Ps. Red, thanks for that info!

petitions, i agree, rarely do accomplish what they set out to. The law ignors them and so do the people they are sent to, but they provide a non-violent way to get everyones single voice across, and they are the obligotory first step to resolving a particular crisis, taking stock of a situation. it's when the opposition openly cast it aside that you can draw the bigger guns and heavyer attention of others.

animal freaks, i presume your not talking about the Spider-Monkey-Man, i wouldnt want to cross him, he's got four arses you know.
However, if you were referring to animal rights activists, we do in deed think in the long run, otherwise we would have falled into shadow a long time ago. instead, though out many differing ways we have saved many spicies from extinction and changed teh way teh world looks. many remidies have been destroyed by the likes of heavy industry simply because they wanted a road which is now never used, while saving forests, habitats of many differnt animals, have provided more powerful and potent cures to investigate which otherwise would also have been lost, i can assure you, most people that would be considerd animal freaks are far from short term thinkers.

testing on humans is a far more productive process than experimentation on animals, please read back through some of Lils posts and others for documentation and stuff. infact human testing is on the increase and human rights dont really care because consent has to be given and those experimented on are often payed.

The law of the jungle. since you asked the question honestly all i can do is answear for myself honestly, as simply as possible. (im non religous, but do belive that every faith/belife has it's place and is real, im not pissing off any gods)
it isnt all right, but lions dont have supermarkets to buy waffles and vegan icecream. sounds slighty bizzare but it's true. if i catch a spider about to eat a fly i rescue the fly, if i see a worm wiggling out into teh path to get stood on i move it, i do what i can, but i accept im not omni presant, i carnt be everywhere at once and so i know the spider will catch flys later, or it already has earlyer, the same way if i see someone beating another person to death i step in and stop them.
As humans we have a gift (some say a curse), weve been kicked out of eden, we dont live by our primeval instincts alone. birds only concern themselves with eating, mating and making nests, they dont worry about gettin their latest video games or missing their latest soap, we do, hence eden referance. but most animals dont have the choice, they are still primarily run by their primal instincts. however my dog (holly), shes massive, is vegatarian. we buy her vege dog food and she prefers it more, whats more she actually prefers biscuits and potatoe to ANYTHING (well except icecream) else and shes as healthy as everyone else. we have a choice, and most animals dont.

people like to say they are civilised, that they are right to rule this world because of their brains, and then they take pride in their beastil nature, acting like primitives....but that isnt civilised. the truth is you carnt have it both ways.

Mark Twain's thoughts.

VIVISECTION
I believe I am not interested to know whether Vivisection produces results that are profitable to the human race or doesn't. To know that the results are profitable to the race would not remove my hostility to it. The pains which it inflicts upon unconsenting animals is the basis of my enmity towards it, and it is to me sufficient justification of the enmity without looking further. It is so distinctly a matter of feeling with me, and is so strong and so deeply-rooted in my make and constitution, that I am sure I could not even see a vivisector vivisected with anything more than a sort of qualified satisfaction. I do not say I should not go and look on; I only mean that I should almost surely fail to get out of it the degree of contentment which it ought, of course, to be expected to furnish.
- Letter to London Anti-Vivisection Society, May 26, 1899

thanxx for that D, and great point, i have to agree

wonderful idea...but as long as money and greed are making the rules you've gote the odds against you...
it's worth a try tho...

vegetarians and esepcially vegans are unnatural...must have shortcircited or something...humans are biologicaly built to eat meat and plants...nothing to change that...they need it too...course eating only meat is just as bad...like everything it's a question of balance...
you know...poison is another word for amount

The way the human body has evolved, and the enviroments we have created with urban societies absolutely defies that sentiment, that we need to eat meat. It's bullshit. Humans eat meat because they choose to, because they like it. Not because they NEED to. And personal choice has to be respected, I just don't get the brutality involved in aquiring the meat. Besides which, you don't need to be a vegetarian to oppose vivisection.

Really? Says who? What is your muscle mass then? You get protein shakes made from soya that thoroughly provides RDA of protein, and more.

