makes US different, is that we are aware of ourselves and our lives. Anything that shares that with us in common, I think we should treat equally to ourselves.

I don't think people should beat themselves up about this as much as they do. Whenever I read threads or debates like this, I am so touched by humanities amazing capacity for love and caring. sometimes, it may be a little misplaced(we care about a lab-rat more than a human), but I think this is simply because we are very removed from these humans and cannot empathize.

Our capacity for empathy, is extrodinary however and this thread show's us what we are capable of.

Humans really are, terrific creatures :) (in potential at least :P )
Permalink Reply by Ivan Reyes on June 20, 2009 at 11:35am
I am quite opinionated when it comes to this issue. I also believe that humans are not any better than animals...but even animals in the wild kill other animals for sustenance. Other animals such as lions or snakes do not care about the animal they are killing, they only know that if they don't kill to eat, they too will die. I think it is senseless for humans to only eat vegetables. We are carnivorous. Our teeth are made to tear into the sinews of meat.

If you have an issue with the killing of animals, buy products that are made with synthetic materials instead of leather and fur, buy vegetables that are grown without pesticides, and buy meat products that are guaranteed to have been kill humanely, but I would never give up meat. You do not eat the animal because you are better, you eat because their death will continue your life. Because it sustains your body. You can be healthier without resorting to denying your humanity...err, your animal instincts.
Permalink Reply by Jared Lardo on June 26, 2009 at 6:30am
tl;dr, but the first paragraph.

I don't like to be evil or mean to other living things, but idealism, gentleness, etc. fail in practice. A tiger is WRONG--let me be absolutely clear on this--WRONG--to kill and eat me. But, it's still going to in the right situation, 'cause it can and to do so brings the tiger a benefit.

Well, f*ck that tiger, man, I wanna f*cking LIVE! BAM BAM BAM. Dead tiger. Not a threat any longer. Hey, I'm hungry, too. I'm going to eat it. Oh, delicious sweet irony. ...and tiger meat. Mustn't forget the tiger meat.

Might doesn't make Right... but Right is an approximation used by social animals to figure out what to do or to not do... evolution has shown creatures doing things we'd never do because those things are evil succeeding insanely well. They have the Might and they succeed. Right just doesn't play into it.

Just the same, I'd don't have the "right" to exploit the chicken for food, but I can and I want to and so I will.
Permalink Reply by Little Name Atheist on July 10, 2009 at 12:46pm
A tiger is WRONG--let me be absolutely clear on this--WRONG--to kill and eat me.

Why is the tiger wrong? If the tiger is hungry, why not?
Permalink Reply by Jim Winkler on July 11, 2009 at 3:50am
EO Wilson estimates that up to 50% of the species on earth will be extinct by 2100. I don't consider what we are doing to food and lab animals to hold a candle to the wholesale extermination of half the world's species.Talking about whether it is right or wrong to eat an animal, perform scientific testing on an animal, or even torturing an animal to death does not concern me anywhere near as much as the number of species we are sending to extinction - for fun and profit. My first priority is to the planet and ecosystem.

Human overpopulation is most certainly the largest factor. Yet few dare talk about solutions. I don't have kids.
Permalink Reply by Little Name Atheist on July 20, 2009 at 2:38pm
You aren't a lawyer, are you? Sharks don't eat lawyers. It's a professional courtesy.
Permalink Reply by sacha on July 23, 2009 at 12:22am
Start small. You are destined to fail if you carry too much on your shoulders. Every little bit is a step in the right direction. I have been vegetarian for 23 years and I tried to take on too much in the beginning. Wear out your leather shoes and then replace them with humane footwear, etc. It is great that you have decided to be a vegetarian. Stop there for now. Be pleased with yourself for choosing the humane route in regards to food. You are doing more than most and that is something to celebrate. The scientists do not want to test on animals (unless they are sadistic). They are developing alternatives and I hope to see the end of animal testing in my lifetime. Read this article when you have time: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227126.800-lungonachip-coul...
If everyone took a small step to eliminate the suffering of animals, the world would be a better place. I congratulate you on your first step.

By the way in response to some of the others: The Humane Myth. An idea being propagated by the animal-using industry and some animal protection organizations that it is possible to use and kill animals in a manner that can be fairly described as respectful or compassionate or humane. http://humanemyth.org/

and plants do not have a central nervous system and are not sentient beings like mammals, fish, birds, etc. Tired and old rationalization that makes no sense...

There are more vegetarians in the UK than anywhere else in the world besides India. You are not alone.
Permalink Reply by Jared on July 23, 2009 at 1:38am
This isn't a topic I'd normally touch, but I feel I should add my two cents.

I, personally, feel a little guilty eating meat solely because I enjoy it at the expense of another being's life.
But I'm not about to go vegetarian, because I even though I am an animal, do other animals not eat each other? I have the teeth of an omnivore and I use them accordingly.

On animal testing, I don't believe I'm versed well enough in it to form an opinion, but I believe testing can be done in humane ways.
Permalink Reply by ShashankA on October 29, 2011 at 7:06am

You don't have the body of an omnivore. Your teeth are small and you have no claws.

 

Animals don't wear clothes and have sex with their family members. Does that justify incest among humans?

 

You are a human. You have the intelligence to understand ethics and the technology to implement ethics. Please use it.

Permalink Reply by ShashankA on October 29, 2011 at 6:54am

About animal testing, I guess I have the following to say:

1. Test it on both human and non-human animals

2. Test it ONLY IF you have removed all known possibility of direct damage or death to the animal

3. If point 3 is fulfilled, I don't mind volunteering for the test as a subject!

Permalink Reply by Lois on November 1, 2011 at 9:03pm
If you can, find meat that comes from animals that have been raised on smaller farms, rather than on huge factory farms where they are crammed into tiny cages and horrific abuse is rampant. Whether humans are "superior" to other animals is entirely besides the point. There is NEVER an excuse for animal abuse. The idea that it is okay to mistreat creatures and deny them basic amenities for their mental and physical well being just because "they will be killed for food, anyway," is complete shite.

RSS

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service