Title 2: Animal Rights
[ Crust 3 ]
Research on Animals
Human vivisection is universally recognized as torture.
Therefore, animal vivisection is also a form of torture.
Vivisection is unlawful.
The thing that makes animals valued as test subjects
is their likeness to us...
but that means they have the same rights as us.
The argument for testing is: "they're similar."
The argument for why their pain doesn't matter is: "they're different."
To the extent that they are useful subjects,
they are also the possessors of rights;
and to the extent that they are NOT possessors of rights,
they are not useful test subjects.
The logic of vivisection is completely contradictory.
Even if a "medicine"
is derived from vivisection,
whoever takes that medicine
will take on the negative karma
that comes from having incentivised
the torture and torment of living beings,
which would cause additional disease to manifest,
thus defeating the entire purpose of the "medicine."
If a substance is corrosive,
then we already know that contact with it should be avoided.
Thus there is no useful knowledge to be gleaned
from corrosivity experiments,
and they are unlawful.
Animals' biochemistry and anatomy
are different from that of humans,
in unpredictable ways.
Therefore, information gleaned
from testing drugs on animals
is not reliable.
Research via Observation
Observation is lawful,
if done in the animal's natural habitat.
If taken out of their natural habitat,
their behaviors become unnatural,
and thus not useful for research.