Peter Singer comments on animal testing issues

[Guest guest]

'Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton, is renowned for insisting

animals should have equal rights with humans but is quoted, on camera,

backing research in which experiments on monkeys are carried out to develop

surgery for Parkinson's and other patients.'

Article continues

http://www.guardian.co.uk/animalrights/story/0,,1957448,00.html#article_continue

 

Hi, I am unpleasantly surprised by this comment of Peter Singer.

Isn't it contradicting yourselve if previously to promote giving animals same

rights as humans?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I remember he ones stated something like:

'If we don't allow ourselves to experiment on mentally handicapped children

then why is it justified to experiment on chimpansees' (our ancestors to some

believe)

 

His blessings on primate-experimentation to develop surgery for Parkinson's if

the outcome is contributing many more humans than the figure of of that is used

on monkeys, to me, is a disaster for the animal rights movement.

Some more scientist can now jusifie torturing monkeys a little better due to

Singer's well recommended reputation

of beïng a Philosopher and some what a pionier on Animal Rights.

 

Then again, it seems nothing new reading this below peace I have just found at:

http://www.animalsuffering.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4576

 

" Singer's utilitarian approach allows animal experimentation if suffering is

minimised and the research has a high probability of yeilding aggregate benefits

that outweigh the individual pain. Nor does Singer unequivocally reject all

animal products. It is permissable to eat free-range eggs, for those hens can

" live comfortably " .(END QUOTE).

 

Me, I have allways prefered altruïsm above utilitariarism and allways will.

'Sensibility as a moral guide'

 

Best Wishes,

Le Petit Chien