Would you go this far?!
Allot of people don't want to exploit animals for any reason, is there any circumstance where you would allow it!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
Answers:
Could you be a bit more specific and give some examples please!? I'd like to answer the question but I'm not sure I've understood you correctly!.
Edit** Ok, thanks!.
I'm vegan because I want to minimise my personal contribution to animal suffering and exploitation as far as I can!. I realise it's not possible to avoid animal exploitation 100%!.
I value human life way over animal life; taking your example, being vegan or not wishing to contribute to avoidable animal exploitation does not require you to be a martyr!. Refusing snake venom that would save your life would be psychotic, not vegan!.
So yes, regrettably, exploiting an animal would be preferable to allowing human suffering or death!. Without animal testing many medical advances would not have been made!. I myself owe my life to animal-tested drugs and procedures, and I would have no hesitation in accepting them again in the same circumstances or encouraging anyone in the same circumstances to do the same!.
I am completely against animal testing for things like cosmetics, and I'm against needless animal experimentation or scientists repeating tests that have already been done; but I'm not convinced there are more effective ways of testing drugs!. I wish this wasn't the case!.
Rivers, I'm shocked at your examples!. ''choosing your child's life over two animal's lives would be morally excusable because of the personal involvement, but not justified because you have chosen one life over two!.'' Bloody hell I would choose the life of a child or adult I'd never seen before over the lives of 100 animals!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
Edit** Ok, thanks!.
I'm vegan because I want to minimise my personal contribution to animal suffering and exploitation as far as I can!. I realise it's not possible to avoid animal exploitation 100%!.
I value human life way over animal life; taking your example, being vegan or not wishing to contribute to avoidable animal exploitation does not require you to be a martyr!. Refusing snake venom that would save your life would be psychotic, not vegan!.
So yes, regrettably, exploiting an animal would be preferable to allowing human suffering or death!. Without animal testing many medical advances would not have been made!. I myself owe my life to animal-tested drugs and procedures, and I would have no hesitation in accepting them again in the same circumstances or encouraging anyone in the same circumstances to do the same!.
I am completely against animal testing for things like cosmetics, and I'm against needless animal experimentation or scientists repeating tests that have already been done; but I'm not convinced there are more effective ways of testing drugs!. I wish this wasn't the case!.
Rivers, I'm shocked at your examples!. ''choosing your child's life over two animal's lives would be morally excusable because of the personal involvement, but not justified because you have chosen one life over two!.'' Bloody hell I would choose the life of a child or adult I'd never seen before over the lives of 100 animals!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
If one needed to exploit animals to live, then that would be morally excusable!. That is to say, their actions are not justified - they cannot be deemed as moral, but one cannot expect them to do much different in that situation!. Similarly, choosing your child's life over two animal's lives would be morally excusable because of the personal involvement, but not justified because you have chosen one life over two!.
Moral justification would be when an action could be deemed to be moral - for example causes less suffering than ALL other options or relieves suffering!.
The vast, vast, vast majority of exploitation is NOT morally justified!. A FEW people in the world rely on subsistence hunting to survive, such as eskimos, but even their actions are merely morally excusable, not justifiable!.
But once again, we are delving into hypotheticals that don't apply for us people who can talk about such things on the Internet!. We are not stranded on a desert island, we are not living in an igloo in the Arctic circle - this does not apply to us!. There's no reason for us to exploit animals!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
Moral justification would be when an action could be deemed to be moral - for example causes less suffering than ALL other options or relieves suffering!.
The vast, vast, vast majority of exploitation is NOT morally justified!. A FEW people in the world rely on subsistence hunting to survive, such as eskimos, but even their actions are merely morally excusable, not justifiable!.
But once again, we are delving into hypotheticals that don't apply for us people who can talk about such things on the Internet!. We are not stranded on a desert island, we are not living in an igloo in the Arctic circle - this does not apply to us!. There's no reason for us to exploit animals!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
Testing of medicines and procedures is acceptable for me!.
"choosing your child's life over two animal's lives would be morally excusable because of the personal involvement, but not justified because you have chosen one life over two!."---I'm almost speechless!. Almost!. It's obvious you have no children and I pray to god you never will!. Over the past couple of weeks you have proven here that you are 100% bonafide insane!. You must be a troll!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
"choosing your child's life over two animal's lives would be morally excusable because of the personal involvement, but not justified because you have chosen one life over two!."---I'm almost speechless!. Almost!. It's obvious you have no children and I pray to god you never will!. Over the past couple of weeks you have proven here that you are 100% bonafide insane!. You must be a troll!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
Yes!. If we were to raise monkeys for food, I would support monkey farming only if they were treated humanely!. Jungle gyms would have to be provided for the monkeys!. School children could take tours of the monkey ranches; it would be very educational!. We could even teach them sign language (the monkeys, not the school children!. Although, there isn't much difference between the two)!. Then we could slaughter the monkeys for their meat!. It would be OK under these circumstances!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
I would allow it for these circumstances:
1!. could teach med students, for saving humans in future!.
2!. for research of anykind!.
3!. for glue or most household products!.
4!. my wife says for makeup!.!.!.must have it!.
5!. dinner!.!.!.if its fried well, then no complaint!.
Just kidding!.!.!.!.!.really only research that is based on uses with humans latter!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
1!. could teach med students, for saving humans in future!.
2!. for research of anykind!.
3!. for glue or most household products!.
4!. my wife says for makeup!.!.!.must have it!.
5!. dinner!.!.!.if its fried well, then no complaint!.
Just kidding!.!.!.!.!.really only research that is based on uses with humans latter!.Www@FoodAQ@Com
God gave humans power over animals!.
to save humans lives, to me is somewhat aceptable!.
for something like shampoo and hairsray!.!.no wayWww@FoodAQ@Com
to save humans lives, to me is somewhat aceptable!.
for something like shampoo and hairsray!.!.no wayWww@FoodAQ@Com
Any use of animals that can save human life, like your example, is fine!. Www@FoodAQ@Com