Re: Does the end justify the means?

rick wrote:

.....
If animals had rights, there would be no usenet. No power, No communications, Millions upon millions of items that make up our everyday life. We could not life it without the death and suffering of billions upon billions of animals.

The same is true of humans, as I'm sure you know, Rick.

All human actions, all human society, all human products,
have some negative effects on other humans, other animals,
and the environment. Some of these effects are blatant
and severe, such as sweatshops, or the terrible conditions
(for both human workers and slaughtered animals) in some
large-scale commercial slaughterhouses. Remember the
workers who were burned to death because the doors were
locked in a chicken processing plant? Yet no one says
this means humans do not have rights, or even that the
people who bought products from such producers did not
believe humans have rights. We can never live so as to
have no negative effect on others, no matter how much we
know, or how hard we try. The effect of Usenet on animal
suffering is small compared to other sources of animal
suffering and death. That is not to say it should be
ignored, but surely there are other areas we should
work on first.

......

My experience includes: Doggie Day care montioring, grooming, bathing,
assistant at a vet hospital, volunteering at animal shelters, working
on farms, touring mulitple slaughter houses, designing a swine barn for
an existing farm and that is before I graduated with a degree in Animal
Science.

I assume you are familiar with Rollin's book on farm animal
welfare? What do you think about his ideas?

Since then, I've worked in animal research. I've been a cage
washer, animal caretaker, lab animal technician, and now I work with an
IACUC to monitor and regulate animal welfare at our institution.
.

Relevant Pages
Loading