Thursday, January 30, 2014

Minimalist vs. Abolitionist: What's your take?


Today’s topic: (drum set please) Animal Research: Minimalist vs. Abolitionist! I know, I know this is a very controversial topic; people tend to be either 100% for it or completely against it, and there’s usually no middle ground in this subject, but I think this topic will really get us talking today.

 There’s actually two degrees of opposition which are the following: Minimalist and Abolitionist. Minimalist tends to believe that Animal experimentation can be useful up to certain extent and under specific regulations, on the other hand we have the Abolitionist (TUN, TUN TUN!!) I don’t know about you all but I happen to find the name itself a bit intimidating. Any who, who are the abolitionist and what’s their take on animal experimentation, you may wonder... Well Abolitionist are the complete opposite of the Minimalist, they think that animals should have the same rights as humans do, thus there should be absolutely no animal experimentation what so ever.  So… Which do you consider yourself to be?

These two groups can be quite extreme when it comes to getting their points across. For example it has been known that groups of abolitionists have vandalized laboratories, and have even gone to the extent of placing bombs under researcher’s car. Ironic don’t you think? Yeah let’s save animal’s lives by murdering the people who conduct experiments on them.
This ad represents a reply by supporters of animal research.
 
Many medical advances would not have taken place, if it had not been for animal testing. Many people think that animal testing is the base for research, and it simply isn’t. Animal research is only used to address specific questions that cannot be addressed any other way but through experimentation.

I, a Minimalist, personally believe that animal experimentation can be very helpful when it comes to finding cures. Thanks to those researches conducted, vaccines for smallpox, polio, etc. have been found. And yes I totally understand and agree on how it may not be fair because animals can’t speak for themselves and it may seem cruel, but understand that that is the only way we can address research questions. Just imagine if an animal testing were to be banned completely, the pace of medical research would hit a complete stop. In addition, in an attempt to decrease animal cruelty throughout an experiment, many of the animal research today is done under strict legal and ethical control.

 

3 comments:

  1. I agree with you wholeheartedly on the irony of the situation of abolitionists using violence to get what they want. It's so two faced that they would resort to hurting people so that scientists could stop "hurting" animals even though it's for their own benefit. I think the picture sums it up quite nicely in a humorous way, well done!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi there. I am also a minimalistic like you. I believe that animal experiment should be done up to some extent. I can see where the abolitionists are coming from but without animal experiments we would not be so advanced in medicine. I understand that animals might be hurt in some cases. Who would they rather perform the experiment on, an animal or an actual human being?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello, I enjoyed reading your blog, I liked how you described the Minimalist and Abolitionist

    ReplyDelete