Animal Rights

[Tsuyoiko]

What are your opinions about what rights animals should have, if any?

I don't think the poll covers everything, but if anyone thinks of any good additions, I'm ask Maciamo to fix it (if you don't mind Maciamo )

I was brought up in a vegetarian house, and my parents were members of Animal Aid. I was raised to believe that animals have as much right to life as humans. I feel that we are just one animal species among many, and that we don't have the right to use animals like a commodity. Eating meat seems as horrible to me as eating human flesh! But I know that my view is an extreme one, and I have to live in a society where most people (including my husband) eat meat. I am used to it, so it doesn't bother me much any more, but as a teenager the sight of meat would make me cry.

[Jack]

animals have only one right, and thats the right to look cute,
i may act tough, but im smitten by a little kitten.

Anyway, folk that hurt animals should be shot, shot out of a cannon and into a wall, and then blow up the wall.

We live in this world like its our's, we should remember we're not the only species living here.

[Maciamo]

Eating animals is ok because that's how nature works (some would eat us too if hungry, and have eaten our ancestors). Keeping animals in zoos is more than ok. It's a necessity as many species are now endangered and face extinction in the wild. The conditions are more important than whether they should be kept in zoos or not (same for circuses). As long as they are well treated and fed, no problem (they are like "public pets").

Hitting pets (lightly) like dogs or cats is sometimes necessary, as it is with children, to make them understand that they have done something wrong. In fact, it's difficult to have authority and respect from some dogs without hitting them once or twice and shouting on them to scare them enough so that they understand who commands. My in-laws can't do that and their dog does mischiefs all the time. I tried my methods, and the dog not only behaves in my presence but seem to regard me as the master now (a bit embarassing as it's not my dog).

I am against testing on animals for cosmetic purposes, but probably for testing for medical research, as it can saves uncountable lives in the future.

[Mycernius]

As far as I am concerned eating meat is okay. Humans are omnivores by nature and we need meat to get all our protein (vague memories of biology). The only plant that does this is soya, which is why most vegatarian foods contain soya. Even the greats apes will eat meat to supplement thier diet. It is also a high energy food and most likely helped man to its intelligence. Human brains need a lot of energy.
I agree with Maciamo on the point for zoos. In the past they weren't very good, but nowadays they are used to maintain species and help those that are on the endangered list. Circus animals though are just for human entertainment and some are kept in appaling conditions. If I want to be entertained by animals I'll watch animal planet, at least there they are free and doing what they do naturally.
I think there use in medical research is justified. I would rather prefer an animal being used to find cures for cancer, heart disease and various other conditions, than see people die because these experiments were banned. Imagine the outcry if these experiments were being done on people. Josef Mengele did during WW2. Cosmetic experimenting is something different. Animals shouldn't suffer because of someones vanity.
Hitting is a bit of a grey area. I find the odd tap or smack while training a dog helps. My dog is very obedient and regards me as her master. Remember that is how a dominant pack member will keep its pack in line. A dog regards you as part of its pack. If you don't put some authority on it, it will become difficult. My aunt has this problem with her dog, plus it is inbred. Big, stupid and she has no real control over it. Smacking cats is pointless. Hit a cat and it will get revenge on you, or just piss off elsewhere. Hitting animals for no reason is just a sign of an insercure person who likes to bully things. Probably can't do it to people, so does it to something weaker than himself. In a way it is pathetic and sad.
I'm like Jack when it comes to kittens. So cute, despite using your leg as a climbing tower to get places. My brother two kittens do this to me every thime I go around his house. One has made it all the way to my shoulder. Little bugger!

[Kinsao]

I'm OK with eating meat and using animal products such as dairy. HOWEVER, although I don't believe eating meat to be wrong as such, I feel very unhappy in some cases about the bad conditions in which they are kept (such as battery hens/chickens, or animals not being killed humanely). I'm not vegan or vegetarian, but in an ideal world I'd like for the animals I "use"/eat to be kept in comfortable life and killed painlessly. Maybe I'm hypocritical because it obviously doesn't stab my conscience enough to have made me a vegetarian... ... on the other hand I seldom eat meat anyway, cos I'm lazy and eat mainly raw stuff and powdered soup.

