From: itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: animals in research
Date: 7 Nov 92 21:47:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine

In article <BxBonp.CvE@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>Greg Popken writes:
>gp> Excerp from UNC Daily Tar Heel (Jan. 24, 1990) 
>gp>    "We are opposed to ALL animal research." said Jon Tracy
>gp>     spokesperson for the national organization People for the
>gp>       Ethical Treatment of Animals. (Stress on All is mine.)
>
>In article <Bx8A99.DuL@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>rl> Your quotations seemed convincing to me.  Be that as it may, I 
>rl> decided to contact PETA for confirmation.  I faxed a copy of 
>rl> your article to them yesterday afternoon, but haven't received a 
>rl> response from their public relations officer.  
>
>From article <1992Nov5.161931.21697@samba.oit.unc.edu>, by itsmine@med.unc.edu (Greg Popken):
>gp> I'm sure you will inform me of the reply.
>
>At this point, I'm no longer expecting a reply.  I've faxed 
>similar documents to PETA in the past, and I've received answers 
>on a few occasions, but not always.  In particular, I recall a 
>posting from rec.pets.dogs wherein a dog breeder claimed that 
>PETA had been implicated in several murders.  I faxed the posting 
>to PETA, but didn't receive a reply.  The breeder, however, 
>received a letter from PETA's lawyers demanding either proof of 
>the claim or a retraction.  The woman never did retract her 
>remarks but instead argued that PETA was "suit-happy".  This 
>resulted in a deluge of flames from people on both sides of the
>animal rights issue, and she subsequently disappeared from usenet.  

Careful Russell This sound like a threat.  Please, oh please don't tell
PETA on me.  I don't mean to down play this though.  Quite frankly it does
concern me that my name is now on a list somewhere at PETA.  The reason
more scientist don't speak out in forums such as this is concern for their
personal safety as well as concern for disruption of their labs.  I find
this appauling.  Why should a citizen of this country be frightened to
speak his mind (as long as it is not slander) for fear of physical
retaliation from those that oppose his (her) views.  Be that as it may I
figured PETA would come up with my name sooner or later, and I refuse to
be intimidated into the suppression of my beliefs.  I respect PETA's right
to disagree with me, and I support their right to express their point of
view.  I hope that they feel the same about my rights.  Though I can not
be certain. 
>
>rl> I have three questions:
>rl> 
>rl> 1) Do non-human animals have any personal worth that ought to be taken
>rl>    into consideration?  Or, are they merely "automata", as many 
>rl>    behaviorists still believe?
>
>gp> Let's not fuck around.  Do animals have right's?  Every day in the 
>gp> world millions of animals "in the wild" further their own chances 
>gp> for suvival through the use of other animals.   
>gp> In the same way I use other animals to benifit human and 
>gp> non-human health.In the wild there are no "rights". Rights are a 
>gp> human concoction.  Why should we apply them to non-human animals.  

>RL> Please explain why humans ought to have rights.

Because we (humans) choose to live in a civilized society (though at times
I'm not sure).  In order to maintain this civilized society we have
developed laws to protect its members.  The developement of these laws
necessitates the establishment of rights.  If we (humans) instead choose
to live, say as cavemen or wild animals, then I don't believe that we
should have rights.  ( I'm a big fan of Darwin!)

>
>rl> 2) Would you be inclined to support any use of animals that satisfies
>rl>    some human need or desire, eg for fur, food, amusement, etc?
>
>gp> As long as the need is legitamate and can not be obtained 
>gp> adiquately by other means, yes.  

RL>How do we define "legitimate" needs?   Do Miami socialites really
RL>need mink coats?

Of course! It gets cold in Miami at night. (sarcasm) Russell I don't want
to date the ethics of excess with you.  I don't support the fur industry,
financially. But, I do support a persons right to choose what they want to
do with their money, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of
other members of their society. I don't know how WE would define
legitamate but I define it based on my own consciousness.  By the way
do you own any leather coats, shoes etc...
>
>
RL>When I have time to root through my newspaper archives, I'm going
RL>to post several media accounts dealing with LSU's cat shooting 
RL>experiments which ended in controversy not too long ago.
>
RL>The AMA strongly defended the project and praised the researcher 
RL>credencials) claimed that the experiments were wasteful, redundant, and cruelRL>.  PCRM physicians, as you might 
RL>expect, testified against the project.  
>
'm not sure of the specifics of the research project.  Please inform me of
the aims of the research.  If it is the project invovling cat shootings in
order to allow Surgeons to practice proceedures I support it.  You can be
damn sure that I don't want a surgeon operating on me if he or she has
never had experience operating on live tissue.  
And critics with credentials in what.  Einstein had great credentials but
he didn't know shit about the effects of protein kinase C activity on the
NMDA Ca channel in ogliodendrocytes.  Get my piont.  PCRM and PETA
constantly produce "expert" opinion on issues.  What they don't tell you
is that the expert is a opthalmologist or a gynecologist and the research
being discussed is afferent nerve damage or sleep disorders.


					  Greg Poken

The opinions expressed here are mine. And these opinions well you know...

Knowledge is forever! Spelling stops at the end of the page.