(For those of you not in 3rd block AP Comp, we read a very one-sided article on animal testing and how it’s wrong, cruel, etc. This is a rather delayed response to the conversation held in class.)
First off, I’ll admit that I may be biased, that my mind is often swayed by both personal experiences and a trait where my logos fall to my pathos and ethos. However, my opinion is just as valuable as any. I wouldn’t be alive today if it weren’t for animal testing. I’m diabetic. When I was seven, my family rushed me to the hospital where I, phobia of needles and all, could only survive if I was injected with insulin. I won’t go into the details of diabetes, but insulin was made available to people through animal testing (pigs, if I recall correctly). So, yeah, I get the point for animal testing—it saved my life.
Needless cruelty is, however, needless. While this article was not the most eloquent that I have ever read and lacked in citations, it struck a cord. There are people today that do NOT give animals the compassion they deserve. Waffle with me if you like, call me a slave to PETA, tell me to go hug a tree, or what have you, but I’ve been exposed to enough injustices. We as a race often see ourselves as the creation almighty, ruler of the earth, and Darwin’s grand contender. Maybe we are, maybe we aren’t, but we don’t need to disregard other living beings just because we wrote ourselves some books, constructed concrete cities, wasted earth's natural resources, and use a whole 2% of our brains.
We set the standard for what is or isn't worth something, what does or doesn't qualify as knowledgeable. Throughout history, certain human beings were treated as—to put it nicely—utter crap. We've had discussions on the holocaust (which, mind you, incited anger when disregarded, but eyes rolled at animal cruelty) and the mistreatment of blacks in America and the general disregard for women. In the Holocaust, humans were experimented on by ‘Doctor’ Mengele. It wasn’t for beauty products, sure, but it was painful all the same. But, then again, it was done in the name of science—therefore it must be okay. The experiments were done on lesser beings, therefore it's fine. Those Jews and Roma were people though, with feelings and the ability to feel pain. I'm not trying to personify animals like Gopnik's daughter, but if you slap your dog upside the head, you cannot deny they'll feel it.
Anyway, that's my two cents. I'm not saying we should cease all animal experimentation, just that humanity could cut back on the needless cruelty. It'll be hard, considering our species, but not impossible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with you on this. I think the alternatives to animal testing aren't enough to completely get rid of it, but the needless cruelty can definitely stop. You're definitely a great example of how animal testing can save someone's life!
ReplyDeleteI also agree with what you said. Animal testing is necessary, but only to a certain extent. We must cut down on the unnecessary testing until a practical alternative to animal testing is developed.
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this Stefanie! I hope everybody reads this. Just because animals may or may not have feelings like us (I guess no one knows for sure) doesn't mean we can treat them like dirt. Some of this stuff seems obvious to say, but it needs to be said anyway becuase sometimes people just don't get it.
ReplyDeleteI would also agree that animal testing itself is a necessary vice unless we can discover something else. More often than not though, it is done in a very inhumane fashion. I didn't much care for the essay itself that we read, but the issue strikes me deeply. I hear about it a lot as I live with a veterinarian as a father. It's just important to remember that the reason we test on them is that they are so much like us. If we can use that as an excuse to put them through medicinal processes, we certainly have a duty to go out of their way to make sure they are taken care of.
ReplyDeleteYou have some very good points. For one, ya it was kinda one sided, but it was nice to agree on something for once.
ReplyDeleteI like your balanced view. I think it's important we bring up another distinction: You say that Mengele's experiments weren't for cosmetics, but they were often for something much more horrifying and inhuman than treating diabetes. I think that Kunkle was wise in our discussion to say that he has more sympathy for those who do medical testing. It is important that animal testing be reserved for what is actually beneficial, not cruelly useless or actually harmful. I hope I'm not being narcissistic when I bring this discussion back to my own "Carnivore's Credo"/"The Importance of Rites" blog turf, but the dignity with which we treat animals reflects on the dignity we credit ourselves.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Stefanie: Go hug a tree. It probably needs it.
You brought up a really good point of how animal testing saved your life! It clearly shows that there are some benefits, but torturing and harming the lives of innocent animals are clearly wrong.
ReplyDelete