Skip to Main Content
Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way.

Government Inspectors Condemn Animal Laboratories at UW-Madison

Written by PETA | January 5, 2010

After reading an article in the Duluth News Tribune about the goings-on at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I took my dogs, Charlie and Lucy, for a long walk. My brain needed to mull over the angle I’d take in writing this blog—my soul needed to witness happy dogs doing dog things like sniffing tree trunks and greeting strangers, canine and human alike.

The article discussed a lengthy report compiled by government inspectors after a surprise visit last month revealed a filthy facility in which depressed dogs who underwent major invasive surgical procedures were vomiting in their cages and did not receive any veterinary treatment, university personnel did not notice or treat a gerbil who was severely emaciated and struggling to breathe, and staff were inadequately trained to handle primates. The Duluth News Tribune notes, “One major finding is that in five studies, UW-Madison researchers did not show that they tried to find an alternative to painful experiments on animals.”

 

supercentenarian / CC
rhesus monkeys

 

Unfortunately, this kind of treatment happens so frequently in university labs that it is almost routine—as awful as it is to call such horrors “routine.” A recent PETA undercover investigation exposed similar cruelty suffered by cats, kittens, and dogs (purchased from local animal shelters), along with monkeys, mice, rats, and other victims of experiments at the University of Utah. At the U, what appears to be incompetence, indifference, and neglect forced many of the animals to endure severe trauma, prolonged suffering, and grisly deaths. Apparently, vivisectors at UW-Madison follow a similar modus operandi in the treatment of the victims of their experiments.

Our fingers are crossed that UW-Madison receives more than a slap on the wrist for these violations. While we keep an eye on the story, take the time to give our fight against laboratory atrocities some muscle by taking action today. Then go hug your own dog and give him or her an extra treat.

Written by Karin Bennett

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • Kurt K says:

    Umm…Randy I believe in all sects of Christianity Jesus is believed to the embodiment of God. In other words he was God on earth. Jesus is very often called God.

  • Randy says:

    Great God Jesus? Should I really feel threatened by someone invoking a GodJesus chimera? In what sect of Christianity is there a God Jesus? PS. Most biological scientists aren’t lining their pockets with $$$$. If you believe any such thing let me inform you that you are heinously misinformed and need to perhaps check in with reality before sinking to hatemongering.

  • ruth thompson says:

    It is unbelievable to cruelty seen in this day age not only do we kill our own babies in the most horrific partial birth abortions but these dear helpless creatures are torn apart by socalled human beings. The Great God Jesus will judge each by the acts performed on this earth and these cruel people will find out what it is like to be in HELL burning 247 with no exit and no kind hands or hearts to help WITH NO EXIT!! God never made us with intelligence to treat lesser creatures cruelly. Scientists Researchers who line thier pockets with cash at the suffering of other beings will soon reach the end of their own lifes AND THEN WILL BE THE JUDGEMENT! U say U don’t believe well just wait it will be proven to you in the end for sure!

  • Lori says:

    As a junior at the University of Madison I am DISGUSTED. Admittedly I knew about these facilities when I enrolled here but I kind of made it an out of sight of mind kind of thing an incredibly immature and neglectful decision on my part. I promise to do everything possible to let my fellow students and anyone who will listen about these outrages. The suffering must end.

  • Kurt K says:

    I couldn’t resist the pun given the website! Sorry PETA.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    hehe… ‘beating a dead horse’I suppose that’s one form of animal abuse I must admit I’m guilty of when provoked enough.

  • Kurt K says:

    Wow I sure missed alot over the weekend. After reading down through the last few posts I don’t really feel the need to respond. Kalama has done some very thurough research in his responses. There really isn’t any need to beat a dead horse. For the record I am still against dog fighting the fur industry and senseless animal abuse. On to the next topic!

  • Gwen says:

    Mr. Defender perhaps the condoning violence based on ideals that kalama is accusing you of is based on the fact that you keep grouping scientists with child molesters and people who abuse children. It’s YOUR OPINION that these kinds of people are the same. He’s 100 right about thateven though I despise animal research. He also hasn’t resorted to being childish or accused you of any of the things you keep acting like he did. Where exactly is he lying?

