Liz loves animals. Seeing them ill, hurt, or killed breaks her heart. She advocates for "adopt, don't shop" and TNR programs for feral cats.
That is the designation given in the Califormia civil code under animal laws. The sheer number of laws dealing with animals is mind-boggling. There is some attempt made to insure humane treatment of every species from pet animals to livestock.
In the end, however, the lawmakers, as usual, miss the boat and end up with ineffective and half-baked "protections." I cannot cite chapter and verse here; the list is far too long and couched in the excessive wordiness of "legalese." Suffice it to say the laws read more as if to make excuses and exceptions to said laws than offer any real protections. The same is true for virtually every state.
It seems to be a sad truth that many humans, and particularly those in postitions of power, still view "non-human animals" as less deserving of safety, compassion and protection. This angers me.
We Are All Animals
There is no excuse for using animals for research of any type. Seriously. While this may be technically legal, the rationale is flawed. While we are all, indeed, animals, (as I point out in a related article), with many traits in common, still and all, a dog, rabbit, or guinea pig is not a human, and test results from one cannot reasonably be extrapolated to the other.
Therefore, all animal testing should cease. We have sufficiently advanced computer technology and knowledge of human physiology and chemistry to be able to analyze initial safety of any given compound prior to starting human tests on volunteers.
Anything in serious doubt at the end of the computer analysis stage should probably be abandoned as unsafe. Goodness knows, in spite of all this so-called 'safety testing' on animals, there have been plenty of dangerous drugs and topical potions seep through. Countless recalls and lawsuits have resulted.
So much for animal testing as a predictor of safety for use in humans. Some of us are old enough to recall the Thalidomide tragedy. In spite of "testing" in which researchers "...could not find a dose high enough to kill a rat,"countless birth defects resulted. No, you don't have to be killed to be adversely affected.
How Would You Like It?
What if it was people subject to these unecessarily cruel experiments and bogus tests? Would you volunteer for the initial testing proceedures, with your brain opened up and wired to a machine?
What if it was your child, or your own pet dog or cat in that laboratory? Human rights/animal rights. it's all one and the same thing.
Sometimes, in the case of small animals such as mice, rats and guinea pigs, they are bred for the purpose. They are born, given new life, only for the purpose of living that life in suffering and to be sacrificed in the name of science. This is just not right.
What these pseudo-scientists do to animals, they are equally capable of doing to humans. It is a mindset, not a job description. Don't you find that a frightening thought?
Remember the movie, Planet of the Apes? Sure, that was a Hollywood fiction, but put yourself in the shoes of the humans in that story. It could just as well have worked out that way. How would you like it?
Other products, not intended as medicine or for consumption are still tested to this day on innocent animals with no voice in their fate.
This melange of products includes everything from gasoline to garden fertilizers. The way they determine toxicity is a nefarious scheme called the LD50 test. Never heard of it? They don't like to publicize it.
Here's how it works: In order to determine the Lethal Dose (the "LD" part of the equation), they administer by various means (ingestion, injection, topical application, inhalation) a specified quantity of the agent being tested. Then they measure how many animals have died. They repeat, increasing the dose level until they have succeeded in slaughtering 50% of the subjects. (There's the "50" part). So, the number on the package following the LD50: tells you how much it took to kill half of all those poor animals.
They already know the product is dangerous. That is not research. It's murder.
Unconscionable and Evil
The real problem here, is that these are no longer tests ! These products have been 'tested' to death--literally--to the deaths of countless thousands of poor wee beasts. They already know the product is harmful or toxic!
Animal testing makes no more sense than nuclear testing. Once you know something works, does not work, or is dangerous, the testing is finished. Continued repetition is nothing more than abuse.
Why, then, do they keep repeating these same proceedures?? This is a horrid menace haunting our human race, and destroying our very humanity. If we do not think of our fellow animals as brothers whom we should protect and nurture, how can we expect to stop violence between people? We cannot.
Animal "testing" is an evil and outdated practice that must stop. This is the true definition of moral depravity--picking on those who are defenseless. The laws must be changed to protect our brethren lest all hope is lost for ourselves. So no, there is no difference between animal and human rights. The oft-quoted "golden rule" applies to all creatures.
Of course animals have souls. The organized religions would prefer you did not think so, but they do. Look into the accepting, non-judgemental eyes of your dog as you come home from work; see the sublime expression of bliss as you pet your cat and scratch just the right spot.
How many stories of heroism by pet animals have you heard? Hundreds! A being with no soul thinks purely in terms of preservation of self, with no thought to others. The fact that many, many animals live in family groups, care for each other, and can transfer that bond to us humans is soul.
