|
there have been some good reasons for animal testing in this thread.
and all you people who are so sure that animals should never be tested on, wait till half your family have died from cancer or some other disease that will one day have a cure because of animal testing and then come back and give your answer.
im not saying that i never feel bad about it, but adding things up, it is worth it. it is worth animals suffering so that people dont.
animals are animals, we have power thru knowledge, tigers have power thru strength. if a man walks around in the jungle and gets killed ny a tiger, we say he is an idiot because he walked round the jungle. its nature. survival of the fittest. if we are to survive then we are to use other species to do so. animals would kill humans from instinct. why is testing on animals not instinct? its our instinct to help our own species that makes us do such things.
nobody answered my hypothetical question.
hip priest quoted me, but never actualy answered. it was a simple hypothetical question but he took it as if it was not hypothetical.
its simple.
ill put it another way. in a HYPOTHETICAL way:
would you rather you banned all animal testing worldwide one year ago, or have not have banned it and have a cure that has been found in the last year that means a member of your family can live?
i dont think it is a trick question or an unfair one. its simply asking if you would end testing on animals or save the life of someone dear to you, which, if the "no" people had their way, would mean all your dear ones who could have been saved from animal testing would die.
please everybody, tell me the other great ways of testing except for on animals.
humans?
prisoners?
what?
it does help.
|