Injection or protection? :: essays research papers

Injections OR ProtectionAlthough testing on beasts seems the only way to raise advance our medicine, technologies, and prevent products from harming people, it doesnt necessarily make it right. I think we can entirely agree that injecting defenseless animals with dangerous chemicals resulting in serious billet effects or possible death is cruel and unusual. Coincidently, in the U.S. we consider such acts as illegal forms of punishment. Yet in the case of animals, its called science. Which leads to the question, what rights do animals have? Arent animals and humans different which therefore lead to a different set of rules? So what exactly separates the two species? The answer might evasiveness in searching for the differences between man and beast. Let us test the senses in order to see a difference there. Sight, smell, hearing, touch, and taste atomic number 18 all common characteristics that both species share, except for a few instances in certain animals and certain disable d humans. Moving on, both are able to sense danger, queer danger, feel pain, sense positive and negative emotions, display affection and dislike. The fact that we even test on animals is an admittance of the distinct similarities between the two. If man and animal were so different, there would be no gain in knowledge due to experimentation. This supports my claim that animals share the same intrinsic rights as humans. Therefore, animal rights should be protected somewhere in our nations constitution. Is it some occasion so minute as having less legs, a set of thumbs and the ability to walk upright? Some would argue that animals are soulless beasts that walk the earth and exist only to serve mans purpose. So why would there be such a thing as wild and untamed animals? They do not exist for the purpose of man and are able to carry on their lives self sufficiently. It is now unambiguous that animals can exist and thrive without human intercession. This refutes the possibility that animals are here only to serve under and function for the betterment of man. It is only through our intervention that we have dominated and controlled animal nature. Through our own perceived superiority, man has decided that animals are expendable for the greater good. As necessary as it whitethorn be to preserve human life, I dont think its ethical to use animals as the testing ground for vanity products. When I say vanity products Im referring to hair, body, and make-up accessories.