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    AD’s ABRIDGED DOGFIGHTING LIE AD Kurt makes excuses for dogfighting. mistaken statement Kurt I think you’ve confused me with someone else…I think dog fighting is horrible. PROTEST AD Kurt supports dogfighting. ignores correction and provides no instance of Kurt supporting dogfighting LIE KH Kurt said he doesn’t support dogfighting why are you insisting on this? Asks for example of Kurt supporting dogfighting AD Kurt supports dogfighting. LIE KH’s ABRIDGED ‘LIE’ aka a collection of statements where AD justifies condoning violence based on his personal code of ethics then claims he doesn’t condone violence against people with different ideals without providing any alternative explanationor reiterating ideological justifications + multiple claims that KH accused AD of ‘threatening to harm’ people despite the total absence of any statements supporting this claim AND being told this was not the intent of any statement irregardless. Kurt “you can condemn violence against animals but condone violence against people?” question 1 AD “i do condone violence against some people..simply because i think it gives you a taste of your own medicine” response 1 KH “Since I don’t agree with your standards does that make it okay for me to condone violence against you?” question 2 AD “I dont agree with any kind of violence unless the victim is the abuser IDEAL people’s definition of ‘abuse’ is personal AD “if someone hurts and abuses an animal in any way just the same as a human being then they deserve the same done to them” IDEAL not everyone agrees with ‘eye for an eye’ tactics. KH Made points about why violence is never acceptable pointed out that someone who hurts an ‘abuser’ becomes an ‘abuser’ themselves. KH “I’d assert that anyone who believes that they can harm someone solely due to a difference in ideals…” Challenge to justify condoning violence with something other than ideals AD “if someone abuses or hurts anything or anyone they get what they deserve which i stand by my comment” AD reiterates support of ‘eye for eye’ AD “dont cause harm or distress to anyone or anything’ its really not hard” irrational statement AD condones violence against violence but doesn’t acknowledge that the violence he condones violates this statement. AD “you two animal abusers” IDEAL declared animal researchers as ‘abusers’ in AD’s ideology repeated polls show most people don’t agree with this description. AD’s belief that scientists are abusers is based on his IDEALS AD “WHERE in my posts have i EVER said id hurt someone because they have a difference in ideals???” Straw man never accused AD of making threats himself AD “I said i didnt care if an abuser gets attacked” AD softens original stance actually AD said “i would love nothing more than to see…not ‘I didn’t care’” AD “but not once did i say I WOULD ATTACK ANYONE” Same straw man again KH explained I never accused AD of personally threatening to commit violence KH “by stating you would love it if an ‘abuser’ was beaten up you are condoning violent opposition of something you disagree with…If you’d be happy to have a vigilante harm me but wouldn’t be happy if the vigilante were harmed in retaliation then you simply are selectively condoning violence against someone based on nothing more than a difference in ideology.” clarifying why I thought AD’s condoning of violence was based solely on ideals AD “i have never ‘threatened to beat ANYONE up’” same straw man AGAIN…I never said AD threatened anyone KH “Would you love to see someone get beaten up if they beat up a vivisectionist? Why not? Perhaps because they share your ideals?” Challenging AD for an alternative explanation again AD “Again kalama where did i ever say i’d love to see someone beaten up because they dont share my ideals?? see what i mean you are a LIAR. AD chooses not to provide alternative explanation despite all previously made statements used to justify condoning violence being based on his own ideals. KH “You have repeatedly stated that you condone violence against anyone who harms another living thing. The difference between you and vivisectionists which you claim justifies harming them is ideological you believe no living thing can be harmedscientists believe some animals may be harmed if there is a perceived need and suffering is minimized.” final attempt to explain why I think his claims are based on nothing more than ideology KH “If I misunderstand you and you clarify yourself I will be happy to retract statements made under incorrect assumptions.” lets AD know I have no problem correcting my statements provided clarification or evidence to the contrary is provided.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    Who’s a “jumped up pompous arrogant man” the person who maintains civility and repeatedly gives you opportunities to participate constructively in the discussion despite the fact that you’ve done nothing other than insult everyone who disagrees with you can’t utter a single sentence without seeming as if you’re freaking out and accuses people of supporting things they don’t support ps. do you realize that by repeatedly accusing Kurt of supporting dogfighting despite being corrected and providing no evidence that you are actually the only LIAR here? I’ve given you multiple chances to explain why my assumptions are wrong. Give me ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of what other than your belief that an animal being harmed by an experiment to help men makes violence against a scientist condonable but at the same time doesn’t make violence against someone who hurts a scientist condonable. If you can’t then your justification can only be based on your personal ideology. I gave you a chance to redeem yourself by actually addressing any of the multitude of points I’ve made in this thread and still you chose to do nothing more than insult me. For some reason all I see you writing is ‘cutting up animals’ ‘cutting up animals’ etcbut we’re not even discussing whether its okay to do experiments. All I’ve been discussing with you is why you think violence against scientists is okay and how you totally misunderstand things like the liver substitute. You haven’t made a single logical statement you repeatedly call me a liar and still haven’t managed to provide any example of somewhere I’ve actually lied. As I said if I’ve misunderstood something you’ve said CLARIFY WHAT YOU MEAN. See the first paragraph for an example of providing evidence that someone is intentionally lying. See the next post for an example of your outright lie followed by what you apparently think is the ‘lie’ I’m telling regarding you. All you seem capable of doing is repeating yourself over and over again. You never respond to any points I try to make or clarify your points that you claim I misunderstand. You are either totally irrational or immature. Any normal person can tell that you aren’t making any effort to read or respond to what I’m saying. You’re right about one thing thoughthis is a waste of a debate as far as you are concerned because every time someone tries to make points you can’t seem to do anything other than claim you’re being persecuted and act like a drama queen. You’ve even resorted to using the internet version of putting your hands over your ears and saying “I’m not listening!” which is basically the classic hallmark of a belligerent child throwing a fit. Grow up.

