Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum What are we going to do about these idiots...

I picked up the newspaper today -and read 4 separate articles on how animal-rights protestors are harassing scientists and stopping them from completing important research. The worst part is how these people terrorise scientists during thier evrey-day life with vandalism and violence. What can we do?

They are hypocrites - they exact violence and terror on scientists and yet would sacrifice their own lives in order to save a fluffy bunny wabbit. It is incoherent.

Have you seen Borat talking to the animal rights campaigners - very funny.

(Borat is talking to two protestors; one a short middle aged woman; the other a teenage girl)

Borat - Why do you like to hunt the fox?

Protestor 1 - I do not hunt the fox! I think people that hunt the fox are the scum of the earth.

(Borat shows the lady his bear hunting badge on his jacket lapel)

Borat - In Kazikstan...

Protestor 1 - You kill bears!

Borat - Yes. Kill them.

Protestor 1 - He kills bears!

Protestor 2 - You kill bears! That's evil

Borat - No. In Kazakhstan we shoot animal. We do not hunt the fox.

Protestor 2 - Well you shouldn't be talking to us because we love animals.

Borat - We love animal too.

Protestor 1 - So why do you shoot them?

Borat - For fun.

Protestor 1 - You evil b*****d! P**s off!

(Borat walks away but then returns)

Borat - I do not kill fox.

Protestor 1 - But you kill bears.

Borat - There is no more bears in Kazakhstan.

Protestor 1 - Because you've killed them all!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Borat is talking to two different protestors; both middle aged women)

Borat - In Kazakhstan we love animals.

Protestor - Good for you.

Borat - We have most popular program on television is animal program.

Protestor - Good.

Borat - Is called, "Dancing Dog and Cat". They dress the dog like a family Royal, like Prince Elizabeth, one with the crown and they dance.

Protestor - But do they treat that animal well.

Borat - Yes they treat very well. They give them food and they only have... (Borat mimics a dog dancing) And the floor is a bit hot so they jump...

Blacknad.

funny, but I don't think Borat can save us. This is a real issue, these ignorant fools are so blind from looking at things from the simplest possible level that they have become completely oblivious to the immence amount of benefits that have come out of animal testing. Then we have more ignorant people like Pamela Anderson who really don't give a damn about anything apart from their repuation funding these fools!

Someone on gogo once said that some cures have been wasted because they had a negative effect on animals but may not necesarily have a negative effect on humans. This is the only valid argument against animal testing -ever. What we need to do is test the stuff on these animal rights protestors themselves. This way everyone wins.

We've experimented on people, some "lower humans" tasted the king's food and it was considered normal. Some people are considered more important than others. Some draw the line with humans on either side of it. Others draw the line with animals on the same side as humans. Sometimes it's where you view yourself in the pecking order. Once it's a few steps removed we can live with experimenting. It's a complex problem and one that's here to stay. What we can do is keep order which the debate continues.

The following is an excerpt of an interview with ( Is This A Dangerous Philosopher ? Peter Singer Interview ) with philosopher Peter Singer :

Claudette Vaughan: Correct me if I'm wrong but you once paralleled the animal situation to the slave trade. All the other liberation movements ? women, gays and slaves ? all won their freedom of sorts by becoming economically viable, therefore tolerated in the market-place. Will the Animal Liberation Movement be the first Movement that wins on moral grounds alone?

Peter Singer: The parallel I made was essentially this: in both cases there is a dominant powerful group, which essentially defines itself as the repository of the highest moral worth and of the highest values. It says that those outside of this group are lower beings that can be treated as things, brought and sold. Essentially seen as property. I've used that analogy to try and get people to see that for us today animals have that status and we think of ourselves as superior to them and therefore as entitled to use them as a means to our ends. In the same way that white slave traders did with Africans during the slave era. Really what I'm trying to say is: reflect on your own attitudes and ask yourself if you think that slavery is wrong. If you do, can you really defend the attitude that we have towards animals at present?

This next excerpt is a Singer review of Animals in Research , edited by D. Sperlinger in The Quarterly Review of Biology, December, 1982.

The authors of the new essays making up this collection are mostly scientists, though a couple of philosophers get thrown in for good measure. What is most interesting about the essays is that, while many of the scientists stress the value of animal research in their field, they all recognize that unnecessary suffering does occur in laboratories and that there is a need for tighter controls to prevent it. ? this concession is a marked change from hyper-defensive scientists who used to claim, for example, that no scientist would stress an animal because that would distort the results of the experiment (as if causing stress was not sometimes the point of the experiment).

