1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is animal testing justified

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by PopeADope, Feb 8, 2017.

?
  1. yes

    8 vote(s)
    42.1%
  2. no

    11 vote(s)
    57.9%
  1. PopeADope

    PopeADope Habemus papam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    14,371
    Ratings:
    +5,819
    Religion:
    Amish Taliban
    Please vote on the poll. What gives us the right to subject animals to such abuse??
     
  2. suncowiam

    suncowiam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    5,601
    Ratings:
    +2,223
    Is eating animals justified? Why so or not?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. PopeADope

    PopeADope Habemus papam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    14,371
    Ratings:
    +5,819
    Religion:
    Amish Taliban
    We're top of the food chain
     
  4. suncowiam

    suncowiam Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    5,601
    Ratings:
    +2,223
    Do we only eat for sustenance? We eat also for the enjoyment of simply eating...
     
  5. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,448
    Ratings:
    +7,441
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    I voted yes with the caveat that animal testing should be limited to medicines, not makeup or other products, and there should be a strictly enforced and unified ethics oversight to determine suffering is kept to a minimum. It will never be a perfect system, but animal medical testing betters human AND non-human animal quality of life, and has lead to live saving discovery to an extent that cannot be ignored. But that animal testing without ethical oversight creates horrors that should also not be ignored.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1
  6. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,654
    Ratings:
    +12,612
    Religion:
    Druidry
    The ability to do so.

    I voted "yes" in the poll because it's obvious that there are reasons which justify it. Humans can rationalize anything. Personally, I find that if humans are unwilling to experiment on their own animal for purposes that only benefit their own animal, they should not be doing the experiments at all.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. whereismynotecard

    whereismynotecard Treasure Hunter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    Messages:
    15,115
    Ratings:
    +2,045
    I prefer volunteers to be tested, or for treatments to be tested out on those who are at the end of their options - like a treatment for a dog sickness that we're not sure will work - test it on a dog with that sickness and who has tried everything else and will die otherwise. If the products are for humans, it makes more sense that they would be tested on humans. If you pay volunteers, I'm sure you'd get tons of people willing to test stuff.

    I realize it's a complicated issue - how do we test if a flea medicine is safe? How about dog shampoo? The best test subjects to provide accurate results would of course be dogs. I just really don't like the idea of an unwilling subject. Animals cannot consent to this. So I would prefer paid human volunteers to test things whenever possible - most especially anything that is going to benefit only humans.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    26,300
    Ratings:
    +10,436
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Might is right! Pass the lamb chops please.


    .
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. PopeADope

    PopeADope Habemus papam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    14,371
    Ratings:
    +5,819
    Religion:
    Amish Taliban
    I lol d :D
     
  10. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,568
    Ratings:
    +9,329
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    I think we've pretty much removed ourselves from the 'chain'.
    Why not experiment on prisoners, or the elderly, who are no longer contributing to the economy. They'd be better biological models, surely.

    If might makes right, then there's not really a controversy here. Anything we're capable of is justified, and if we're not capable of it it's a non-issue.
    Add utility as a factor and Dr Mengele is revealed as a visionary.
     
  11. SomeRandom

    SomeRandom Still learning to be wise

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2014
    Messages:
    6,305
    Ratings:
    +4,695
    Often times medical studies are conducted on animals first, this allows the potential of side affects up to and including death to be observed before human trials start. So we are willing to test on ourselves, it's literally the second stage of developing new medications. So it's tricky to say whether this is justified. But I know that animal testing has and continues to provide us with invaluable information about the effects of medicine or treatments. I would prefer other methods and hopefully technology will enable us to limit animal testing to next to zero or even better non existent.

    Testing for make up products, tests to see what tobacco does and other tests that already have observed results is another thing altogether. That's just completely unethical.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Saint Frankenstein

    Saint Frankenstein ᛘᛁᛏᚾᛁᚴᚼᛏ᛫ᛋᚢᚾ
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    28,387
    Ratings:
    +13,751
    Religion:
    Germanic Folk Revival
    No. I'd rather do it on humans.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  13. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    21,568
    Ratings:
    +9,329
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    So far we've had might makes right and utility makes right.
    I remain doubtful. Neither can be applied generally without some pretty gruesome possibilities.
     
  14. Saint Frankenstein

    Saint Frankenstein ᛘᛁᛏᚾᛁᚴᚼᛏ᛫ᛋᚢᚾ
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    28,387
    Ratings:
    +13,751
    Religion:
    Germanic Folk Revival
    I just think we should do it on humans simply because I'm a misanthrope and human pain and suffering in general doesn't bother me as much.
     
  15. PopeADope

    PopeADope Habemus papam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    14,371
    Ratings:
    +5,819
    Religion:
    Amish Taliban
    Interesting :)
     
  16. Kemosloby

    Kemosloby Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Messages:
    5,122
    Ratings:
    +1,230
    Religion:
    Christian
    There should be limits, animals have feelings too. Except for slugs.
     
  17. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,485
    Ratings:
    +3,345
    shall we do the test on your children instead?
    (anyone)
     
  18. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    41,485
    Ratings:
    +3,345
    it happens
     
  19. Katzpur

    Katzpur Not your average Mormon

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    29,668
    Ratings:
    +5,546
    Religion:
    LDS Christian
    Since I had to vote "yes" or "no," I picked "no." While there may occasionally be a legitimate exception to the rule, I'd say that at least 99% of the time, it is not justified.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Willamena

    Willamena Just me
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    39,211
    Ratings:
    +6,378
    Religion:
    Mystics
    Not relevant.
     
Loading...