  • animal defender says:

    ‘Would you love to see someone beat up a vivisectionist? Why not? Perhaps because they dont share your ideals’… Again kalama where did i ever say i’d love to see someone beaten up because they dont share my ideals?? see what i mean you are a LIAR and the more you speak the more you prove it. ‘Im going to give you the chance to redeem yourself’ Who the hell do you think you are?? Seriously you are a jumped up pompous arrogant man. All of the above are true you are nothing more than an animal abuser seriously you need to remove your head from up your ass kalama. What a waste of a debate. im not even dignifying this with a response im not even coming back to see what crap you come out with anymore its true…go and cut up more animals if thats the only thing that satisfys you. SUCH A LIAR.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    “you are just as patronising as kurk and you stink of desperation.” I’m going to point out that I pretty much always stick to addressing points other people have made. I’m not patronizing youI am challenging your assertions. I disagree and find fault with some of them so I point out what I disagree with or find nonsensical. Unlike you I do not stray and begin insulting people getting their names wrong on purpose Kurk or ‘stinking of desperation’. If I misunderstand you and you clarify yourself I will be happy to retract statements made under incorrect assumptions. However you have repeatedly accused me of misinterpreting your statements and then go on to do nothing more than reiterate my original interpretation. Also unlike me you never provide the quotes or point out the places where I’ve supposedly misinterpreted you. You simply state “You said I said this but I never did.” and usually I didn’t even say what you think I said. You are either misreading me or not taking the time to even figure out what I’ve written. Or in the worst case you’ve started believing I’ve said things I’ve never said like you’ve done with Kurt and the dogfighting you insist he supports despite being told multiple times that he doesn’t support dogfighting. “id suggest you didnt interfere with other peoples debates and mind your own buisness” Go look at post 1. I started this debate. Here allow me to post the first sentence you contributed when you joined the debate I started “Oh here we go kurt butting in again… ” Wait so you joined just to complain that someone else joined the debate? What exactly do you consider butting in? Kurt responded to a statement someone made your entire first post ignored the debate entirely and simply complained that people post on the PETA blog who don’t agree with all of your beliefs. Did you ever stop to think that I may agree with PETA on many issues just not science? Are lactoovo vegetarians welcome here? Do you consider PETA like a religion where everyone is required to have the exact same beliefs? At least Kurt’s post was a response to something someone in the debate said as opposed to outright and irrelevant whining. I’ll give you a chance to redeem yourself…how did your first post respond to a point previously made in the debate or add to the debate in any way? “while your trying to make me look like the monster…” At what point have I tried to make you look like a monster? Until this set of posts I never did anything but explain why I disagree with some of your statments. If you’re referring to the belief that I’ve accused you of actually threatening violence as I’ve already pointed outI did no such thing. Who is guilty of trying to paint a picture of a monster? Here allow me to provide you with your own words regarding me “I think you need to put down that animal your cutting up and reread what ive said” “Go and do what your so proud of kalama cutting up animals” “…compared to you two animal abusers” “go and live your horrid life abusing animals” “animals will always be better than you two” “you torture animals and call it a job” “you mad scientists” Wait…who’s trying to make who look like a monster? “yet you are pin pointing all the negative comments on to me to make me look bad” I think this is actually what you’re doing to me…I disagree with you and instead of debating you simply resort to being disrespectful imagining I’m accusing you of things I haven’t accused you of and basically just complaining that I don’t share all of your beliefs. If you care to prove otherwise try addressing a point I’ve actually made ie. the suitability of the liver substitute or why you don’t think nonviolent options should be the ONLY acceptable options. “you are a joke and a liar.” You do realize that if you call me a liar you should point out where I’m lying right? I never lie when I debate. If you are going to insult my integrity you had best be able to back your accusations up. Otherwise it is you who “are a joke and a liar”.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    “Saying stupid remarks such as ‘threatening to beat people up’ just goes to show how desperate you both are to make me an animal lover and anti vivisectionistlook stupid” Again I never accused you of threatening to beat people uponly that you repeatedly expressed that you’d be happy to see people get ‘beat up’. The only points I made regarding the ‘beating’ issue was that violence is an ineffective way to change things. If my only motivation was to justify myself and make you look bad would I suggest constructive ways to expedite the end of animal experimentation? Would I dub the liver substitute a “small step in a good direction”? Would I express disgust at the substandard and illegally inadequate care shown in the recent research videos? Would I mention which violations were illegal and suggest that people who are concerned contact the USDA and protest those specific things in order to at least encourage better oversight? I do all these things in my various posts across the blog and Facebook. In regards to science my only concern is making you guys realize that you aren’t the experts. I have the knowledge to consider the strengths and limitations of things like the liver substitute. You don’tyet you insist that somehow the existence of the liver substitute makes animal experiments unnecessary. If I had a penny for every time someone