The Instigator
VictoriousDebator
Pro (for)
The Contender
sheeley1
Con (against)

Animal Testing Should be Banned

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
VictoriousDebator has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/6/2018 Category: Health
Updated: 1 week ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 160 times Debate No: 116332
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

VictoriousDebator

Pro

I would like to wish my opponent good luck.
I hope this comes to a good debate and I hope others will enjoy.

I will start:

(Please keep in mind that by "we", I mean us pros who support banning Animal Testing)
When in the course of human-animal related events, it becomes common for the human to ignore the right of animals and conduct testing against them with the excuse of better health and life for the human. We(pros) are very disappointed that we humans are treating them cruelly, having a high probability of abusing them to death.

We hold these truths to be obvious, that animal and human should be treated equally. Humans are animals, thus there is no difference between humans and all the animals out in the world. Here is where my point comes in. If humans are animals, then why should we be testing animals? Are we assuming that we are the priority? Not just me, but so many people out there in the world believe that other animals have justice and their rights.

Until now, animals had to remain silent, but with the long history of mistreatment by humans, it is now time that the world finds out what has been going on.

" We"ve been endangering the whole wild and outdoor species.
" We never negotiated or discussed with animals about animal testing.

Even after all of this cruel animal testing, we shared how animals would feel like to relevant communities and medical institutions. However, our complaints were not accepted, and testing is still getting conducted. We must now announce that we are declaring the independence from animal testing.

I, therefore declare that animals have the right to go about peacefully in their daily lives! We are all living creatures that can feel pain and suffering!

Animals Testing should, therefore, be banned!
sheeley1

Con

I'd like to extend gratitude and respect to my opponent and which them the best of luck in this debate. With that being said, I believe the fundamental nature of animal testing is acceptable.

To begin, your original premise posits that animal testing is fundamentally immoral because we have not been given consent by said animals to be used. As of yet, there seems to be no way of obtaining consent from a plethora of animals. While it is true that we can observe and predict the behaviors and reactions of certain animals and species different than us (for example, we can generally tell when animals are happy/sad/angry etc.), this premise relies on the notion that all animals are able to give consent. However, while we do have swaths of knowledge about animal behavior available to us, we have yet to encounter animals with the complicated executive capabilities of humans, so comparing humans to all other animals can't possibly be a fair comparison because humans are unlike all other animals in a variety of quantifiable ways.

For example, out of all of the animals studied and observed by humans, it is extremely rare to establish that other animals have theory of mind, the ability to complexly understand the emotions, desires, actions, etc. of themselves and others around them. Even in animals that have the potential to develop theory of mind, it is often at rudimentary levels and often disputed by other researchers regarding the significance of the study's findings.

Another reason animal testing isn't inherently immoral is because any alternative would stunt the progress and development of new medicines, treatments, vaccinations, etc. For example, banning animal testing would either 1) extend to all humans, because, as you suggested, they're animals too or 2) not place restrictions on human testing. In the case of the second instance, you must then concede that humans are uniquely distinct from other animals, in which case we are back to the first point I suggested. Animal testing has helped to accelerate medical and scientific advents for both domesticated pets and for humans.

Leapfrogging off of my previous point, if you extend a ban on animal testing, you must then establish if it is ethical to do social experiments or milder forms of testing on those same animals. If your response is no, then we are stuck in the situation I previously described in which you must subjectively arbitrate which procedures and which animals are acceptable to test. If your answer is none of them, then the result of that policy would be a cessation of the mounds of scientific value obtained from testing on animals, even as simple as social and behavioral experiments.

Overall, I believe animal testing is not only ethical, but ought to be encouraged for the purposes of scientific and medical advents and because, as I pointed out earlier, any concrete restrictions placed on animal testing will lead to a slippery slope that is inevitably invalidated.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by asta 1 week ago
asta
Lets test on criminals instead. Their results are more reliable than animals.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.