Actually it's healthier to eat meat and vegetables.
I'm shocked but I must admit JLB has some validity to his statement.

Also it's healthier to eat carbs and meats and veggies. Carbs give you energy, by being broken down into peptides or something. It's why some people who run track meets and the like will eat carb-heavy food before the track meet.

On a side note, both vegans and non-vegans have valid points in reference to environmental damage from their eating habits, as well as health related issues.

In the end it comes down to the person to decide, not the body.
All hail Meaty McMeat, lord of the Meat!

This isn't a thread about vegetarianism, it's about animal testing. Not every animal right's activist is a full blown vegan. It's a very difficult lifestyle to lead. But yes the topics go hand-in-hand.

The meat commercially offered have very low nutritional content due to antibiotic and growth hormones being pumbed into the "once alive" animals. There are scores of information and articles written on this subject, and I have previously done a vegetarian thread on this site before.

You don't need to be a vegetarian to oppose the abuse of animals.

Abuse of animals in what manner?
Smacking them around for being bastards and stealing my milk? HELL YES ABUSE THEM!!

Abusing them by forcing them to go through specific medical treatments which will yield nothing beneficial for mankind? Totally against

I disagree with animal testing vehelemently but I thiink eating meat is just part of nature...Its part of teh food chain, most animals do it.
However what I disagree with is the inhumane way animals are treated during their short lives and miserable deaths just so we can eat a bit of meat. I would have no issues with eating meat if I knew the animals wern't mass produced, money making schemes and I could rest assured i wasn't buying into that cruelty...

actually mankind is currently omniverous through choice. if you want to quate nature meat formed less than 10% of mankinds early diet. if we want to go back further theres current belif that mankind evolved from two breeds, one artistic and vegetarian, the other war-like and carniverous. orinally it was thought teh warlike wiped out the vege, but now the evidance suggests the two interbred, with results that we have today. but then if you want to go back further.....when the dinos died, mankind only survived because of being vege. the races that would become ape and rodants evolved from a vege - prehistoric pig. the pig survived because it could root out small plants where no other life could. the quantity was too small for large herbevours, useuless to teh predators.

GETTING YOUR VITAMINS
there are thousands upon thousands of books on amazon, or through permaculture magazine (or their website) that detail (not only for use by vege/vegan) nutritional content in everything other than meat. in fact to teh extent it makes meat useless for anything other than taste. i carnt off the top of my head remeber what it was but there was somthing a newpaper said you could ONLY find in meat, they were of course wrong as they were informed the thing they mentiond was four times more available and presant in most breakfast cereals. if someone is genuinly interested in getting these links offa me because they want to live healthyer, or more independant then please tell me, im not just gonna post them everywherre and waste my time

theres also speculation that meat helps trigger dormant cancers.

theres 100% research that leading a good vege lifestyle prolongs life and health/fitness (im built like a brickshithouse - strong - and i compeate in a number of combative arts, far from teh stigma of skinny veges, and ive been so sinc the age of five).

people may not realise but most calfs (babys cows) are stolen from their mothers and butcherd so that theres enough milk for everyones breackfast. the only babys that survive tend to be good breeding stock.

oops i forgot lol

good news, stemcells, the miricle of the human body are almost on the breaking point of being cloned. this will cure parkinsens and most other ailments. this is a compleatly human resource, via cloning at teh very start of human life, no animals will be harmed. on the one hand i think it's crazy.....but if it means only humans will be the victims of human endevours im all for it.

im not going to go into vegeism cause it's lils thread and she doesnt want to but i will say this.
for whatever reason people belive they can hurt or kill animals, i can and am quite willing to kill humans, so whats to stop me doing what I want to people. the world is a playground, and i you can i can, and thats teh bottom line. it isnt pretty, but neither is anal electricution, or delibertly damagin a mouses heart for research

It's great to hear such a sentiment, and that is primarily the point, the cruelty involved. Not just in supplying an overabundance of meat products to First World countries, but the means in which it is done. The mere fact that these industries thrive on abuse, brutality and torture simply allows for a society where we accept pointless and endless tests to be done on animals.

