This has been troubling me for some time. Why is it that some people have no problem sentencing animals to their death behind those sinister lab doors? What of the convicted felons that had no problem killing innocent people? Why is it that they get a little pat on the hand while animals have to go through torture. I know these vile "humans" are protected by the 8th amendment, but why are they if they have done very heinous crimes that most are never sorry about? Why is it that some people have these bleeding hearts are willing to forgive them. They know not what it is like to loose a beloved family member.
So my question is this: Should Animals be the ones to be put through testing or heartless killers?

well where as all animals including felons have rights before you start condemning people for testing on other species keep in mind that, 1 the other species are not sentient meaning they are not self aware and do not have the capacity to comprehend the idea of life and death so where it may hurt them they are not afraid that it will kill them and will only react to the situation at hand. 2 felony convictions are not a pat on the hand and the consequences are life altering even if they are acquitted of the crime. 3 a bleeding heart is someone who cares too deeply without any real reason too so the use of your wording in that sentence is wrong or there was a major typo. pets question and answers,www.5d2d.com

now that you have those fact take them into account when i ask these next questions.
1) What would be the repercussions for using only human test subjects and how would it effect the data given?
2) Are you willing to voluntarily take the place of one or more of these animals, possibly risking death due to chemical reactions or allergic reactions only to be replaced by another animal?
3) Do you believe that all felons should be subjected to the conditions contained within the second question regardless of the level of violence within their convicted crimes?
4) if we did not test products on animals including felons then how would we test to see if they are dangerous and or have severe medical effects?

my point is that it is not wrong to feel bad for the animals or that the way you are thinking is wrong it is merely to point out that it is the only real way to test these products at the current point and if we did not test them then you and others like you would be directly responsible for allowing harmful products to flood the market and destroy the health of millions if not billions instead of a couple hundred thousand a year. is it right no, is it necessary to protect not only humans but other species should they come into contact with these products yes.

As silly as it sounds, that qustion has depth. It asks the question, what is it about us that makes us, as humans, more worthy of certain rights than animals.

Is it our developed consciousness? Oee could argue that some animals do expereince a sense of self, like dolphins whales and some monkeys.

Is it because we were gifted by our creator some sort of innate spiritual presence that animals lack?

Or is it because we just can, and therefore do? I think it is this last reason. But I think it is an evil that must be done. I think the benifits outweigh the costs...if it were not for lab testing on animals, we would not have the medical technology to save injured wildlife, or know the effects of pesticides like DDT. Millions would die of what are now considered common diseases. Millions would go hungry if they did not get fish from the sea.

And this will continue as long as we are the dominant species. So get ready for when the aliens come and treat us like cattle and lab rats and we get what we have been giving.