here said “Vivisectionists are sadistic andor only do it for money cuz there’s all kinds of animal alternatives so we don’t need animals and animals aren’t humans so everything from animal research is useless.” I’d be much wealthier than I am. The only thing that makes this statement believable for people like you is that it matches your ideals and that you are basically ignorant with regards to science the scientific process biology etc. Can you honestly assert that you are a better judge of the utility of the liver substitute than I? Can you honestly say that most people here are better judges of how animal research has contributed to medical advances? As I’ve said multiple timesstick to your ethical opposition. Don’t try and justify your ethics using concepts you have no mastery of. “I never said humans were all evil and animals were all good at all so get it correct kalama” You provided an extensive list of the crimes of humanity car crashing killing raping etc clearly asserting that these crimes would not exist if humans didn’t exist “Yeah you may think its bizzare but if there were no humans..there would be no abuse.” You then reiterated that you have issue with most humans “There are very few humans who deserve to live on this planet”. You disregarded the fact that animals partake in the human crimes of which they are capable theft rape beatings murder warfare. I’m sorry but the list and these statements clearly portray a picture of animals being incapable of doing wrong and humans being the only source of wrongs. If this was not your intent then you need to start writing what you actually mean. Obviously no animals are going to build cars and pollute the environment or be able to wantonly dispose of rubbish since they are restricted to consuming what’s around them which is biodegradable.The only issue which you addressed was cats killing sadistically which you correctly attributed to the ‘circle of life’ despite the fact that my point was only to demonstrate that the very humans which you paint to be so despicable actually put effort into carrying out processes which are natural in the context of the ‘circle of life’ in a kinder manner than the cat who most likely lacks the cognitive capacity to even realize he’s torturing his prey. A human can sit there and say “Hey when I killed this cow it took a long time to diemaybe we should find a better way to do this.” Further a human can say “Hey I don’t even think I need to eat this cow so maybe I won’t kill it at all.” Of course with this added intellect you also end up with factors like money coming into play which may drive some people to opt to maximize profits instead of minimizing suffering again factory farms. The cat can neither be motivated to do less harm nor more harm. Even if we provided cats with infinite and convenient nonanimal food they would still kill prey given the opportunity. That’s why I said at best animals can only be considered to be innocent.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    Animal Defender said “Firstly kalama i have never ‘threatened to beat ANYONE up’” Never did I state that you yourself threatened to ‘beat someone up’ only that by stating you would love it if an ‘abuser’ was beaten up that you are condoning violent opposition of something you disagree with. Would you love to see someone get beaten up if they beat up a vivisectionist? Why not? Perhaps because they share your ideals? The previously mentinoed hypocrisy applies whether or not you yourself are the vigilante. If you’d be happy to have a vigilante harm me but wouldn’t be happy if the vigilante were harmed in retaliation then you simply are selectively condoning violence against someone based on nothing more than a difference in ideology. There is no desperate twisting of your words herethis is simply what you are stating. Furthermore you yourself attempted to justify the post that WIL had made which Kurt perceived as threatening “so yeah kurt i do condone violence against some people..simply because i think it gives you a taste of your own medicine”. You have even in your most recent points stated that you believe that violent retaliation is perfectly acceptablewhich is the only thing I’ve ever accused you of doing. “I also NEVER said id hurt anyone just because we dont agree you are such a bullsr kalama WHERE in my posts have i EVER said id hurt someone because they have a difference in ideals???” You have repeatedly stated that you condone violence against anyone who harms another living thing. The difference between you and vivisectionists which you claim justifies harming them is ideological you believe no living thing can be harmedscientists believe some animals may be harmed if there is a perceived need and suffering is minimized. The point I actually made was that scientists don’t experiment in order to ‘harm’ animals. Their intent is to minimize or prevent suffering in the pursuit of helping mankind. ‘Harm’ is actively minimized and is simply a byproduct of the scientific process just like harm occurs when people consume other animalsthey intend to eat to survive not hurt other animals. You on the other hand differ by saying that it’s okay to hurt only humans in order to help animals. You say that it’s okay to actually intend to hurt someone in order to change their behavior. Let’s put it this way…a scientist won’t harm an animal unless he believes there is a need to do so and many people agree with him. If there is an alternative he is REQUIRED to use the alternative. If an animal must be used it is required that it not be subjected to any pain at all or that if it must experience pain that the need must be great. A scientist would never be happy to see a rat be harmedunlike you who clearly states things like you “would love nothing more than to see a child molester beaten up.” There are ways to deal with people who behave in ways you can’t accept that don’t involve violence. Most people accept that there are generally far more productive ways to resolve conflict and bring about change than by use of violence. You assert that you would be happy to witness someone bypass nonviolent methods and that is why in the statement you refer to I accused you of believing it’s OK to harm with malevolent intent.

