|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:49 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:29 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:42 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:29 pm
|
|
|
|
I love animals, but i also love me a steak, I even buy leather. But The reason I do that is so that parts of the animal don't go to waste. Cows now adays have been bred to the point where if we released theminto the wild they'd die. They're part of hundreds of generations of Breeding to be food. at this point in time for most farm animals, it would be crueler to LEt them loose than to continue on using them for food. I'm not condoning any type of Physical pain/atrocities I'm just pointing out that our food source has been bred to be just that. PETA in my opinion are fools, WE can't eliminate animals from our diet as a species, it just wouldn't be practical. WE need some of the amino acids that the meat provides for us. And The warmth that my leather coat provides is far better than the skin that was taken off of the cow that my steak was made out of just being tossed aside.
Khemet is the Ancient Name of Egypt, they used to Worship cats, Because one of their gods was Bast. The cat goddess.
I think every animal has it's place in this world. If one eats meat or wears animal products, They should respect and realize what type of sacrifice is given for one to continue their life. . It's called a Circle. If humans hadn't evolved to this point, PETA would not have the Minds TO Complain about how far we've evolved and the fact that we actually need to farm meat instead of Hunting on our own, if we still did that we'd use all of the animal and not cause it to suffer, because we'd only hunt for nescessity. and sport hunting is a despicable concept,
Name me one case in recent history (post 1970) that was Animal testing just to see how it "Ticked" i would like to see if there are still such pointless tests. I can think of a few conditioning tests that were creul but none in recent years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:25 pm
|
|
|
|
Ascher overcastic Ascher Ilassa Ascher most animal testing isnt about medicines OR cosmetics its about sticking needles into animals just to see how they tick Actually that is quite untrue We already know how animals tick due to a process called dissection. Plus I'm in a psychology and a chemistry class, and its been found that rats are actually around 90% of genetic similarity to humans believe it or not, and of course apes and primates being 98% genetically similar. Thus When a medicine is being tested it is presumed to have the same effect on a test animal as it would on a human, and animals are used as a first measure that way should there be a problem with the drug, only a lab rat will be effected rather than a human. And you have to consider that medicinal testing comes in stages, right after a drug has been deemed safe for animal use the next stage is HUMAN testing. Need our scientists stick needles in humans to learn how they tick? no Because Da Vinci found that out for us when he began to perform illegal autopsies. Scientists already know exactly how animals tick, and it is the exact same reasons humans live too. A beating heart. Lungs to take in oxygen, liver for blood cleaning, a digestive and waste system, kidneys, spine, CNS, DNA, RNA, Gabba, dopamine, various Neurotransmitters, are ALL present in animals as they are in a human. *takes a bow* Thank you animal crultey is still worng, i don't care if they are testing for the good of mankind. we can test things on ourselves! why not get a group of humans together and test them? i can assure you that the human group would (even though tested on) would be treated better than the rat group, or primate group. I am going to pose you two questions before I return to my slumber... 1- From your point of view: Is cruelty to humans not as bad as cruelty to animals? Is a mass genocide in a small uknown country somewhere not as deplorable as killing one rat to save a human life? and 2- You name for me one person who would willingly volunteer to test a drug that has never been tested before, where even the scientists who made it don't even know the side effects. Would you be willing to be one of those human first generation test subjects? The whole point in testing on animals is for human safety.
to answer your question...
1. ok....so a genocide is not a good thing i never said it was....your taking what i said out of proportion...i mean that animal crulty is a bad thing....making them suffering then killing them is unneccesary...and crule, and no i do not agree to human genocide, i thknk that is awful and mean and crule to, and i hope it never happends again.
2. i think human testing is ok....as long as they know what they are getting themselves into and it's willing not forced, yes i would volenteer if i knew whaat i was getting myself into.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:26 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:45 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:52 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:43 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2005 7:08 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|