Animal testing?

[Alex]

It's a necessary evil, until a satisfactory alternative is found.

 

What sort of criminals Ginge?

[LiquidEyes]

Ginge: posting tasteless, out-of-context pics of animal cruelty proves nothing. Those are the sorts of 'emotional blackmail' shock tactics your average activist stoops to.

 

Unless you've got some facts associated with those pics, I think they should be taken down. I'm not in favour of censorship by any means, but I think your post is gratuitous and pointless.

 

Everybody knows that this shit happens; you achieve nothing other than some kind of sick titillation by posting those sorts of pics on a message board.

[Ginge]

Out of context?

 

So posting pictures of animal testing in a thread about animal testing is "out of context"?

 

I dont agree with it, I know it happens but I dont support it. I dont think its a "neccesary evil" either. I've seen adverts in the back of magazines advertising for people to test out new products and drugs (which I have applied for) so why do some places still insist on torturing creatures who have no choice but are strapped or locked down just so they can say "Yes, this mascara / washing-up liquid / pain killer wont make a rabbit go blind therefore it "shouldn't" harm you"

 

Nope, complete crap, I never have and never will agree with it.

 

QUOTE (Alex @ Aug 5 2004, 19:16)

What sort of criminals Ginge?

Definately paedophiles, rapists and murderers.

Edited August 5, 2004 by Ginge

[Guest Shenlong]

they've virtually stopped cosmetic testing on animals, what about mroe important or vital research, what would you suggest then?

 

there re many guidelines you ahve to follow beofre the government will even think of granting you a license to use animals. always you are encouraged to use alternative methods wherever necessary, e.g. using cell cultures, and reducing the amount of animals you use, any potential pain they are going to suffer, etc.

 

as for voluntary testing on humans, it isn't going to happen for certain types of experiments as the results may be quite debilitating and permenant. there is only so far you are allowed to test on humans.

 

what are your views on drugs then that would not have happened without such research? if you son developed diabetes would you refuse to let him have insulin out of principle? i think not.

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (Ginge @ Aug 5 2004, 23:07)

Out of context? So posting pictures of animal testing in a thread about animal testing is "out of context"?

Ginge you absolute fucking cock. Sometimes I wonder whether you really are as much of a nob-cheese as you come across on the board, or whether you are just taking the piss.

 

Using your logic, maybe next time we have a discussion about rape or paedophilia, we should post some gratuitous pictures of women and children being fucked up the ass?

 

Someone take those fucking pictures down. What did you hope to achieve by posting them? I don't remember anybody saying "no Ginge, I refuse to believe that animal torture goes on in this world ... prove it."

 

Everybody who reads this forum has a right not to look at those pictures if they so choose.

[Lisa]

I will remove them LE, as they clearly are disturbing you, I do agree they are not nice & I tried to pop them on a link yesterday, but struggled , so I will delete & ginge hon, if you feel, you need the pictures up, by all means post them, but on a link, saying pictures of lab animals, explicit, be warned

[LiquidEyes]

I'm partly desensitised to that kind of thing anyway ... you see those sorts of pics on billboards every time you go to Camden Town ... I just fucking hate the way animal rights activists use out-of-context pictures to "prove" that animal torture is the norm.

 

Anybody can get hold of a picture of a mutilated animal. But these people are not intersted in doing a balanced survey or investigation, they just want to stir up trouble, and use shock tactics to get gullible people to follow their "cause".

 

(Okay, slight generaliation, but I do believe the majority of "activists" are just trouble-makers.)

[LiquidEyes]

QUOTE (LiquidEyes @ Aug 6 2004, 10:06)

I do believe the majority of "activists" are just trouble-makers

^ ... or are themselves gullible and believe the bullshit that other activists spoon-feed them.

[Alex]

Those pictures are great for propaganda purposes, but not for much else.

 

I've seen these pictures over a number of years and all it's done is turn me against the "animal rights" campaigners.

 

 

[LiquidEyes]

^ 110% agreed. That kind of titillation has the opposite effect on anyone who has half a brain. It conditions people to that kind of imagery, and frankly makes the activists look sensationalist trouble-makers.

 

It's a shame, because I'm sure there are a few people out there who are actually doing something balanced and constructive for the cause of animal rights, yet they all get tarred with the same brush.

 

(off-topic: Ginge, just a guess, but I bet you enjoyed the new Farenheit 9/11 film, right...?)

[Guest Kether]

I love the way that whenever an animal rights campaigner is interviewed on the news they always come across as some psycho halfwit who's been brainwashed and brain fucked from smoking too much dope and taking too many mushrooms maaan.

 

I don't want animals to have the same rights as humans, how would we set up ballot boxes for the little fuckers?

[Alex]

If only they'd tested dope and mushrooms on animals, they would know the risks related and would keep their minds clear for protesting coherently.

[LiquidEyes]

[Ginge]

LE, you may think I'm a cock, I dont really give a shit. I think you're complete tosser who tries to force his opinions (whether they're right or wrong) on other people. Just coz you believe something, doesnt make it right. Different people have different opinions, different people believe in different things, why do you always try to be the big "I AM" in everything.

 

I suppose if I told you I'm an atheist you'd say that there IS a god and you'd find some scientific equation proving it.

 

Why not just let people have their opinions and leave the fuck alone.

[Guest Kether]

QUOTE (Ginge @ Aug 10 2004, 21:04)

LE, you may think I'm a cock, I dont really give a shit. I think you're complete tosser who tries to force his opinions (whether they're right or wrong) on other people. Just coz you believe something, doesnt make it right. Different people have different opinions, different people believe in different things, why do you always try to be the big "I AM" in everything. I suppose if I told you I'm an atheist you'd say that there IS a god and you'd find some scientific equation proving it. Why not just let people have their opinions and leave the fuck alone.

LE's opinions are based on a strong sense of liberalism and rationally founded. His arguements are well structured and he accepts other people's opinions but attempts to make other people see his way of thinking by probing in a logical and calculated manner.

 

This "I AM" attitude you speak of says more about an inferiority complex on your part as you know that your debating skills aren't up to par and there's no way that you could counter such rational debate with the emotive arguements you possess and not be torn to pieces.

 

I don't think LE tries to force his opinion on anyone, he explains his views and picks holes in other people's arguments whilst bacing up his own points. Isn't that the essence of any debate? When you're forced to resort to slanging matches it's usually an admission of defeat.

 

I do hope that you stick to your obviously strong morals and never use any medicine/soap/cosmetic that has been tesed on animals as you feel so strongly about this.

 

PLUR

 

xxx