Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dutchling]

Animal right activists? Well there goes my vote.

Whats inherently wrong with animal rights activists?

(Dutch) animal right activism equals threatening scientists and setting stuff on fire. Not something I want to associate myself with.

[Owlbread]

To be honest, considering some of the things scientists do to animals I'm not all that fussed.

[Dutchling]

To be honest, considering some of the things scientists do to animals I'm not all that fussed.

Yes, because hurting people is always a good solution.

[alexandertnt]

Whats inherently wrong with animal rights activists?

(Dutch) animal right activism equals threatening scientists and setting stuff on fire. Not something I want to associate myself with.

Some Dutch animal rights activists setting stuff on fire means there is something inherently wrong with animal rights activists? Makes sense.

[10ebbor10]

Sadly, it's a rising threat with many of these groups.

[Owlbread]

(Dutch) animal right activism equals threatening scientists and setting stuff on fire. Not something I want to associate myself with.

Well now you said threatening, not hurting.

[10ebbor10]

Only because that would kill their public support.

[alexandertnt]

There are some animal rights groups that do these things, and some that dont. Some of the groups that dont do these things now call themselves animal welfare groups, but there are still a significant number that call themselves animal rights groups and dont threaten to kill people.

My point is that some Dutch animal rights groups doing some silly things shouldnt cause someone to automatically assume that these locals support or condone these acts, and that an Australian political party has anything to do with those things. As far as I am aware, the violent-animal-rights type of groups are significantly less pronounced here in Australia than in Europe.

[Dutchling]

(Dutch) animal right activism equals threatening scientists and setting stuff on fire. Not something I want to associate myself with.

Well now you said threatening, not hurting.

I don't see how that changes anything about it being fucked up and not worthy of sympathy whatsoever.

There are some animal rights groups that do these things, and some that dont. Some of the groups that dont do these things now call themselves animal welfare groups, but there are still a significant number that call themselves animal rights groups and dont threaten to kill people.

My point is that some Dutch animal rights groups doing some silly things shouldn't cause someone to automatically assume that these locals support or condone these acts, and that an Australian political party has anything to do with those things. As far as I am aware, the violent-animal-rights type of groups are significantly less pronounced here in Australia than in Europe.

While I know nothing of them in Australia (and as I just see what thread this is, will also stop discussing this after this post I guess) animal rights activists here are fucked up enough for me to, as I said, want to avoid them as much as possible. I don't have anything against animal right groups in general, of course...

[Owlbread]

I don't see how that changes anything about it being fucked up and not worthy of sympathy whatsoever.

Dutchling, I've seen a pattern emerging. You made a similar comment about the FSA's relationship with Islamism - simply because they fought alongside Islamists, you completely damned them and stated your support for Assad. It's childish to speak and act on absolutes and maxims - "if you do such and such, you aren't worthy of any sympathy/compassion/understanding at all".

It makes life a lot easier when you think that way because you don't have to deal with uncomfortable moral dilemmas, but it is lazy and unbecoming of you as a political thinker. Part of getting older is understanding that the world is not a place where you can easily apply maxims or absolutes.

[Dutchling]

edit: meh, forget it.

[Descan]

Owlbread, you -do- know that unless it's necessary for the experiment, the animals are sedated and given painkillers, right? That they're well cared for during their lives, and that as soon as we can create human tissue to do experiments on, pretty much all animal testing will stop?

I dunno what "things scientists do to animals" you're talking about, but I doubt it's anything recent. >____>

[Owlbread]

Owlbread, you -do- know that unless it's necessary for the experiment, the animals are sedated and given painkillers, right? That they're well cared for during their lives, and that as soon as we can create human tissue to do experiments on, pretty much all animal testing will stop?

I dunno what "things scientists do to animals" you're talking about, but I doubt it's anything recent. >____>

I understand that as soon as we can create human tissue to do experiments on, animal testing will stop. I suppose what I said is really just an emotional reaction to seeing stuff like lab rats being forcibly given cancers, Alzheimer's disease or diabetes. I'm not thinking of stuff from a number of years ago like the rabbits being gassed with sarin (which apparently still goes on in the world, without "painkillers"), the sheep and goats exposed to nuclear blasts in Kazakhstan or the shaven, tortured macaques in American laboratories, it's just the really mundane stuff that gets me. Something at the back of my mind keeps telling me what I'm seeing isn't right, even though I know it's necessary.

[Dutchling]

Owlbread, you -do- know that unless it's necessary for the experiment, the animals are sedated and given painkillers, right? That they're well cared for during their lives, and that as soon as we can create human tissue to do experiments on, pretty much all animal testing will stop?

I dunno what "things scientists do to animals" you're talking about, but I doubt it's anything recent. >____>

I understand that as soon as we can create human tissue to do experiments on, animal testing will stop. I suppose what I said is really just an emotional reaction to seeing stuff like lab rats being forcibly given cancers, Alzheimer's disease or diabetes. I'm not thinking of stuff from a number of years ago like the rabbits being gassed with sarin (which apparently still goes on in the world, without "painkillers"), the sheep and goats exposed to nuclear blasts in Kazakhstan or the shaven, tortured macaques in American laboratories, it's just the really mundane stuff that gets me. Something at the back of my mind keeps telling me what I'm seeing isn't right, even though I know it's necessary.

I guess I have an emotional reaction to this too. My brother got threatened while doing research using macaques. Research that is also done on human volunteers by the way. Nothing serious happened afterwards, but still...

He actually showed me his monkeys once, completely illegal of course, and I passed a room filled with rabbits in cages on my way to them. He told me they were all probably filled with tumors, which I guess is indeed emotional reaction-worthy. I didn't really care at the moment though, because macaques are fucking adorable :v.

[Jimmy]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The above is a nifty tool that I haven't personally had the opportunity to use. A good friend of mine at University however spent most of her honors using it. Here's a link to what it's used for. [link]

Ultimately when we experiment on animals, it would be good to consider whether what we're doing is in any way more immoral than ending their life for consumption as food. In some ways, their death has even more meaning when used to advance medical or scientific knowledge than it does to simply serve as a tray of plastic wrapped meat in a supermarket deli that will get thrown in the trash if it's not sold.