They show emotions--joy, sadness, fear, pain, all properties ascribed to 'soul.' They are, indeed, our brothers and sisters as we walk this world, and they must not be harmed.
Another author has written an expose of what happens in the horse racing circuit; it's not all fun and games as you may think.
References and Resources for Further Information
- Animal Rights and Pet Law - MegaLaw.com
Animal rights and pet law web links and resources, at MegaLaw.com.
- Animal Rights History
Animal Rights-Humane History Timeline: Activists-Quotes-Law-Primary Source Historical Literature Library-Archive
- Animal Rights | Animals Articles & Issues | Change.org
Read the latest animal welfare news, articles, and information at Change.org. Includes nonprofits and resources on animal rescue, animal adoption, responsible pet ownership, animal abuse, animal cruelty, animal rights, factory farming, and much more.
- Animal Legal Defense Fund : Index
© 2010 Liz Elias
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on July 29, 2017:
Indeed, Issy; it is a very sick and demented practice. I await the day it becomes fully illegal. We can fight against it by refusing to buy products from companies who do this. It's easy enough to Google it; but you may be surprised to find out how many companies belong to other 'parent' companies, making for a pretty long list of things to refuse to purchase. It can feel discouraging, but the only way this will change is to hit them hard, right smack dab in the middle of their bank accounts.
Issy Clarke on July 28, 2017:
Great article - it sickens me that some believe that we have the authority to practice and resultantly, justify, the heartless torture of animals. I love animals and am completely against any kind of animal testing.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on June 02, 2017:
I'm sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree. We, as humans are mammals. Just some of the characteristics of mammals include having hair, giving birth to live young, and producing milk to nurse their infants.
We also match all four of the top biological classifications; you can see that in my other article, "Animals Deserve Compassionate Care," (https://hubpages.com/animals/Abandoning-or-Mistrea... in which I have included a comparison chart.
It's scientifically proven as fact, cut and dried, so to speak. Unless you don't believe in science, then your question cannot be answered.
Thanks for stopping by, and I'm glad you otherwise liked the article, and thank you for loving animals.
GalaxyRat on June 01, 2017:
I love animals, and support their rights. However, I believe humans aren't animals. Otherwise, I agree with this Hub, thanks for writing.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on February 24, 2015:
Hello, Kristen Howe,
Thanks so much for your support of our animal brothers and sisters. I'm most pleased you enjoyed my article.
Kristen Howe from Northeast Ohio on February 24, 2015:
Great hub! I'm always for animal rights and against any kind of animal testing. Voted up!
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on February 25, 2012:
(Reply sent from my Nook; apologies for typos!)
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on February 25, 2012:
Thank you veymuch foryour kind comment and praise! Have you read "The Naked Ape" by Desmond Morris? It's an older book, and may be out of print by now, but basically makes the same point you did about howaliens might classify us.
Thanks very much for addingto the discussion and the votes!
James Kenny from Birmingham, England on February 25, 2012:
Hi Lizzy, fantastic article. I totally agree with the views expressed here. I find it funny how we lump everything from chimps to bees as animals, and set ourselves apart. The reality is, we are animals. In fact I remember reading a book by Jared Diamond that stated if Aliens came to this planet and classified all of the life here. They would probably classify us as a type of Chimp, the 'the naked chimp' in fact we're more closely related to chimps than lions are to tigers. Voted up etc.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on February 20, 2012:
Thank you for your interest.
As you may note, the statement about which you are asking was not in quotation marks, as it is not a quote.
It is my own statement, based upon my years of observation and experience with animals, including my own childhood pets, the pets we had when my own children were young, pets of my friends over my lifetime, as well as those animals with whom I have worked in various volunteer capacities.
If you are looking for the source in order to quote it yourself, I have no objection, as long as it is properly credited to me (Liz Elias). Thank you.
emdi on February 20, 2012:
"They show emotions--joy, sadness, fear, pain, all properties ascribed to 'soul" - can you please quote the source of this information
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on February 08, 2012:
Greetings, Jennifer Madison-
Welcome to Hub Pages!
Thank you so very much for your kindd words. It is a pleasure to meet another animal-lover and advocate.
Jennifer Madison from Lohmar on February 08, 2012:
I love this hub and the fact that you care about animals! I am a big animal fan too and I love talking about animal rights and protection!
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on January 18, 2012:
Thanks very much for adding your comment--it's much appreciated. You are right..there is indeed too much ego involved in humanity's opinion of other species.
Kevin Schmelzlen from Julian, CA on January 18, 2012:
Great article! I definitely agree that humans put too much emphasis on the difference between ourselves and other species. At the end of the day, we're all just animals.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on December 18, 2011:
Thank you for your comment. There are always two sides to any issue, and most of the time, each side thinks they are on the side of "right." However, I feel that animals are to be treated with the same respect and care that we offer people.
