Something I dug up...

Haven't seen this in a while...Anyway, I wrote this about a year and a half ago. It's just a rant, but I thought I ought to share. I was going to email it to Brian May, but I figured it wouldn't do any good...Anywho, here it is now. Just for randomness's sake. :P

"A growing number of stages of vital research and testing can now be done, thankfully, without the use of animals. We all hope that the time will come when no animal testing is needed at all. But that's not the case at the moment."
"So announcing that I am to add my name to the on-line petition in support of animal testing when necessary is something of a break with tradition - and a sign of just how important I believe it is that as many people as possible stand up against the tiny group of extremists threatening medical research and advances in this country."--ADVANCES?! I may only be 13, but I know what an "advance" is: it's where you, uh, advance. I was reading my grandmother's World Book Encyclopedia about a month or two ago, and somehow I landed on an article about animal testing (or something like that), and there was this picture, with a scientist injecting who-knows-what into this rabbit's ear. This rabbit was in a cage that looked like it was just big enough for only him (with no room to move, I might add), but there was more than one cage. Each with their own rabbit. I'm not talking two or three. I'm talking ROWS. Rows of God's creatures awaiting the same terrible fate.
This edition of World Book was published in the 60's; you'd THINK we'd've learned by now, but I guess that would be "threatening medical research and advances in this country."
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
"Britain, of course, has a proud history of animal welfare and protection. We should be more assertive about one of the very toughest licensing and control regimes in the world which is being tightened continually as new replacement procedures become available. Testing on great apes including chimpanzees, gorillas and orang-utans is banned here. In 1998 this Government outlawed testing of cosmetics on animals."--Well, Blair did something right. He banned testing on man's closest relatives. But what about the others? Why are the other animals suffering??? Don't they have the same rights as the chimps? Or are we favoring monkeys simply because we, as humans, are more closely related to them? Might I add that we all share the same planet? How would he like it if I got some experimental drug and injected it into him? But no, that's not legal. We have to do it to poor creatures that don't have a choice in the matter.
As for the cosmetics thing, bully for him. But what's the difference between that and testing on animals for medicine? You're still harming God's creatures. It doesn't matter what the reason is, really. Testing for superficial means (like cosmetics) is in no way justifiable, but if we lived fifty years ago, and my mom was suffering from some terminal illness, and the only way to save her would be to test on animals, then yeah, I would. But are we living fifty years ago? No. It just sickens me that there are so many technological advances (people can take pictures with their cell phones, for crying out loud!!!), and yet people are still testing on the creatures that we share this planet with. I mean, which is more important? Cell phones or life? Hmmm....
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
"The result is that experiments involving animals are subject to the tightest restrictions and monitoring. No animal procedures are allowed unless it can be demonstrated to an independent panel that the research is essential, that there is no realistic alternative and that any suffering is kept to an absolute minimum."--Again, it's 2006. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE 21ST CENTURY!!! Why are we still inflicting pain on animals AT ALL?! I don't care if it's done under monitering. In my mind, that makes it WORSE. That means that people are standing by and watching it happen. AND THEY'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!
I admit, I'm no scientist, but I am pretty smart, and if people can mess with genes and cells, change baby's eye colour and the whatnot, then why can't they test drugs on THOSE? I don't think genetic engineering is right (I think it's playing God, personally), but if they're going to do it, then can't they do it for the betterment of not only man kind, but animalkind as well?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
"Hundreds of millions of people in the UK and around the world today are alive and healthy because of the pioneering work of our scientists and researchers.Many millions more will be spared an early death or a life of pain because of the research now under way. They deserve our support. And they should get it."--That's wonderful. But Blair shouldn't feel like a hero. HE ISN'T ONE. Since I'm American, it's probably not my place to criticise the British government, but this is a worldwide issue. You don't exactly see squirrels bragging about their heritege, or waving little Union Jacks (or Canadian flags, or American, or WHATEVER). So I guess I do have the right. ; )
Anyway, since human life is so important to Blair (IT IS TO ME, TOO), he does have a point. But if advancing is so important to him, than why is he still condoning testing on animals? And WHY is he calling this "pioneering work?"
I guess people like me aren't meant to understand people like that.

*Please note that I wrote that a year and a half ago. I know it's dated. And also note that I was very angry when I wrote it. Yes, that is a rarity for me.

Yeah...Thought I ought to share that.