Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jennifer
The 'right' thing to do is a matter of opinion, and you are not involved (you're not doing the testing, being tested on, or in need of the cure), so what business is it of yours anyway? Undoubtably, you'll say you're a 'voice for the animals'. But you aren't really all that well qualified to speak on the matter, unless you, say, do research studying pain. Chances are you've never seen the inside of a lab. You just don't like the thought of cute likkle bunnies being cut open. And, tbh, the distress that thought causes you is nothing to the suffering of the humans who need treatments
|
Personally I dont have a problem with breeding human babies specifically for the purpose of medical experimentation, which I justify on the grounds that a) for many drugs, testing on babies is likely to yield results that scale up more accurately to adults than animal testing, b) it would be _really_ helpful for invasive neuroscientific research (as would experimentation on criminals who have been convicted of serious crimes, which we should also be doing), and c) babies generally arent thought to be self-aware during the first year of their life anyway, so it's doubtful that they could 'suffer' anymore than a rat could (ie they could feel the sensation of pain, but there probably isnt the sense of selfhood that would be required for actual suffering) Pretty much all of your arguments here still work if you replace 'animals' with 'babies' ("you arent involved so you dont get an opinion" etc etc), so I assume you wouldnt have a problem with this either?
(I'm not even doing a devil's advocate thing here, I'm serious)