Animal testing should be ban in the us
Debate Rounds (3)
According to the health association in 35000000 cases of polio are in 1981 and in 2014 233 cases are left because of animal testing. This shows the great decreases of cases of polio vaccine because of animal testing
Are you saying that 'The End always justifies the means'
Are you saying that if the U.S. did impose a ban that it would be left at an unfair global disadvantage? Is that your argument.
We are going to have to get to the nub of this question soon, with only 3 rounds.
My position is that there should never be testing on animals, even if it is within the context of animal health or conservation. I disagree with the domestication of animals for farming or labour.
I believe that animals should not be kept in Zoo's or as pets.
I believe that a creature has a 'validity' and an essence that should not be violated.
This is an absolute position that will never be practical in any real way. I just choose to have it, anyway.I believe that the fate of all mammalian life on this planet is already a done deal and that debate on this is 'just shooting the breeze'
If you are going to kill it for fun, then kill it. Just leave your gun at the Police Station and start with a lion.
If you are going to kill it to eat it, then do that. Allow the creature to live it's life as intended and kill it as effectively and as humanely as is possible. If the creature is a nuisance requiring a cull then use the same approach. Donate space to these creatures for their lifetimes. IMHO
We press home our advantage on fellow life forms and we have created a 'final solution' for these things.
Cosmetics or morality? It is your call.
If you want to do testing, then get sick people to try the stuff out. Find volunteers etc. Isn't it a fact that the global pharmacutical industry is just one big 'death camp' of torture and sadism. We don't see it but it is there. Do you consider that the suffering of mammals is subjectively different than the pain we experience as human mammals?. Why? Would you administer a toxin to a child. Would you use rat poison? Why?
Would you use weed-killer? Why? Where are you going to make your line here?
Human morality is a Menu if it ignores creatures like dogs, chimpanzees, rabbits, rats, etc. These creatures are mammals as we are. They nurture and love and protect as we do. So do many of our endangered species.
If we cannot discover a morality that encompasses the validity of these life forms then we will finish them off first and finally turn on ourselves. Negroes were conveniently regarded as animals for most of the slave trade. This justified their exclusion from any degrees of decent treatment. What if a chimpanzee or a gorilla was able to express itself via a computer language programme, What if it could recite it's own prayer or poem. Would we still stick 'bolts' in his head.?
This consideration is an absolute that will never be 'seriously considered' Make your point, but do not expect me to agree with it. Good Luck
mawada_sami forfeited this round.
mawada_sami forfeited this round.
You vote and I win. Thanks!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by famousdebater 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Full forfeiture allowed Pro to win conduct and arguments since Con was unable to refute the arguments presented by Pro.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.