The book makes a much-needed antidote to the venom engendered by antivivisectionists who think that all animal experimenters are sadists, and experimenters who think that all antivivisectionists are sentimental cranks who care more for cats and dogs than for people.

I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.
~ anonymous

I am of two opinions on this. Animal testing for the cosmetics industry is revolting, I think it is pretty obvious by now that cosmetics should not be put in your eyes or eaten. I never understood that one. I certainly think with current technology and knowledge about anatomy vivisectioning is really an old and outdated practice.

About the only thing I think animal testing should be used for is vaccines or perhaps reattaching limbs. Other than that I do think it is purposeless in modern times.

I'm inclined to both agree and disagree. There are a lot of surgical techniques tried out for the first time on animals that you really wouldn't want perfected on your mother.

I think the question comes down to whether what the techniques are humane ... in other words ... were anesthesia and analgesics used properly.

Save aminals from stupid research.For important research make sure minimum pain gets inflicted on "Higher" Animals.. Elephant,Dolphins,Whales,Cow,Horses,Tigers,Chimps etc come in this category... Animals with organized behaviour go through larger pain.. they "feel" for their near and dear ones.

The lust for fashionable solutions doesnt serve science...enough is known to be deducted using smart extrapolation techniques.
Why more ?

dvk wrote:
"...enough is known to be deducted using smart extrapolation techniques."

In some cases. Not in all. Perhaps not even in most.

See there is no logic in my resoning if we are accpeting facts of life.Spontaneity for example comes from such source.
This is true in my opinion...its non linear.
A spontaneously lived life deserves an spontaneous death.. dont you think so..
The Universe came out spontaneously.. we are living it every moment spontaneously.And it shall achieve its destiny the same way.
Therefore there is no point in putting souls in liquid oxygen, its a sin from a scientific prespective as well.
In some societies people are burned after death..
Why? This is the reason...
May God Bless us with proper reasoning.
We have all committed or are committing a similar sin every day.

dvk wrote:
"May God Bless us with proper reasoning."

May a competent psychiatrist bless you with a prescription for a decent antipsychotic: Seek help.

Ok fine.Instead of putting such a remark you could have simply ignored that line..

DKV,
I don't see what your reply has to do with the post above it or the thread of the discussion which was on using animals for experiments with testing chemicals a/o procedures on animals. Could you please try to be on topic, at least?

Amaranth.

Robert Miller asks:

"I picked up the newspaper today -and read 4 separate articles on how animal-rights protestors are harassing scientists and stopping them from completing important research. The worst part is how these people terrorise scientists during thier evrey-day life with vandalism and violence. What can we do?"

What we need is a dictator that will have the guts and the power to do the right thing and a sword hanging over his head to drop him/her as soon as the power is abused. History shows that in most cases Dictators get more done, for this I include Pharaoh's and kings. Eventually they do badly and that too is confirmed by history.

We live in a democracy that will never get much done of note. Our best days appear to be behind us. Life here is evolving in very unfortunate ways, with more crime, more greed, more payoffs to politicians that care little about the voter and an influx of legal and illegal immagrints that are intent on turning this country into a semblence of their own country, which was criminally degrading, and which was why they left it.

This may sound depressing to some of you and no doubt there are some that will challenge it. Birth control is a joke when you have chinese comming here for the very reason they want to escape Chinese law limiting families to one child. Mexicans, legal and not, race here to spawn large broods. The church advocates unthethered birth rates. The social system pays people for having children when unable to afford them on their own. Un-married mothers and abandoned mothers are far more numerious than ever before and it is running un-checked, except for providng them with welfare for being sexually uninhibited and out of control.

So, Robert Miller, there is not a darn thing "we" can do about it and there is nothing that is going to be done about it by any person or group of persons in this country. We tried to raise a lot of people to the solid values our country was founded on and instead the sob-sisters managed to lower our values to those of the Earths castaways.
I hope the rest of you see some thing good in what is going on here; all I see is bad news.

Basically, in general, I am an optomist!!
jjw

That was a sideways response, my error.

As to terrorise of scientists it does come around to the same thing. I advocate be kind and careful towards all animals, including people, but in the final approach people must come first. The same sob-sisters will keep you from building on your property because of some roddent they like. The sorry story goes on and on.

jjw