I'm against animal testing for cosmetic purposes, and for medical purposes too. I had to think hard about that last one, but decided against it because no, animals should NOT be caused suffering, it's not right, and, I know medical research benefits for people with illnesses, but I think there should be other ways of testing... I think we have advanced technology to test without need of animals... and, animals react differently from humans, I wouldn't even be 100% satisfied if something had been tested on an animal that it would be OK for a person necessarily. I know you can say "there is a high chance" or whatever but it's still a risk.

Circuses are a "no" for me, not because I even think the animals would necessarily be treated badly, but I just think the animals aren't needed for "entertainment", a circus can be plenty good enough without animals, why put them through it.

I had to think hard about zoos and in the end checked both boxes. On balance it's a yes because zoos help to preserve species that would otherwise die out, protect them, help keep the natural balance and that... these days it's mostly done in an educated way, people know what they're doing, they want to help... but I'm against "bad" zoos where the animals are just cooped up and they're not well looked after.

I think hitting pets is wrong, no matter if they are a big dog. I believe in the "learning by reward" system. I'd only cause pain/harm to an animal if they were actively attacking or threatening me (or someone near me). But, a "tap" or "smack" (I don't mean a full-swing whack!) isn't the same thing as "hitting", I think it depends on the animal. For example, everyone knows a horse or a cow, you can smack them and they don't feel it so hard as a human would, or a small animal like a cat. It doesn't bother them (e.g. tap with a whip, on a horse). And a large dog, probably wouldn't feel a tap or smack to be very hard. When I think of "hitting" I think of a full-force hit in anger - a definite no-no.

[lastmagi]

Interesting poll, Tsuyoiko.

Eating meat is OK
As Maciamo and Mycernius pointed out, eating meat is part of a natural process. Humans are all part of a larger system, not apart from it.

Using products from live animals is OK
After all, we get products from animals that are already bred for that purpose. If we let them loose now, they'd all get killed.

Testing on animals for medical purposes is OK
I agree completely with Mycernius on this one:

I think the[ir] use in medical research is justified. I would rather prefer an animal being used to find cures for cancer, heart disease and various other conditions, than see people die because these experiments were banned. Imagine the outcry if these experiments were being done on people. Josef Mengele did during WW2. Cosmetic experimenting is something different. Animals shouldn't suffer because of someones vanity.

Not much to add for the time being. I think it's actually quite inhumane to let potential medical cures be restricted for that reason. A quick search on google will give some basic myths and facts.

http://www.rds-online.org.uk/pages/p...=2&i_PageID=48

I had to think hard about that last one, but decided against it because no, animals should NOT be caused suffering, it's not right

Working alongside scientists and researchers, you realize that they have the same ethical concerns as anyone else. They want to reduce the suffering as much as anyone else (many scientists start out with a love for the natural world, after all), but they also aim to reduce the suffering of humans, as well. Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways.

from the site:

Researchers are concerned about the welfare of the animals that they study and this concern is both humane and scientific. Scientists are at least as caring as other people and, like anyone else, often have pets of their own. They have no reason to mistreat research animals and good reason for treating them well, because the use of unhealthy, stressed or frightened animals would reduce the reliability of an experiments results. Researchers make sure that their animals are well fed, well housed and kept free of infections and other illnesses.

and, I know medical research benefits for people with illnesses, but I think there should be other ways of testing...

None of those alternatives should be taken in isolation. Indeed, I think it would be dangerous just to restrict oneself to certain alternatives.

from the site:

Non-animal methods - tissue culture, computer modelling, studies of patients and populations - are very widely used. In fact, only about ten pence in every pound spent on medical research goes on animal studies. The word alternatives, often used to describe these non-animal methods, can lead to confusion because these methods are generally used alongside animal studies, not instead of them. All these techniques have their place, and it is rarely possible to substitute one for another.