  • animal defender says:

    I also NEVER said id hurt anyone just because we dont agree you are such a bullsr kalama WHERE in my posts have i EVER said id hurt someone because they have a difference in ideals??? I think you need to put down that animal your cutting up and reread what ive said. And then when you’ve reread it id suggest you didnt interfere with other peoples debates and mind your own buisness because while your trying to make me look like the monster you yourself is looking like a liar. I said i didnt care if an abuser gets attacked but not once did i say I WOULD ATTACK ANYONE. Yes i admit if i saw anyone hurting an animal or an innocent person i WOULD slap them but not just because of a difference in ideals omg kalama you are so sad. How many people would do the same but yet you are pin pointing all the negative comments on to me to make me look badI aint even reponding to you anymore you are a joke and a liar. Go and do what your so proud of kalama cutting up animals instead of twisting words on here. PATHETIC.

  • animal defender says:

    Firstly kalama i have never ‘threatened to beat ANYONE up’ so its you have misread what ive written kurt..kurk..whatever..wanted an explanation off someone who wasnt even talking to him with which i replied along the lines of if someone abuses or hurts anything or anyone they get what they deserve which i stand by my comment take off your rose tinted spectacles and see the world in which we live without a question of a doubt if someone hurt my children then i would hurt them plain and simple if i hurt someones children then i would expect to be hurt The solution is simpledont cause harm or distress to anyone or anything’ its really not hard. I never said humans were all evil and animals were all good at all so get it correct kalama i said with the world in which we live in at the moment i would rather live with just the animals to which both you and kurks responces are of the obnoxious manner which kind of sums you both up. Saying stupid remarks such as ‘before you give up your life and go live with the animals’ and ‘threatening to beat people up’ just goes to show how desperate you both are to make me an animal lover and anti vivisectionistlook stupid compared to you two animal abusers You two can suger coat your job all you want and claim im the crazy peta loving wierdo who doesnt know what im talking about but people who read these blogs will know exactly what you are and at the end of the day you can twist my words to however which way it suits but it will never change how i feel about your job. you are just as patronising as kurk and you stink of desperation. Goodbye kalama go and live your horrid life abusing animals but always remember..what goes around comes around karma is definately gonna catch up to you im not religous and i dont believe in god but what i do believe in is animals will always be better than you two no matter how much you preach.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    “there is no excuse for humans to kill an animal either to eat…” This statement is only valid if you believe that we have accumulated all knowledge regarding human nutrition. Well after a few decades people still can’t even make up their mind conclusively about whether aspartame is actually harmfuland that’s just one molecule. If we can’t even figure out one molecule it’s safe to say we probably don’t know everything about what humans need to function and develop optimally. Until that knowledge is attained it’s safest to maintain the diet we’ve evolved to handle over the last few millennia not the typical American dietwhich just so happens to include small but regular quantities of meat. Obviously at this point in the game we’ve gotten good enough to prevent overt malnutritionbut not all nutritionrelated deficiencies are easily tied to dietary factors. You can’t study a factor in humans until you identify it and then after that it may take hundreds of years to pick up on what roles it plays in human biology. “All your’s and kurks excuses about animal testing being vital is bull its usless and unnesasary” What basis do you have for this statement? You can curse while making this claim all you want but that doesn’t make you right. “Have you seen the other blog about the near human organ being developed for testing? WITHOUT ANIMALS” Yes I have. 1. This technology wasn’t developed WITHOUT ANIMALS. If you go to HuRel’s website and read the journal paper you’d see that they frequently refer to previous animal experiments that provided the rationale that helped provide the basis for their design. Furthermore they actually grew the liver cells on collagen obtained from rat’s tails. 