I'm pleased you enjoyed the article.
princesswithapen on December 17, 2011:
Animal rights is a sensitive issue and boundaries between what is acceptable vs what is not are vague and blurred in areas like research, slaughter, clothing, etc. "Where do we draw the line?" is the big question because what is unacceptable for a certain section of society is totally fine with the other. Animal rights activists are often ridiculed with the notion "the world has better things to worry about", but we all know how untrue that is.
This hub made for a good read.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on October 27, 2011:
@ mia miller--
I agree with you at least 2000%....unfortunately, I have no control over what ads appear. We authors do not get to choose our ads. It is done by Google's bots, crawling through and picking out 'keywords,' and if they find a keyword that the bot thinks matches up to a particular business or industry, they place the ad.
It is, indeed, infuriating! I have other hubs in which I've written about the outrageous charges and unethical practices of everything from insurance to engery, and guess what? Those articles are full of ads FOR the very things AGAINST WHICH I am writing!
I wish there was a way to change or prevent this--I just have not figured it out yet.
Thanks for your input, and voicing your frustration--if enough voices speak out, perhaps we can get a change implemented.
mia miller on October 27, 2011:
S can some one of authority please explain WHY you have a L'oreal you tube ad at the bottom of the petition site page. This is confusing & an outrage. WTF?!
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on July 15, 2011:
Hello, Debra Charney--
Thany you very much I appreciate the input and the votes! Blessings upon you.
Debra Buckland from United States on July 15, 2011:
Very well-written article. I couldn't agree with you more. Voted up and awesome!
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on April 05, 2011:
Thanks so much for your comment. You are quite correct, and raise a good additional point. It is indeed always those who are unable to speak for or defend themselves who get the shaft. You get all the justice you can afford to buy.
lobonorth on April 05, 2011:
I suspect that a culture that doesn't value the rights of animals tends not to value the rights and dignity of humans who are poorly equipped to defend themselves, i.e., the poor, those with disabilities, etc. As you say, we are all animals. Good Hub,
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on April 03, 2011:
Hi there, triciajean--
I agree fully...that is a very excellent point. Thanks so much for stopping by and leaving additional insight.
Patricia Lapidus from Bantam, CT on April 03, 2011:
Thank you for writing this, DzyMsLissy. It seems obvious that survival and a joyful life align. You go forward as yourself and your family and tribe and all of life. Where are any of us is we do not respect life in every creature we meet?
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on January 16, 2011:
Thank you so much for such high praise! It is indeed a wonderful thing to find like-minded folk. I will certainly check out your article as well.
I love the idea of a food pantry for pets..we are almost in those straits ourseslves. I noted that you are a fan of the SF Giants...so you must be from somewhere in the Bay Area. I look forward to your return to N. CA--it would be wonderful to meet---I think we could accomplish a lot, as I have some dreams for helping animals, myself.
Kathy from The beautiful Napa Valley, California on January 16, 2011:
MsLizzy, this is fabulous! Wonderfully written with heart and soul and intelligence. Have you read my "Humans vs Animals, A Specious Argument?" We are definitlely on the same page with the same love for animals. Yes, Erthfrend is a wonderful, loving soul who introduced me to others who love animals and our circle continues to expand. This is my life's work. I cannot imagine living on this earth and NOT caring about all sentient, living, loving beings. Thank you so much for following me and I, of course, am now folowing you. I will read more of your hubs as time allows. Today, Sunday, I'm meeting with two friends. We are setting up a non profit "Furry Friends Food Pantry, Inc." to help those who are having a hard time making ends meet and so, we will provide food for their companion animals. We're moving along at lightning speed to get this going. I will soon be returning to N. Calif. where I am originally from to continue, as always, this good work. Bless you for caring!!! I voted UP and AWESOME and shared on FB this hub. Much regards and respect! Kathy
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on December 16, 2010:
Thanks for stopping by, and I'm glad you liked my hub.
And agreed--big lobby money is in large part responsible for most of the ills plaguing this nation!
trevzooms from Honest within myself on December 16, 2010:
Hi, good well written hub on a touchy subject. Research is big money, I can't say much more other than it's an uphill struggle for anyone wishing to end animal testing.
Liz Elias (author) from Oakley, CA on December 15, 2010:
Thank you, Tranquilheart
We need to keep the word out there in hopes of effecting change. Blessings to you.
Tranquilheart from Canada on December 15, 2010:
Well said. Those who say animals have no soul and not worthy of basic rights have no souls themselves. Kudos from a kindred mind.