The musings of a juggling mother

Rants & raves about life as a woman today, juggling work, home, kids, family, life the universe & everything.

© Mrs Aginoth. The right of Mrs Aginoth to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents act 1988

Sunday, February 26, 2006

Good for them

I'm not usually one for marches and demonstrations - I've been on a few in my youth, but mostly for causes I am absolutely adamant about, and in the summer;-), but if I hadn't been working yesterday, and could've got a sitter (sigh, life's soo complicated now), I would have seriously considered going along to this one!

Usually 600 people on a march would not say much, but this is the first time there has been any co-ordinated response to the ALF - who, IMO are one of the most revolting, evil terrorist groups to arise over the past few years. Not because they are against animal testing - that's their right to believe what they want - but because they believe that killing people is right. Not because they don't want the new lab built, but because they have used fear & bullying to halt it's construction. What kind of group threatens to kill builders for doing their job? Or states that everyone who attends the oldest higher educational institution in the country is a legitimate target? Or threatens a child-care nursery because some of the children's parents work for one company? Or firebombs a house when a 9 year old child is there? Or steals the body of a grandmother from her grave just because some of her family are associated with animal testing?

How does saving animal lives equate to taking human ones?

FWIW, I am totally in favour of animal testing - if a million rabbits have to die to cure a human disease that's fine by me! How many people will be saved? How much good will those people do? Obviously where alternatives are just as useful, we should use those, but many things will ultimately need testing on living creatures - and I'd prefer 1000 dead rats to 1000 dead people! And yes, I would personally happily infect several million pigs with Psorisis (if we could), and test them until they died if it would cure Aggie - and that's not even life threatening!

It's good to see people finally standing up to be counted in favour of something. We do tend to only voice our opinions when we want to change things, rather than when we think hat we have got is good - so lets start celebrating success and not be frightened of saying what you believe, just because others don't agree!

5 Comments:

  • At Sunday, February 26, 2006 10:42:00 am, Blogger chosha said…

    The group you're describing are obviously a bunch of nutters who've lost sight of what's important.

    However, on the subject of animal testing in general, it's worth remembering that animals are not just testing in the hopes of curing disease. Many animals suffer and die in the cause of creating household products and cosmetics. I don't think that countless dogs (or even one actually) should have oven cleaner sprayed into its eyes, just because humans can't be bothered to use a bit of elbow grease to clean their oven. That is the kind of animal testing for which there is just no excuse.

     
  • At Sunday, February 26, 2006 11:03:00 am, Blogger Juggling Mother said…

    That's why I said - where alternatives are available, they should be used!

    But equally, I'd rather a million rats died in pain than we licenced a product (medical or otherwise) that would kill a person.

    As biological knowlege & technology increases, live testing will bcome less and less vital - when we can grow "living" eyes in a lab, we won't need to squirt stuff into the eyes of living animals. But then I'm sure there will be idiots protesting that it's immoral/irreligious to create the eye!

    BTW in the UK it is law that all new medical products are tested on animals bfore stage 1 human trials, so I'm baffled as to what the ALF et think they will achieve by closing down labs - the testing will till be done somewhere else.

    They're also the group that tried to stop fox hunting by digging holes to trip up the horses - often seriously injuring riders, and ensuring the horse was put down! How does that equate to animal rights?

    BTW - I have been opposed to fox hunting for many years - although not to killing foxes:-)

     
  • At Monday, February 27, 2006 1:12:00 pm, Blogger Vancouver Voyeur said…

    I hear you on the child care. I wonder how many more people would be politically active if not for life's daily responsibilities. I actually did take my daughter to a protest when she was a baby, but that was a bunch of us La Leche League types over a breastfeeding in public issue. :-) I don't agree with resorting to terrorism when you're unsuccessful on other avenues. I don't believe violence helps anyone's cause, well, except maybe the other side, it makes them look more rational.

     
  • At Tuesday, February 28, 2006 12:36:00 am, Blogger mig bardsley said…

    I agree about the ALF. dangerous and mad. Should be stood up against, absolutely.

    Can't decide about animal testing. I'm afraid I feel that it's just a tiny bit arrogant to pick up handfuls of our ecology, use it to destruction and then find that what cures mice doesn't quite actually cure people. Likewise, what doesn't seem to hurt mice much, does sometimes do terrible damage to people. (mice, rats, pigs, monkeys, whatever)
    I'm just not convinced that animal testing is absolutely reliable. Nor that the results are always safe. Nor that the companies that profit from the research can be trusted.

    Nonetheless, well done the pro-testers for standing up to the bullies. Since it seems them in charge aren't doing too well!

     
  • At Tuesday, February 28, 2006 1:17:00 pm, Blogger RCA said…

    Animal testing is always a hard issue for me - I take medication that was no doubt tested on animals at stages in its development which basically keeps me alive. But still I struggle with using any other species for our own advantage with no regard to their well being.

    I think (as with many things) its about degrees. Cosmetic and other types of testing should generally not be performed on animals, this is cruelty for small reward - the equation is unbalanced.

    While scientist need to have a reasonable sized sample pool for medical testing this should be controlled - 15 years after the link between cigarretes and cancer was proven beagles were still being made to smoke 100 a day...

    Where medical testing is done it should be in a way that causes the least possible pain or harm to animals, under careful monitoring.

    Animals should be kept in good conditions otherwise not pinned into cages where they can't move, left in agony to observe effects and then repeat for the next day...

    And terrorism should never be condoned - its anti-abortionist activists that really get me - abortion is murder so we'll burn a doctor who performs legal operations to death...cos thats not murder...

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home