There are stages in any research programme when it is not enough to know how individual molecules, cells or tissues behave. The living body is much more than just a collection of these parts, and we need to understand how they interact, how they are controlled. There are ethical limits to the experiments that we can do using people, so the only alternative is to use the most suitable animal to study a particular disease or biological function.

and, animals react differently from humans, I wouldn't even be 100% satisfied if something had been tested on an animal that it would be OK for a person necessarily. I know you can say "there is a high chance" or whatever but it's still a risk.

I would argue that that's part of the process, in figuring out how relevant animal biology would be to human to minimize unnecessary pain later on.

Incidentally, there will never be a 100% guarantee about research. I made a thread once about how some researchers into communication devices for the paralyzed had their funding (almost?) cut because their device would not be 100% accurate. But biology is so complicated that a 100% of anything would immediately be suspect.

from the site

All mammals are descended from common ancestors, and one result of this is that humans are biologically very similar to other mammals. All mammals, including humans, have the same organs - heart, lungs, kidneys, liver etc - performing the same functions and controlled by the same mechanisms, via the blood stream and nervous system. Of course there are minor differences, but these are far outweighed by the remarkable similarities. The differences can give important clues about diseases and how they might be treated - for instance, if we knew why the mouse with muscular dystrophy suffers less muscle wasting than human patients, this might lead to a treatment for this debilitating and fatal disorder.

Testing on animals for cosmetic purposes is wrong
Unnecessary.

Keeping animals in zoos is OK
for preservation purposes

circuses?
don't know. Never been to one.

Hitting pets?
Lightly and not too hard, and only for negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement should go together with negative reinforcement because it's harder, for example, to positively reinforce a dog to stay away from the road than to negatively reinforce him. Still I wouldn't hit any animal too hard.

[Maciamo]

I feel that we are just one animal species among many, and that we don't have the right to use animals like a commodity. Eating meat seems as horrible to me as eating human flesh!

Then we should exterminate all carnivorous species on this planet !

But I know that my view is an extreme one

Yes, I never thought you'd see a lion, or even a little pussy cat, as murderers because they only eat meat.

think there use in medical research is justified. I would rather prefer an animal being used to find cures for cancer, heart disease and various other conditions, than see people die because these experiments were banned.

I already. Do you prefer to see a mouse die for the sake of research, or your cat catching it, playing with it, then opening its belly until the entrails come out, then leave the dying mouse on your doorstep as the cat is not hungry anyway. That's animal cruelty. But this is also nature. Animals (and humans) cannot control their instincts (humans sometimes can, but using a lot of efforts).

Smacking cats is pointless. Hit a cat and it will get revenge on you.

Haha. I know children who also behave like that.

I'm OK with eating meat and using animal products such as dairy. HOWEVER, although I don't believe eating meat to be wrong as such, I feel very unhappy in some cases about the bad conditions in which they are kept (such as battery hens/chickens, or animals not being killed humanely).

So you are saying that hunting is the ideal way of obtaining meat since animals are kept in the best ideal conditions (free in nature) when we kill them, right ?

[CC1]

I have no problems with eating meat! As Maciamo said, many other animals would eat me if given the chance.

Medical research is ok with me...but not cosmetic research.

Using animal products? I see no harm in milk from a goat or cow, as it helps the animal, but I think if we ever figure out how to perform a liver transplant from an animal to a human that would be wrong!

Circus? Wrong

Zoo (or controlled habitats?) Ok, and somewhat necessary for education and study. Of course the zoo here in Okinawa is just wrong! This would depend on how the zoo is set up and how the animals are cared for!

Hitting animals? Wrong...except for training purposes as Maciamo suggested. (Wow I've never agreed with Maciamo this much in one post...prepare for Armageddon!)

