Animal "Ethics" Committees

  • Thread starter Thread starter spencelo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If animals have “rights” then they should have to pay taxes and be given the right to vote.
 
spencelo said:
For the record, I’m against virtually all animal experimentation, but this post isn’t really about justifying that claim - I will in another post.
Click to expand...
For the record I’m for virtually all medical animal experimentation and the fact that my son is alive today justifies the claim.
 
Lost_Sheep said:
If animals have “rights” then they should have to pay taxes and be given the right to vote.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure certain rights are contingent on paying taxes or participation in the electoral process.

And it could be argued that humans being the most intelligent species on earth have a responsibility toward all complex forms of life on earth.

For example: I’m against dog fighting and have no problem with police arresting those people involved in those cruel games.

With respects to animal experimentation, spencelo raises some issues that probably should be considered.

I often hear a lot of ballyhoo in the United States about “democracy” and critical critiques about one party systems like Cuba. However, if one ever listened to the reactionary rhetoric from Democrats and Republicans one could logically conclude democracy (in this case I denote democracy as more than a one party system which is the typical Western view of democracy) is actually despised in the United States equally by members of both parties and a one party system, one party domination, is preferred.

Questioning customary practices in a society or having empathy towards animals is not necessarily “weakness” or something diabolical. Neither is preserving tradition at times.
 
TimeEntrance said:
I’m not sure certain rights are contingent on paying taxes or participation in the electoral process.

And it could be argued that humans being the most intelligent species on earth have a responsibility toward all complex forms of life on earth.

For example: I’m against dog fighting and have no problem with police arresting those people involved in those cruel games.

With respects to animal experimentation, spencelo raises some issues that probably should be considered.

I often hear a lot of ballyhoo in the United States about “democracy” and critical critiques about one party systems like Cuba. However, if one ever listened to the reactionary rhetoric from Democrats and Republicans one could logically conclude democracy (in this case I denote democracy as more than a one party system which is the typical Western view of democracy) is actually despised in the United States equally by members of both parties and a one party system, one party domination, is preferred.

Questioning customary practices in a society or having empathy towards animals is not necessarily “weakness” or something diabolical. Neither is preserving tradition at times.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your thoughtful remarks.
 
So we line up human volunteers for untested drugs and procedures to see if they have adverse affects before sending them to market, would you be willing to be one of the subjects?
 
DCNBILL said:
So we line up human volunteers for untested drugs and procedures to see if they have adverse affects before sending them to market, would you be willing to be one of the subjects?
Click to expand...
Spoiler: No.
Instead, they’ll “volunteer” certain groups of people.
 
DCNBILL said:
So we line up human volunteers for untested drugs and procedures to see if they have adverse affects before sending them to market, would you be willing to be one of the subjects?
Click to expand...
Perhaps they could get convicted prisoners to volunteer in exchange for time off on their sentences. It would, of course, be dependent on the likelihood of recidivism, etc.
 
DCNBILL said:
So we line up human volunteers for untested drugs and procedures to see if they have adverse affects before sending them to market, would you be willing to be one of the subjects?
Click to expand...
If humans are willing to volunteer (animals have no choice), then I’m all for it.
 
spencelo said:
If humans are willing to volunteer (animals have no choice), then I’m all for it.
Click to expand...
Wow, just wow. Placing the welfare of animals over that of people is the ultimate manifestation of the “culture of death” that I could imagine. It would seem that we are indeed in a most challenging time.

My prayers.
 
DCNBILL said:
Wow, just wow. Placing the welfare of animals over that of people is the ultimate manifestation of the “culture of death” that I could imagine. It would seem that we are indeed in a most challenging time.

My prayers.
Click to expand...
Suppose you had to choose between (a) healing a very seriously wounded dog and (b) placing a band-aid on a stranger’s cut. More people, I suspect, would choose (a), in which case they would be placing the welfare of a dog over the stranger. The example simply illustrates the welfare of people doesn’t always trump.
 
spencelo said:
Suppose you had to choose between (a) healing a very seriously wounded dog and (b) placing a band-aid on a stranger’s cut. More people, I suspect, would choose (a), in which case they would be placing the welfare of a dog over the stranger. The example simply illustrates the welfare of people doesn’t always trump.
Click to expand...
Put the dog down, care for your brethren. I do not see an issue here. 🤷

And yes the welfare and dignity of people always trumps, the fact that people no longer believe this is so is a poverty.
 
DCNBILL said:
Put the dog down, care for your brethren. I do not see an issue here. 🤷

And yes the welfare and dignity of people always trumps, the fact that people no longer believe this is so is a poverty.
Click to expand...
Perhaps my hypothetical wasn’t clear. The stranger in my example will be perfectly fine - his cut is a very minor wound.
 
DCNBILL said:
So we line up human volunteers for untested drugs and procedures to see if they have adverse affects before sending them to market, would you be willing to be one of the subjects?
Click to expand...
Yup. Line them up. I am in favor of using human volunteers for the very reason that they freely give their consent. These animals 1) do not give their consent and 2) don’t even benefit from the research to which they contribute. I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that hip replacements, bone pinnings after traumas, etc. were all developed by using dogs in research, yet most dog owners can’t pay or their elderly dogs’ hip replacements when they need them, or have to pay quite a hefty bill if their dog gets injured and needs surgery to fix the trauma. That’s just messed up.

And remember that after the priliminary testing on animals (without their consent and with a lot of pain and suffering to the animal in most cases), then it is tested on human subjects. So why not just go to the ones who can give (or deny) consent in the first place.
 
DCNBILL said:
Wow, just wow. Placing the welfare of animals over that of people is the ultimate manifestation of the “culture of death” that I could imagine. It would seem that we are indeed in a most challenging time.

My prayers.
Click to expand...
Wow. Just Wow. That’s EXACTLY how I feeel about people who have such such little regard for animals to think their pain and suffering is negligible and that they are human’s playthings, even disposable. Nice show of stewardship. Way to turn around and buck up to the responsibility of being a steward.
 
DCNBILL said:
Put the dog down, care for your brethren. I do not see an issue here. 🤷

And yes the welfare and dignity of people always trumps, the fact that people no longer believe this is so is a poverty.
Click to expand...
Of course, because they’re disposable to some. It’s because of comments like above that the only donations I have made thus far this year have been monthly to the ASPCA. And that’s not likely to change no matter who disagrees.
 
Without arguing to extremes, I always thought it was weird that we are willing to spend thousands of dollars on the health care of an ailing pet, but won’t do the same for an ailing person we don’t know.
 
spencelo said:
Suppose you had to choose between (a) healing a very seriously wounded dog and (b) placing a band-aid on a stranger’s cut. More people, I suspect, would choose (a), in which case they would be placing the welfare of a dog over the stranger. The example simply illustrates the welfare of people doesn’t always trump.
Click to expand...
False dichotomy.

Put the band-aid on the stranger and save the dog.
 
Rence said:
Wow. Just Wow. That’s EXACTLY how I feeel about people who have such such little regard for animals to think their pain and suffering is negligible and that they are human’s playthings, even disposable. Nice show of stewardship. Way to turn around and buck up to the responsibility of being a steward.
Click to expand...
I am a steward first to my brothers and sisters in Christ, I do not have a disregard for animals just a place for them below that of my fellow man.

So it is your opinion that we should place the welfare of animals above those of humans? :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top