responda esta pergunta

debate Pergunta

Animal rights or animal research? why?

 ewb991 posted over a year ago
next question »

debate Respostas

bri-marie said:
Both.

I think, when it comes to things like diseases, animais should be researched. Many diseases that effect humans, also effect animals, so it makes sense for them to be researched. (I also believe that humans should be tested and used for research as well.)

However, when it comes to things like make-up? No. Their right to live, and right not to be tortured comes first. If humans want make-up, humans should be tested to make sure it's safe.
select as best answer
posted over a year ago 
para-scence said:
Animal rights.

I think it's wrong to take hold of any creatures life, just because you are superior to them. I'm not sure if it's a good analogy, but that's like forcefully taking someone who's mentally handicapped from their início to research them. They still have a life, and family, and they are unable to defend themselves. I just think that's wrong. I think we should just leave animais alone and let them live their lives. And it's wrong to keep them trapped in a cage; that's basically taking their lives as well.
select as best answer
posted over a year ago 
Chaann94 said:
Animal research.

I will always know the lives of the 20 cancer patients in a hospital are much mais worth than the lives of 1000 rats.
select as best answer
posted over a year ago 
Dewheart said:
The vast majority of experiments on animais are done por students and the results of those studies are never published. Even in the case of actually looking for cures for diseases, it is unethical to cause suffering to an innocent being.
select as best answer
posted over a year ago 
*
Because curing 10 years old cancer patients is unethical? What you're basically saying is we need to get back to the dark ages where people died of the flu. Because the flu medicine and stuff was invented via animal research. Also the small pocks are cured because of animal experiments. What you're saying "even in the case of curing diseases it's unethical" is just hilariously stupid.
Chaann94 posted over a year ago
*
I never said we need to go back to the dark ages, so would you kindly not put words in my mouth? We can find alternatives to curing diseases that are not tested on animals. So you are willing to sacrifice millions of lives of animais who have done nothing to deserve the torture inflicted on them? I would amor to find a cure for cancer, but in the case of animal testing, the ends don't justify the means. Even though I disagreed with your stance on animal testing I didn't use petty insults. Calling someone else's opinion "hilariously stupid" when they presented it in a respectful way, is simply immature and uncalled for.
Dewheart posted over a year ago
ThePrincesTale said:
Neither. The greater good.

If that means a few mice have to be used in order to potentially create a vaccine that could save thousands of lives, then so be it.

On the same token, if some are killed for the sole purpose of.someone looking at their innards, then I don't see that as good.

Society over over the individual. It may be either human society or animal society, each have their own circumstances.
select as best answer
posted over a year ago 
next question »