@Maciamo Is it too late to make this a public poll? To see the responses of those that don't bother to post.

[HomicidalMouse]

I worked at a medical research centre, and can safely say the mice i looked after were very well treated. Sometimes i thought they were treated better than me. Wonder what happened to Martin, Beans, Rollo and Squigs...? Probably dead... But i also learnt baby mice (or pups) make funny clicking noises
My apologies if i seem like im taking the p*ss Im in a peculiar mood.
So yeah, i think medical testing on animals is ok, but not cosmetic testing for the same reason as Mycernius.

[Maciamo]

@Maciamo Is it too late to make this a public poll? To see the responses of those that don't bother to post.

Unfortunately, we can't change a public to private poll or vice versa after the poll has been created...

[Kinsao]

So you are saying that hunting is the ideal way of obtaining meat since animals are kept in the best ideal conditions (free in nature) when we kill them, right ?

Yeah! Errrr... but it's not very practical with our modern lifestyle... Although on balance I'd rather be spending the day out hunting my dinner than cooped up in an office...

Uhhh, and just to be a bit too serious about your joke, I guess under hunting conditions animals aren't likely to be killed very humanely, though... no stun gun for the cavemen...

Hehe, if I had my way we'd all still be running naked through the long grass...

I think if we ever figure out how to perform a liver transplant from an animal to a human that would be wrong!

I believe already has been performed a heart transplant from a pig to a human. Apparently pigs are one animal that is very biologically similar to human...

I worked at a medical research centre, and can safely say the mice i looked after were very well treated.

Well that's OK then. If they are not suffering, that's fine.

Errrr... did you get your forum name from some interesting experience while you were doing that job?

[Tsuyoiko]

Then we should exterminate all carnivorous species on this planet !
Yes, I never thought you'd see a lion, or even a little pussy cat, as murderers because they only eat meat.

I think you know I don't mean that at all! Of course many animals need to eat meat to survive, and early humans needed to eat meat too, or we probably wouldn't have evolved large brains, or been able to survive ice ages. Maybe if I was starving I might eat meat - but I'm not starving yet! Since I can survive perfectly well without meat I'm glad I can make the choice not to eat it.

[Maciamo]

I believe already has been performed a heart transplant from a pig to a human. Apparently pigs are one animal that is very biologically similar to human...

As Winston Churchill said : "I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals."

He also used to draw a pig as a signature in letters to his wife (who'd draw a cat).

[Maciamo]

A Japanese friend of mine keeps ants in an aquarium filled with earth as pets. In that particular case, I am not sure whether hitting pets is OK.

[Tsuyoiko]

A Japanese friend of mine keeps ants in an aquarium filled with earth as pets. In that particular case, I am not sure whether hitting pets is OK.

What about pets attacking other pets? Iris likes to attack Nefertiti when he is in his exercise ball.

[lastmagi]

Pardon my going slightly OT

I think you know I don't mean that at all! Of course many animals need to eat meat to survive, and early humans needed to eat meat too, or we probably wouldn't have evolved large brains, or been able to survive ice ages. Maybe if I was starving I might eat meat - but I'm not starving yet! Since I can survive perfectly well without meat I'm glad I can make the choice not to eat it.

I think vegetarianism is perfectly acceptable as a lifestyle choice. I think I've read articles about how (and I reserve the right to be wrong) calories are lost with each successive progression through the trophic levels.

As for me, I have to eat meat. I tried going vegetarian for some years during the spring and fall seasons because I wanted to test something I read about allergies being somewhat alleviated with non-animal product uptake, and I would always look longingly at the meat section of my school's cafeteria (whew, what a long runon sentence). Plus the vegan section always sucked in my school.

[misa.j]

Great thread, Tsuyoiko.
Even though slaughter houses seem very strange and cruel to animals, I eat meat and do not think about what the chicken I eat had gone through. Hunting, if it's done clevery, helps the population of wild animals and is an ideal way to consume animals, but it's not practical. I'm definitely not for the safari hunters or those who use traps or lures to attract animals for hunting.

