Evening star., 1930-06-25
''Sentimentalist" Scores
Cruelty of VivisectiOn
To the Editor Of The Star:

\ To the Editor of The Star:
AS I happen to be one of those senti-
mentaliSts. II you please, who are
that animals can and do suffer tortures
at the hands of vivisectionists. I dare
to challenge the urbane, cool state
ments of the scientists wherein they
blind the eyes and benumb the SYM
pathies of the public at large by claim
ing that 1t Is necessary to make
animals the victims of hideous ex-
periments in order to benefit the human
animal.
What good to the human race comes
of coldly racking the dumb animal
| with intolerable agony. of causing the
means, the shrieks, the quivering pant
ing struggle to escape from the Steel
hard fingers of the scientists, the
whimpers of pain, the eyes glazed
through deathly agony, of merciful
death withheld, that humanity
humanity, God save the word-may
purchase a possible immunity from
disease through making existence an
inferno for the dogs, the cats, the other
poor creatures who are unfortunate
enough to be at the doubtful mercy of
this We call the human being.
An editorial in the Star of June 10
defended viviSection on the ground that
these men who practice it are also
willing to experiment upon themselves
in cases where the lower animal will
not answer as subject. Granted that
this is so, all honor to the men who
thus dare and serve humanity. But
what OF the other experiments which
cause unspeakable torture through
acids eating into the flesh of writhing
| dogs, cats? Just to see how they re
act, eh?" How about tiny puppies
| mere babies, being forced to keep awake
Gays, nights, by ruthless hands, until
they fall into convulSions, or a stupor
! of near death, just for the scientific
experiment of seeing how long they can
survive without sleep?
How about the bleeding bodies,
quivering under a knife, as it pierces
and cuts and digs without mercy, while
the dog, his eyes dark and agoniZed
with terror and deathly sickness.
screams with the inferno of it all in
his torture, that human race may be
benefted-human beings who ought
| to do more for themselves in observing
decent sanitary laws and right living to
| preserve health, rather than owe i'm
munlty to sickness through the hideous
! experiments upon the animal kind.
No animal possesses the human
organism. Why torture that which is
not, then, of the human kind? Can
| good come of such monstrous advantage
taken of creatures who cannot tell of
how they suffer? No, it cannot. It is
not weak sentimentalism to urge that
this monstrous advantage taken of the
smaller creatures Of the animal world
! that advantage called "vivisection"-
be rtgidly banned in this Capital City
of these United States 1t is strange
that the apathetic and the indifferent
| to the welfare of our dogs, cats, birds.
other creatures at the mercy of the
human being, always denounce kind
ness and mercy toward these creatures
as ''Sentimentalism." The general
| health of the human race would be i'm
proved If they entertained bit of this
sentimental SoftnesS" to a much
greater degree as race, since kindness
to animals means few diseased animals
| to spread germs. Let them look to that
side of it, say
May our legislators realize that the
"sentimentalists" have cause to speak.
| and that they are in the right when
/ they cry out to abolish vivisection.
! ADA LOUISE TOWNSEND.