I was just thinking, and wondering, about the subject of animal welfare. You know "animal welfare" is the older term. It goes back to the founding of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in 1824 in the United Kingdom. "Animal rights" is a more recent and politically loaded term. Rights are also a historic and political term. Rights to freedom of speech and against unreasonable searches goes back to at least the 18th century in this country. Rights like to an 8 hour work day universal health care are more recent additions. They are usually in modern constitutions. But the United States is a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council. And we have always said we are opposed to those rights, or at least that they are fundamental, and should be charters of rights. And rights like the rights to a jury are just peculiar to the United States. Some people think they really aren't universal. But everyone in the world now seems to believe animals should be free of unnecessary cruelty. They just disagree on how far it should go. PETA believes we should all be vegan by law. They think honey is even cruel. Back starting in the 19th century it became illegal to harvest meat with unnecessary cruelty. It was also illegal to overburden your animals on a farm if they had to carry a load. If meat production is needlessly cruel now, it's because the two groups are now in two radical camps and they don't communicate anymore. I think most people would agree testing of cosmetic products on animals is cruel and unnecessary. I personally favor the gradual abolition of meat. But most people would agree there's no reason why meat production can't be as humane as possible now. Also, testing now to cure serious and deadly human diseases must involve animals. There was a controversy a while back. Some Hollywood celebrities were members of PETA and were against animal testing to cure diseases. But it was pointed out then they also were strong supporters of HIV and AIDS research. And AIDS research involves rhesus macaques monkeys. There is no other way to do it. And I am a little confused by that last one. Can't medical research on animals be as painless as possible? Why can't it be totally pain-free? Doctors are hesitant to give humans too many opioids when they are in pain because they don't want them to become addicted. With animals that wouldn't be a problem because ironically they really wouldn't care if they became addicted. They will be euthanized when the experiment is over anyways, usually. Also with opioids humans sometimes build up a tolerance. And higher doses have to be used, until the opioids are no longer effective. Again animals are usually put to sleep at the end of the experiment. So they wouldn't be alive long enough to build up a tolerance. Any thoughts on what I just said?
Yes. And people said Coco couldn't form sentences, that she didn't have "syntax". Coco once said "Me love nut butter sandwiches". Why would that not be a sentence?
Thanks, yes there was a bit of skepticism with koko. Slightly lesser known orangtuan chantek could also sign. We have a set of twin malefemale straycats. Quite interesting synchs they have. I dont take strays in as too many diseases.
