I see a lot of shrillness here, and very little by way of a realistic path towards a future where animals are treated better. This might at least make sense if it were a successful strategy, but this is manifestly not the case.
This is unacceptable. Very well, let's extend your metaphor. The overwhelming majority of people are okay with daily rape and eventual murder, and it is encouraged socially and legally. You have a choice. You can stand on a street corner and scream till your face is blue at people who could care less, in the hopes that they will one day see the light and completely change their lifestyle. Or you could try to get something done in terms of reducing the incidence of rape so that it takes place only once, rather than daily. Sure, the victims will still die violent deaths, but at least they will not have suffered suffer every single day of their lives beforehand. Is this still terrible? Yes. Is it also less overall suffering? Yes.
Incidentally, none of this would 'justify' rape, torture, or genocide; it would mean that less [horrible crime] beats than more [horrible crime], if those are the only two options available.
Your original position however was that of the miracle cure: one experiment could save a bunch of people, but that one experiment would be horrible to the animal. My statement was that 'research ... has the potential to avert far greater suffering than it causes.' I have given you two examples.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 08:02 pm (UTC)This is unacceptable.
Very well, let's extend your metaphor. The overwhelming majority of people are okay with daily rape and eventual murder, and it is encouraged socially and legally. You have a choice. You can stand on a street corner and scream till your face is blue at people who could care less, in the hopes that they will one day see the light and completely change their lifestyle. Or you could try to get something done in terms of reducing the incidence of rape so that it takes place only once, rather than daily. Sure, the victims will still die violent deaths, but at least they will not have suffered suffer every single day of their lives beforehand. Is this still terrible? Yes. Is it also less overall suffering? Yes.
Incidentally, none of this would 'justify' rape, torture, or genocide; it would mean that less [horrible crime] beats than more [horrible crime], if those are the only two options available.
Your original position however was that of the miracle cure: one experiment could save a bunch of people, but that one experiment would be horrible to the animal.
My statement was that 'research ... has the potential to avert far greater suffering than it causes.' I have given you two examples.