Keeping animals in the zoos seem very wrong to me. It doesn't seem possible to create the conditions how they should live.

Especially with dogs that are poorly trained, I have to say that hitting is necessary. If you are raising a puppy, they can be trained with less or no physical punishment. They are naturally dominant animals therefore they need to learn who the master is, and unfortunately sometimes that's how they understand.

[HomicidalMouse]

Errrr... did you get your forum name from some interesting experience while you were doing that job?

No. I had this name before that job. You know baby mice get eaten by their parents. In fact mice arent that picky on what they eat. Baby mice, each other, my fingers...
God im full of useless facts about mice now...

People who think old animals have no rights annoy me. Who are all like "but look how old an pathetic they are. They've gone blind and senile. Its best just to put them out of their misery". The same can be said about old people but you dont go around putting them outa their 'misery'. Just cause their old dont mean they dont have a right to live.

[Tsuyoiko]

Even though slaughter houses seem very strange and cruel to animals, I eat meat and do not think about what the chicken I eat had gone through.

You've just hit the nail on the head about why I can't eat meat. I can't separate the idea of 'meat' from the idea of a cute animal that has been slaughtered for the sole purpose of feeding people. Those of you that have pets, I'm sure most of you couldn't think of eating meat that had come from your pet. I feel the same about all animals.

[Morfos]

I swung back and forth on this one.

[yakutatazu]

ofcourse there would not be a middle.
I give my cat a sharp tap on the head if he scratches me YET AGAIN (without reason)
if a medicine is safe, but for legal reasons has to be tested, animals are OK, if not disadvantaged by it.

I must say I'm against people who won't eat meat-meat, but will eat fish-meat and bird-meat. what's with that?
fish and birds are just as concious as the rest.

[No-name]

If you ever want to preserve a creature, put it on the dinner table or make a pet out of it. Cows, chickens,dogs and cats will never be extinct.

[strongvoicesforward]

What are your opinions about what rights animals should have, if any?

Animals should not be comodified by us. They were put here for their own purposes and one has no right to exploit them any more than a white person has the right to do so to a black person or a male to do so to a female.

The concept of equal consideration of interests is what should guide us in our relations with animals. That interest should be codified and therefore protect their right to autonomy from invasive actions that harm or prevent them from living natural lives or ones that are lives of suffering due to our interference in them.

I was raised to believe that animals have as much right to life as humans.

You were raised correctly.

... and that we don't have the right to use animals like a commodity.

We don`t have the right to do so. We have only declared ourselves to have it.

[Miss_apollo7]

I have voted.

Hitting pets is wrong, and experiments done on animals for cosmetics is wrong. "GO GO BODY SHOP"

Experiments done on animals for medical reasons is OK I guess, since it can cure illnesses and save human lives.
I eat meat, as long as animals have not suffered when slaughtered. I am really into animal welfare so animals should be treated properly..always.
Animals being kept in captivity in zoos and circuses is OK since the animals are treated properly.....

[Anchyyy]

I voted too.

1.1 Eating meat is OK ~ people are eating it for million years, that won't change, because people are used to eat, well except some(religion)

3.1 Testing on animals for medical purposes is OK ~ As long as those tests don't make them suffer, make them sick or kill them. On the other side, it could save many human lives, as miss apollo already said, but animals have feelings too. Imagine some aliens doing experiments on people.


4.2 Testing on animals for cosmetic purposes is wrong

5.1 Using animals in circuses is OK ~ As long as they are treated well.

6.1 Keeping animals in zoos is OK ~ Ofcourse it would be better to let them live in the nature, but i guess it's ok, but they have to get food and fresh water everyday, zookeepers should clean their cages daily and so on.

7.1 Hitting pets is wrong ~ You can show them what's wrong and right with patience and love and not with hitting them and yelling at them. First they don't even understand you, they can become afraid of people and in this fear the animal will attack you.