The Instigator
NausicaaFrostfire
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Cobo
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Should animal testing be allowed?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Cobo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/21/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,163 times Debate No: 35846
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (1)

 

NausicaaFrostfire

Con

Animal testing is cruel. Animals have feelings; they can be scared, hurt, and want to be loved. We would not lock up a human being and test chemicals on them, so why should people be doing that to animals.
Cobo

Pro

The Pro's would like to thank the con for today"s debate.

The stance of the pro is that Animal Testing is the only viable solution. In order for science and medicine to advance we must have some way of testing chemicals and medicine. We cannot test on human or that would contradict the actually purpose of testing for things such as medicine if someone dies. The same can go vice versa for animals. The only reason we cannot test on human is due to the value of human, since humans are conducting the testing they have more value. So we have three options with testing chemicals and medicine.

Option 1-Human testing

This is obviously not preferred by either side, due to the Pro already acknowledging the superiority of animal testing and how the con agrees with the pro that we cannot and will not test on humans for moral reasons. We also cannot test on human as the reasons stated in the opening statement.

Option 2-No testing

The con would obviously prefer this choice, due to the fact that neither human nor animal lives are lost. But, indirectly, Human lives are lost due to the decline in medicine production and animal lives are lost in a declined of animal medicine production. So this is obviously the least favorable option as with this option the most lives are lost.

Option 3-Animal testing

This option is the most preferred because it is the only viable option that society can compromise on. With any other testing we have moral problems as referenced earlier. In order for the con to win the con must show how society would continue to progress without this option an must accept either the first or second option.

Now the pro is not saying that animal testing is entirely right or wrong. The pro is saying that out of the above options animal testing causes the least casualties on both sides and is the best way to advance science and medicine for all races on earth

I await the con"s response.
Debate Round No. 1
NausicaaFrostfire

Con

NausicaaFrostfire forfeited this round.
Cobo

Pro

Extend all arguments, please.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 2
NausicaaFrostfire

Con

NausicaaFrostfire forfeited this round.
Cobo

Pro

Please vote pro

Thank you
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Then 3 years ago
Then
I feel that animal testing should be banned as it is very cruel on the animals. We also do not know if the animals feel pain just like us. Imagine how bad it would be if we were in the animals shoes? We must also remember that animals are not human and thus are not of the same genetic structure as us. This is why animal testing is not always 100 percent accurate. In conclusion, my stand is against animal testing.
Posted by Then 3 years ago
Then
I feel that animal testing should be banned as it is very cruel on the animals. We also do not know if the animals feel pain just like us. Imagine how bad it would be if we were in the animals shoes? We must also remember that animals are not human and thus are not of the same genetic structure as us. This is why animal testing is not always 100 percent accurate. In conclusion, my stand is against animal testing.
Posted by Then 3 years ago
Then
I feel that animal testing should be banned as it is very cruel on the animals. We also do not know if the animals feel pain just like us. Imagine how bad it would be if we were in the animals shoes? We must also remember that animals are not human and thus are not of the same genetic structure as us. This is why animal testing is not always 100 percent accurate. In conclusion, my stand is against animal testing.
Posted by NausicaaFrostfire 3 years ago
NausicaaFrostfire
Okay I look forward to debating with you.
Posted by Cobo 3 years ago
Cobo
Cool thanks for the quick response. The case will be posted tomorrow ASAP.
Posted by NausicaaFrostfire 3 years ago
NausicaaFrostfire
I would just state your case.
Posted by Cobo 3 years ago
Cobo
Just for clarity, is the first round for stating my case in the first round or just doing intro?
Posted by zebrafinchqueen 3 years ago
zebrafinchqueen
It's hard to find the contender since I don't think a lot of people can think of anything of agreeing to hurt animals
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Piccini 3 years ago
Piccini
NausicaaFrostfireCoboTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited. Not giving sources to Pro for he has not used any.