I know we aren't supposed to plug our websites and all, but I wrote about this on mine....go to my profile and snag the link to my "space" (if you have one yourself) and send me a friend request so I can add you.....then visit my blog section and read through some of my stuff on the subject....i'll try to post a direct link if it works....
I think this link should work....it's the entry on the 13th of April. http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...n=49BD6F34-3288-4A21-9FB264B31CC47E5538445257 If it doesn't, let me know.
Autumn: I have read a bit about animal rights v. animal welfare. I was in a class last semester on Ethics and the Environment, and we did some reading/discussions about animal rights/welfare... I don't actually have myspace, so I couldn't read your post on it, sorry. Nonetheless, I'm not sure how any creature can NOT have the right to be free from the kind of pain inflicted in laboratory experiments, such as the one Mars supposedly performs on animals. You're right, though, that the story seems a bit sketchy - I also cannot find any sources other than Peta... just posts on forums by people who got their info. from Peta, lol.
Sis....can you open my link above....you should be able to even without one...if not i can copy and past the blog in here : )
It says "You Must Be Logged In To Do That"... Ah, okay MySpace. lol. Yeah, it'd be awesome if you could just copy and paste your post in here... it sounds interesting.
If you have a problem with animal testing you should try working in an animal lab. There are federal and state guide lines that have to be strictly met and there are regular inspections. Most rodents that are used for testing live out there life in a much nicer environment than they would in the wild. In most labs all the animals are played with and not just studied. Don't trust what PETA has to say if they are the only ones saying it.
There seems to be a problem apart from the animal thing people mentionned on this thread. Why the hell should chocolate ingredients actually be tested? I mean, if scientist are not sure whether or not the shit they put into the chocolate (to somehow make the company save money) is bad for people, I say NO THANKS! Tsk, gimme a break... it's only food....
Here you go NoDirect: Animal Rights Vs. Animal Welfare Category: Pets and Animals As with anything in this world, you have your good and you have your bad. Sometimes the "goods" mess up and do some things "bad" and sometimes the "bads" will do something once in awhile that is "good." This said, all people on this earth in some way, whether large or small are effected by animals...whether directly or indirectly. A good percentage of the people in the world feel that animals are more than "dumb" creatures to be used as needed and discarded. Of these people, there are many that take action to support their beliefs that creatures deserve respect, show love and should be treated kind and fair (like we should treat our fellow humans) Here is were the road fork, some choose (maybe they do not know the terms) to be "Animal Rights Activists" or "Animal Rights Supporters" and other branch off to the other lane and take the route of "Animal Welfare Supporter." But does anyone know the difference? Here is the brief descriptions...read them and see what group your beliefs and actions fall into: Animal Rights Beliefs: The number one goal of the Animal Rights movement is to end ALL "exploitation" of animals by humans. This includes, but is not limited to: Raising Livestock For Food, Dairy Products, And Other Goods. Eating Meat (And Most Of The Time ANY Animal Product) Hunting and Fishing Horse Shows, Equestrian Sports, Even Recreational Trail Riding Dog Shows And Agility Competitions Animal Actors in Movies (Even If Treated Well) Guide Dogs For The Blind Therapy Dogs For The Elderly, Sick, Handicapped Police And Military Dogs Search and Rescue Dogs (You Know, Like the Ones That Were Able To Find People Still Alive After The Towers Fell, And At The Same Time Comfort Of Firefighter and EMT's as They Searched) Owning Pets In General Animal Welfare Beliefs: The main goal of the movement is to prevent and address cruelty to animals through education and action. To provide care, treatment and proper homes. Funding and support of shelters that can properly, kindly and fairly treat animals in need of their services. Enforce Anti-Cruelty Laws through the education and collaboration with local, county, state and federal law enforcement. Initiate, Monitor, Lobby for and enfore humane legislation. Create Guidelines, Rules and Regulations pertaining to the proper care and living conditions for livestock, zoo animals, circus performers, pets, performance animals, work animals, lab animals, etc. Now, where do you fit in? Well, below are the groups that are associated with each. Animals Rights: PETA, HSUS (Humane Society of the US), ELF, And ALF (one the the FBI's most wanted groups) Animals Welfare: ASPCA, MSPCA, NAIA, Rutland Cty. Humane, Collie Rescue Of New England....An Thousands More Who Work Hands on Everyday To Help Animals Around the World. In Conclusion: Love your pet? Love Your Horses? Watched In Awe As An S&R Dog Does It's Work? Peta and it's followers want that all to disappear. I leave you with some quotes from that group: "Pet ownership is an abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation" (Ingrid Newkirk, PETA founder Washingtonian Aug. 1986) "In the end I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether" (Ingrid Newkirk Newsday, Feb. 21 1988) "The cat, like the dog, must disappear..... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." (John Bryant, _Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of a Changing Ethic_ (Washington, D.C.: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, 1982), p.15) "We are not especially 'interested in' animals. Neither of us had ever been inordinately fond of dogs, cats, or horses in the way that many people are. We didn't 'love' animals." --Peter Singer, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd ed. (New York Review of Books, 1990),Preface, p. ii