We believe it's necessary for scientific reasons, we don't question the validity nor do we question the costs involved, because we believe the bullshit being fed to us via powerhouses (read: goverment, pharmaceutical companies, investors and so on and so forth).

The very same way we believe that eating meat is healthy and necessary to our survival. We do not question the general opinion, we do not wish to think of the means in which that piece of meat landed up on our plates. We do not question, and when we get ill, what do we do? We go to the doctors who end up giving us products that keep being testing on animals. We simply perpetuate a cycle of abuse and murderuous torture without a second thought. It's has become part of our nature. Or rather, it has become part of "brain-washed" nature.

I'm not advocating people should change, I wish they would however. But I cannot tell another what choices they ought to make. I would ask though that people consider these matters, look into these matters and THEN make an educated decision.

If it serves you to eat meat that has been aquired through brutal means, if it serves you to eat antibiotics and hormones alien to your natural body, only to get sick or suffer from obesity, then by all means go ahead. If it serves you to continue to buy products that repeatedly get tested on animals in the most horrendous of ways, then by all means, go ahead.

Just be informed.

I heard about that on the news today. I'm excited about that as much as I'm wary of it. I'm a little bit hesitant in trusting science on that level.

I've once heard an argument concerning death row victims. The argument was for these inmates to be used instead of animals. We're forcing death on them, is it really terrible to spray perfume in their eyes to see if it hurts instead of a rabbits??
I don't know, there seems something valid to such an argument. If they consented to the tests. And who wouldn't, die or have tests done.....

the two truths of meat, peopel only need it because they like the taste. and people wouldnt want it if the majority of them actually saw what was done to get it.

testing on death row, well if they got to live longer im sure many would be hapy to, then again theres already alot of people happily getting paid to be tested on.

a german cannibal got convicted, despite the evidanse left by teh person he ate that he was a willing meal, why should the german be locked up if meateaters can continue.

you speak from the heart lil, thats the best anyone can do

If the inmates give their consent then I`d have no problem with it. People on death row still have rights in my eyes though so manditory testing would be out, no matter how much people consider death row inmates worthless.

Thank you! Yes it's important to speak from the heart, I believe it's speaking from the heart, or to speak of things close to one's heart that encourages information to spread. I have to be vociferous about things I feel strongly about.

I find that very interesting, and frankly for the sake of being true to my nature I would defend both sides. Needless to say all human beings should be afforded choice, but we do not extend that to animals, for obvious reasons we "wield power" over them, simply because they don't have a choice. I don't understand how one cannot value all life, but that is my personal view.

I find it interesting that death row "victims" would be denied any rights whatsoever except when one poses these possibilities into the scenario. Perhaps we're just programmed to automatically not give credit to animal life. A life of a murderer/rapist is more valid than a dog, mouse, cat, rabbit etc. Needless to say there are levels of awareness and levels of development, but surely we test on these animals because we believe they feel, for if they didn't the tests would be redundant. Now if they feel and they didn't choose to feel this pain, why oh why do we feel justified in our actions?

We condemn people who take life yet we do not flinch when we butcher millions of animals in the name of science. Compassion goes a long way, and compassion looks at alternatives.

Dermatological comparisons cannot be made between a cat and human skin, so why on earth test on a cat in order to make it safe for humans? There simply is no logic involved.

A lot of these tests are fatal to animals and yet would not be to human beings, because of our lymphatic systems working completely differently, and because we have vomit reflexes and thus our bodies can reject foreign bodies, the animals they use to test products that result in such physical reactions, do not have vomit refelxes. So why do they test on them?

I have to wonder if a person on death row would honestly choose death over cosmetic testings.

interesting point.....someone i argued with about the right for life, was also saying that you should only keep animals...and people around that are useful. so in his mind inmates on death row serve no useful purpose and should be tested on anyway. it made me think.....how many vegetarian murderers are there, how many vegans went on killing sprees...compared to how many meateaters want to shit on mankind. ?

another thing to consider when passing judgement on animals, they are essentially children, as silly and loveable, just as much in need of attention and care. a famus hero once said "with great power, comes great responsibility". man kind cannot have it both ways.