Why are the rules different for animals? Can we answer this?

If we choose to treat each other humanely and remain intolerant of violence on our fellow man...why are the rules different for animals?

Remember a time you felt total utter fear or anguish, and imagine that was your entire life day in and day out...

Goldfinger's John Feldman wrote this song for PETA, who put together this footage; there are two versions in existence, one concentrates purely on factory farms, this one covers a number of industries that abuse animals for money, including the farming industry.

------

There is a reason the animals struggle and fight and/or try to escape when humans in factory farms, laboratories, fur farms, or an American household threaten, hurt, torture, abuse, and try to kill them. Humans react the same way.

Imagine someone tore you from your family and threw you in a cage...for the rest of your life. Your time out of the cage is spent strapped to an uncomfortable, painful apparatus you do not understand or know is going to get worse or ever stop. Back in the cage you suffer from the same fear, anguish, and mental deterioration that prisoners in solitary confinement do. The only difference is that prisoners get out of solitary confinement and often out of prison altogether.

Why? Because they have rights.

Imagine you are torn from your family at birth and put in a small crate for the first few years of your life. You cannot turn around, your muscles do not develop properly, you are injected with foreign substances, and you cannot express to anyone the pain and discomfort you are feeling day in and day out. Imagine then that you are so crippled by the unnatural environment that you are left to stumble in a pen, hit and abused by unknown beings who are doing it purely for their own amusement, because you are no good to them, your price tag is gone, you are nothing except an object of abuse...for no reason. You cannot get away, you try to fight, through your pain, your fear, but you can do nothing. You cannot express that what is happening to you is wrong and someone needs to help you. You cannot ask another to punish those who torture you.

Why? Because you have no rights.

---------
Do we have a right to live? Yes.
Do you have a right to be free from fear and oppression and harm? Yes.
You are lucky.

Animals have a will to live...the creatures you see in this video don't want to die, and they want to be free with others of their kind. That's what we feel and do.

How is it different for these animals?
Why do we rob them of the things we take for granted for our own lives and which are protected by laws, by each other?

What is the reason these animals are subjected to such suffering? The reason is the humans just do it. Humans abuse animals for fun, but mostly humans abuse and exploit animals for money, and they don't hold back.

Animal protection laws are not working; they are not being abided by; they are not being enforced.
What can you do?

Do not give money to industries that harm animals. Try transitioning to a vegan diet, do not buy clothing made from animal products such as leather and wool, and try to learn more about the products you buy, such as Splenda, made by Proctor and Gamble, a company that tests its consumer products on animals.

Check out this list of companies that test on animals, and try to avoid purchasing products manufactured by them. Opt for products by companies that do not test on animals -- search by category here.

It's not easy -- we strive to conserve, waste less, recycle...if we are seeking to help our planet, why shouldn't we also seek to help the animals we share it with? We are all here on the same ground, breathing the same air, and while we have rights...we have obligations. For those that do not have rights, we are obligated to protect them by making informed decisions and helping to educate our peers.

The next time you need a hug, you call a friend for help, you breathe a fresh breath of air in the comfort of pure freedom...remember those who do not have even the simplest of things such as that. When you hold your cat, walk your dog, or enjoy watching animals in their natural environment, remember those who were robbed of this.

---
After watching this and other videos like it, remember that it is okay to feel sad, angry, and sick...

but even if you cannot answer these questions, know that you are not helpless.

Testing 1-2-3...an on-going debate.

Animal testing...starting with 1-2-3: http://www.stopanimaltests.com/feat/testing123

I posted this on my Facebook to spark a debate, which it did, thankfully, and even more thankfully, brought into the conversation a med student that did research on rabbits at Rush Hospital in Chicago a couple years ago. She is on one side, I am on another. It's great, and it's one of the best ways to stay informed and educated on any issue for which you speak for or against.

My position: If you or anyone you know is in the medicine field (including in school for), please watch and pass this on and tell others to stand AGAINST animal testing. It is unscientific research yet proven animal cruelty. More info at http://www.pcrm.org/.

Counter: I think that it is difficult to learn the facts about animal testing from an extremist video. One fact, you cannot video tape or take pictures of the animals in the lab unless you have explicit permission and can prove that it is pertinent to the research. So, I would just question where those images came from, not that they aren't horrifying. However, if you really want to learn the facts about animal testing and then decide what should be changed, go to http://www.aalas.org/index.aspx or http://www.iacuc.org/index.htm.

Rebuttal: The most likely source of the footage is an employee of the lab(s) where animals are tested. No one else has access, to your point. Bear in mind that PETA and the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (which produces iacuc.org -- they are the same org) or schools like Columbia (http://www.cumc.columbia.edu/research/animal/research.html) both have an interest in making you believe they are right. The difference is that one is defending a practice that is regulated only as far as animal protection laws are enforced behind closed doors by parties interested in the progress of the research, not in questioning and challenging its practices – including third parties hired by the lab or by the government (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/pubs/noawicpubs/educ.htm), an entity that has been known for and charged with atrocities on animals for research. Does Columbia put out pictures of their tests for the public? No.

Without pages of essay explaining the enforcement gap, these images depict in a concise, poignant manner what pro-vivisection scientists do not share with the public, as they divulge information that depicts full compliance only. Even with PETA’s efforts (over two decades’ worth), there is still an amazing amount of cruelty in the name of science – so I can’t imagine how animals would be treated if people were not invited to be shocked at least once so that they question animal testing. It is an unconventional regulatory method that US legislation and regulation cannot, by design, ever employ.

The bottom line is that it is 2009, we have alternatives, and society should employ a zero-tolerance standard. Because we cannot rely on existing regulatory bodies to prevent or stop animal cruelty in this sector, there is always the chance that animals are suffering, despite laws against it. Therefore, if one is against animal cruelty, one should be firmly against all animal testing.

---
Not surprisingly, National Anti-Vivisection Society was not listed under "Links" on the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science website. It's the oldest entity of its kind, yet for some reason, the pro-testing organization the Counter suggested omitted it: http://www.navs.org/.

We cannot get our information about animal testing from a NON-biased party. It is impossible at this stage because it is science and money against ethics. Very tough dynamic to carry out debates in, without ultimately arriving at the "agree to disagree" ending.

NAVS supplies some interesting numbers, though, on number of animals used in research.

Alternatives to animal testing at AltWeb and more at In Defense of Animals for methods such as in vetro, computerized simulations, epidemiology, and more.

---

A PRO-animal testing protest, no pun intended...but they intended it and to protest: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/04/22/vo.pro.animal.testing.cnn?iref=videosearch. They may or may not have seen this HSUS footage from the New Iberia Research Center. This is just one of many dozen research centers conducting the same types of tests on chimpanzees and baboons. That the other centers are violating the AWA and other protection laws goes without question. This is a perfect example of the enforcement gap and how undercover video is, as of yet, the only way for the public to know that there is animal cruelty going on in this country in the name of science -- illegal cruelty.