It's not all about saving money I'm sure...alot of the ingredients are preservatives....plus they like to say that they melt in your mouth, but not in your hand....that might have something to do with it too....candies are shipped all over the world in all different climates....they could leave Hackettstown NJ in the middle of one of our 20 degree winters and be shipped to sunny hot Arizona and need to maintain their form.... On top of this, companies need to exhaust product testing due to the number of people out there just waiting for an excuse to file a lawsuit : )
Thanks for that Autumn! I believe you have exaggerated the beliefs of the animal rights movement. I don't know what is true for all of the groups, as I'm only familiar with Peta, but I know that Peta has said it has no problem with people having companion animals. That's probably the context in which some of those quotes about "pets" originated. I actually just found an article on companion animals on Peta's website, and some of what they said was a bit surprising to me. They say that it would have been better if the idea of "pet ownership" had never existed, because it has led to problems such as overpopulation and cruelty to animals. Then they say: If you'd like to read the whole article, here's the link: http://www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-petaonpets.asp. I'm not sure about any of the other things... a quick search on Peta's website gave me no info. about guide/search-and-rescue dogs, and I'm too lazy to do any more research, lol. However, I do agree that most animal rights activists are opposed to: "Raising Livestock For Food, Dairy Products, And Other Goods;" "Eating Meat (And Most Of The Time ANY Animal Product);" and "Hunting and Fishing." Peace, sister.
LMAO! Right! Oh, yeah! Where did you pick up this gem? You are so wrong it's pitiful. People don't play with their lab specimens. You can't because that would be against protocol. It would throw off their tests. Not to mention the fact that there are usually dozens if not hundreds of animals to every lab assistant. And if they actually "played" with an animal, they just might develop an "attachment" to it and be reluctant to kill and dissect it later. No lab rats and other animals are kept in cages most of their lives except when they are removed for experiments. Go visit a lab sometime... Unless you're referring to primates who are tested for intelligence. But that's not what goes on in most labs.
And what kind of animals do you play with there? And what are you testing them for? What kind of lab is it?
Depending the testing animals are handled and played with on a regular basis so they are less stressed when being handled for testing. IF the animals are over stressed they wouldn't perform. It's is a lot different than what most people think.
Yeah, another lie. Do they get to socialize? Do they live together in broods like they do in the wild? Sure they don't need to worry about predators (except you of course). But I hardly think a lab qualifies as a "better quality of life" for an animal than their natural environment. How many animals are you responsible for, what kind, and how much time do you have to "play" with them?
This is a baby rat from my lab. We work with pigeons and rats. We study behavior in stressful situations. Like avoidance behavior and we do ADHD studies using hypertensive rats. In the same lab there is cocaine testing and aggression testing. All of the animals are played with on a daily basis. I don't know if you have ever handled rats before but if there are stressed they bite and they wont stay still. Well that makes it hard to weigh and transport the animals. Pigeons are a little different they are all handled on a daily basis also. It is very frustrating when people who have never working in a lab with animals judge. I am not saying that I agree with all animal testing but most lab treat there animals really well.
So you "handle them" to condition them to human contact, you don't "play with them". Let's call a spade a spade here. In other words if you didn't condition them to human contact they would be so stressed by the sudden human contact, they "wouldn't perform". That's the goal, not to "play" but to "condition". Not to give them some recreation, freedom, socialization, but to get them ready for the next experiment that will probably mean their death. To call such contact "play" is a LIE you must tell yourself everyday. Not too different from the LIE told the nazi's told the jews - go to the showers and get "clean"! If that's what you have to tell yourself to cushion your conscience, fine. But the executioner doesn't "PLAY" with the condemned...
No we play with them it is more than just handling they run up and gown my arms the play in the pockets of my lab coat. It is not just handling. No need to be an ass Skip. I was giving a condensed version. They are played with by every member of the research team on a daily basis. They are treated more like pets than subjects.
uh huh. I lived with a woman who had the job of caring for the mice at a university lab. yes, she handled the animals, but the last handling was always to kill them. She'd get a few out, but many were quite ill and killing a grace. You should look into what happened to the OU Chimps who were part of the wave of language research in the 70s. many are dead of AIDS, some are still in labs that won't sell them back to the activists (the language researchers, in some cases), a couple made it out and died in sanctuaries. I understand the thoughts on LD 50 tests. I know if a huge push for decent, neutral research on MDMA and other chemicals will involve animal studies. I'm not comfortable with it, but the good v. bad balance falls on the good side heavily. I support extremely limited animal research, and certainly not for vanity and food products.
