post new topic

Charities Good & Bad

Related Forum Topics:
animal medical research options
animal medical research options
Animal Intelligence Research
Charities Good & Bad
Mad Science Awards: August 2003 the joy of...
RSPB, Woodland Trust and other charities s...


Charities Good & Bad - 2007/03/23 02:10 Cruel Science: Health Charities
Some health charities ask for donations to help people with diseases and disabilities yet spend the money to bankroll horrific experiments on dogs, rabbits, rats, mice, primates, hamsters, pigs, ferrets, frogs, fish, guinea pigs, sheep, birds and other animals. While human health needs cry out for attention and so many people are going without medical care, animal experimentation enriches laboratories and scientists but drains money from relevant and effective projects that could really help save lives.

Healing Without Hurting
Instead of pillaging animals' bodies for cures for human diseases, compassionate charities focus their research where the best hope of treatment lies: with humans.

They realise that animal experiments are unnecessary, unreliable, and sometimes dangerously misleading. Enormous variations exist among rats, rabbits, dogs, pigs, and human beings, and meaningful scientific conclusions cannot be drawn about one species by studying another. Non-animal methods provide a more accurate method of testing and can be interpreted more objectively.

Compassionate, modern charities know that we can improve treatments through up-to-date, non-animal methods and they fund only non-animal research, leading to real progress in the prevention and treatment of disease - without starving, crippling, burning, poisoning, or cutting open animals.



  Popular posts by Chester81
Nash The Ped.
Camden Arts Centre
NEW Petition To Yank PETA's Tax-...
  | | | post reply
re:Charities Good & Bad - 2007/03/23 03:21 Why do you complain about these charities while promoting vivisection in other threads to this?

Remember this?

History shows that Ray has always claimed to abhor vivisection. He even gave away the particulars of a young girl on Usenet who he believes might actually be one, yet recent quotes from him reveal he believes in the principle of it to such an extent that he would use prisoners on the basis that they have no rights against researchers who may want to use them.

Here's a quote from him advocating the use of prisoners;

"I have not advocated using innocent people.
Let me tell you about a couple of my 'Neighbours' ....
(a) One of them used to lure young guys back to his home, sleep with them and perform all the usual acts associated with homosexual perversion. He then used to kill them, usually by strangulation or drowning.
.....
(b) Used to kill prostitutes and young women by smashing their skulls to pulp with a hammer. He would then stamp over their bodies, masterbate over them and then leave them to be found, sometimes by children.
...
Now honestly, can you say that either of these 'things' have rights?

These are the type of people I advocate for experimental use. *Not innocent people or petty offenders*"
Ray Date: 2003-11-28

As we can see, he does support the *principle of* vivisection and believes non-rights holders are the perfect models to use. He doesn't even believe humans have inalienable rights, let alone the animals he claims to be in favour of advocating rights for.

He wants prisoners to;
"Put a little back into the world."

And to make matters even worse for himself, he now claims that he was merely offering a more reliable model for researchers to vivisect;

"I was offering a more reliable form of testing. I add that I expect few people to share my views"
Ray Date 2003-12-12

"It seems obvious that some scientists no longer are content with the use of lower animals, in view of recent experiments conducted on inmates of prisons and other institutions, and the quicker this Nazi mentality is curbed the better."
-Bob Cromie, Chicago Tribune, 19/1/74 http://www.siav.org/reference/quotes/index.htm

Promoting the principle of vivisection even harder he whined;

"Faced with the fact that vivisection will continue, which would you chose, an innocent animal or one of these offenders?"
Ray Date 2003-12-12

It seems I was right to go after him, because it's obvious he supports the practice and will even defend other known supporters of it, too. For example; Zakhar is a well-known supporter of it and even offers his cost to benefit ratio of 1000:1

"for example if one rabbit would save 1000 humans, then I could accept that the rabbit should die."
Zakhar 2003-02-02

But despite this blatant promotion of vivisection
Ray still believes he is "a valuable defender of all animal rights issues." What a joke, and what a pair of jokers.



  Popular posts by Haemovore
Responsibility for others gone mad ...
Somebody stick a fork in Dreck, ...
More Collateral Suffering from t...
  | | | post reply

Related Products:
   Lorna Sass' Complete Vegetarian Kitchen: Where Good Flavors And Good H...
   Vegetarian Meals Good Housekeeping Favorite Recipes (favorite Good Hou...
   365 Good Reasons To Be A Vegetarian