2. This is not a ‘near human organ’. It’s a system made up of a couple types of liver cells designed to examine specific aspects of chemical metabolism. This means it can’t be used for any research other than what it’s specifically designed to test. “I have to wonder what excuses you mad scientists come out with now to keep using animals.” Well AD See 2 above. If you aren’t one of the few scientists who could use this model for their entire line of work then the existence of this model doesn’t alter the current state of affairs at all. I’m a neuroscientist and this model and the techniques it’s introduced won’t help me at all. Only people who aren’t knowledgeable consider this a magic bullet. People like me on the other hand are happy to see another small step in a good direction. Thinking you can solve the mysteries of human biology with 23 cells in a dish is about as naive as thinking you can solve them ONLY with animals. If you want to see things change so badly why not study hard and join a group developing nonanimal models? That would be far more productive than ‘beating someone up’. Plus Kurt not Kurk has repeatedly told you he doesn’t defend dogfighting yet you continuously insist he does. Maybe you should be paying attention to what he writes instead of arguing with some past perception you’ve associated with him. Also it’s plain as day to me that you’ve misread and responded inappropriately to things he’s written in this very thread.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    Animal Defender said “The cat comment is stupid really because cats hunt and kill for food its what animals do in the wild its called the circle of life” AD that would be true if my intent was to use such an example as an justification for harming animals. However the example was only provided to contrast the ‘All Animals are Angels who Wouldn’t Harm a Fly’ vs. ‘All Humans Are Evil’ portrait you attempted to paint a few posts back. If a human killed like a cat it would be considered sadistic however many of us ‘bad’ humans who ‘steal cars then drive them at 100mph and eventually crash in to someone or someones property’ go out of our way to kill our food far more humanely. Animals exhibit all kinds of negative behaviors you see in humans ants wage war and farm canines fight for dominance within their group chimps ostracize and even murder other chimps and orangutans have been observed committing rape. The only thing up for debate is whether or not they realize what they’re doing. “i would love nothing more than to see a child molester beaten up now if that makes me a sad person then so be it” Yes it does make you a sad person no matter how righteous it would seem to do so. Why? Because 1. Violence accomplishes nothing. Unless you actually kill the perp assault without any attempt at rehabilitation will likely only lead to repeated offenses that will be carried out more covertly. 2. Resorting to violence when there are ANY other effective alternatives sinks you to the level of a subhuman. We don’t handle our problems in the manner in which two stags figure out who gets to hump a doe. We don’t vote for our president because they can kick the tar out of everyone else in the pack of politicians. 3. Because the second you abuse an ‘abuser’ you yourself become an ‘abuser’ and it’s fair game for someone to harm you. This effectively renders you a hypocrite. You’re basically saying “It’s OK for me to hurt someone who hurts something else as long as that someone isn’t me hurting someone who’s hurting something else”

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    Angry I’m well aware that I experiment with animals when there are no suitable options available to avoid doing so. You are more than welcome to have issue with this fact. However what exactly is it that you consider ‘supposed’ about the need to deal with diseases and learn about the mechanisms underlying life in order to prevent and or be able to deal with future problems? Is trying to help others really ‘playing God’? Perhaps you suggest we sit idly and wait for the inevitable extinction that would come to all life on the planet if we adopted this laissezfaire attitude with regards to advancing and protecting our own species and conserving those that otherwise would already have gone extinct. Do you consider saving an endangered species a bad thing?…because you realize that is also playing God no matter which of the many definitions you attribute to the phrase. I’d assert that anyone who believes that they can harm someone solely due to a difference in ideals is far more guilty of playing God. Whether you can accept it or not a researcher’s never intend harm anything and when they do it’s never with malevolent intentunlike Mr. A.D.

  • animal defender says:

    kalama the only reason you are speaking on kurks behalf is because he 100 supports the horror you call a job. I dont agree with any kind of violence unless the victim is the abuser i would love nothing more than to see a child molester beaten up now if that makes me a sad person then so be it and im sorry kalama but if someone hurts and abuses an animal in any way just the same as a human being then they deserve the same done to them. But do you know what the really sad thing is kalama??? It’s the fact you torture animals and call it a job. The cat comment is stupid really because cats hunt and kill for food its what animals do in the wild its called the circle of life it would be easier if they could walk into a shop and buy a can of beans walk home and cook them with some toast but hey ho they carnt so how else do you expect them to eat us on the other hand CAN walk to a shop and buy food we were not put on this planet to kill there is no excuse for humans to kill an animal either to eat or for ‘work’ All your’s and kurks excuses about animal testing being vital is bull its usless and unnesasary and no amount of ‘good wording’ from anyone will prove different. Have you seen the other blog about the near human organ being developed for testing? WITHOUT ANIMALS I have to wonder what excuses you mad scientists come out with now to keep using animals. and as for defending kurk ive read quite a few blogs with him arguing and defending a lot of animal issues dog fightingfishinghuntinganimal testing so yeah he does try and drag people down when he patronizes other peoples beliefs.

  • Angry says:

    Kalama The FACT is YOU are experimenting on these animals!!! No matter how good you are with your wording the point is these animals would not be there in the first place if there was no supposed ‘need’ for it. We should stop playing god. That is what we are doing.

  • Kalama Halamezad says:

    Animal Defender I don’t understand why you think Kurt “drags people down” with his attitude. In general he’s being far more realistic than yourself. Humans aren’t all bad and animals aren’t all good. Innocent perhapsbut not all good. Have you ever witnessed a domestic cat eating a small lizard or bird etc.? I’ve never seen a cat that makes a quick job of itplenty of “playing” before the kill. No cat will ever humanely kill prey or even desire to do so for that matter. If a butcher killed a pig in a similar manner I guarantee you it’d be far more shocking than how men slaughter animals apart from the longterm factory farm confinement. As far as I’m concerned consciously condoning violence against your fellow man “drags people down” far moreso than anything Kurt’s mentioned. Further what’s really sad is that you actually mention violence against your fellow man in your “Crimes of Humans who Don’t Deserve Live on This Planet” list immediately before acknowledging you support violence against others who don’t meet your standards. Since I don’t agree with your standards does that make it okay for me to condone violence against you? Ummm no….

  • animal defender says:

    crashing in to other peoples property whatever that means?…do you not know what property means kurk?? ….’do you know what useless means?’…after speaking with you i have a pretty good idea yeah. ‘before you abandon your life and go live with the animals’… you are so patronizing. so yeah i may not know you but with an attitude like that i wouldnt want to either. Each to their own kurk if you want to live like that then thats your perogative but dont drag other people down with you not everyone shares your cold hearted views where animals are concerned. All you seem to do is talk down your nose to people and be a patronizing little boy. Go away kurk im tired of you now.

  • Kurt K says:

    Animal D But you don’t know me. So how can you assume anything about me? I haven’t made any assupmtions about you have I? Animals are just as cold blooded as any man.

  • animal defender says:

    Dont patronize me kurt its people like you that make me think the way i do.

Connect With PETA

Subscribe