Essay, Research Paper: Animal Rights Gone Too Far

Animal rights advocates have long sought to eliminate cruelty to animals used in
scientific research, consumer product development, and education. But in recent years
a new breed of animal protectionist has pursued a more active approach, one that has
included acts of violence and terrorism, and that has thrust the issue more prominently
into the public eye.
The origins of the modern animal rights movement commences with the actions of
two radical groups that bloomed in the 1960 s and 70 s: the Hunt Saboteurs (HSA) and
it s militant offshoot, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). Through these groups actions,
the landscape has turned into a war zone in which animal zealots torched medical
laboratories, firebombed fur-selling department stores, desecrated graves of long dead
hunters, and initiated attacks against gun and butcher shops. They targeted animals
used in entertainment too, and just displaying a circus poster was enough to put a shop
owner s business in jeopardy. It wasn t until 1975 when Australian philosopher Peter
Singer wrote his book, Animal Liberation, that the entire animal rights world received it s
popular mission statement. His book gave the activists a simple, rational argument to
support their beliefs. It also gave intellectuals a basis from which civilized debate could
proceed. Of special interest is Singer s popularization of the term specieism, which
animal rightists use to indicate racism against species other than one s own, of which
Singer claims is immoral and indefensible. Simply put, the main idea of Animal
Liberation is: If you wouldn t do it to a human, you shouldn t do it to an animal.
History documents that the goals of the radical element of the animal rights
movement have been served by terrorism. Prominent leaders in the mainstream of the
animal rights movement are not willing to appear pro-violence in public because they
realize they must maintain credibility and respect to function within the social structure
they need to influence. The leaders of these groups maintain working relationships
with the mainstream public by doing things that they know are socially accepted.
Famous people are known for their joining in the cause. Paul and Linda McCartney,
Kevin Nealon, Alicia Silverstone, Bob Barker, k.d. Lang; these are just a few of the
famous who use their celebrity to show their support for the cause of animal welfare.
Members of the national group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) are
sent literature that tells them how they can do more for the animals. Just being a
vegetarian isn t enough, some of their advice suggests getting a job in a laboratory that
uses animals for research. They suggest working the late shift, apparently it is easier
to videotape and take photographs during the wee hours of the night. In 1983, ALF
took six rats used in research on Alzheimer s disease from John s Hopkins University.
In a prepared statement, ALF stated that the animals were fellow travelers on this
planet and should not be used for painful, pointless, and repulsive experiments. In
1988 ALF stole thirteen beagles from the University of California, Irvine. Eleven of the
stolen animals were involved in painless research on the effects of air pollution on the
lungs. Two of the dogs were used in a study on sleep apnea. In 1989 ALF broke into a
research laboratory and office at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in
Lubbock. An estimated $50,000 to $70,000 worth of equipment was destroyed; five
cats trained in sleep research were stolen; and, research data and a scientist s
personal documents were stolen. The cats were involved in research, sponsored by
the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, dealing with breathing during sleeping.
Sir George Duckett, head of the Society for the Abolition of Vivisection in England,
said that vivisection is monstrous. Medical Science has little to learn, and nothing can
be gained by repetition of experiments on living animals. He said this in 1875 and
time has proved him wrong. Just in the last hundred years, vivisection (the use of
animals for research) has helped us find cures for many diseases. We have cured
rickets, leprosy and whooping cough, eradicated small pox, discovered the use of
insulin in treating diabetes, benefits of exercise on the heart, cholesterol lowering drugs
and many more. And they are still trying to find cures and treatments for many other
diseases such as AIDS and Cancer.
Despite a history of ongoing use by humans, from the earliest records forward, and
despite the respectful view of animals held by humans, it is clear that people have
never practiced anything close to a universal code of behavior toward animals. Even
when wide-spread social acceptance of a particular religion prevails, individual
interpretations of that doctrine still mark human/animal ethical relationships. Where s
the beef? may reveal the modern American position on beef eating, but our preference
for cheeseburgers and barbecued ribs is not a universal one. The sacred cow of India
bears testimony to a different standard and famines have been recorded in which
people have actually chosen to eat one another rather than violate their religious taboo
against eating a particular species. Many Asian diets include the meat of dogs, but
Americans who eat them as pets are repulsed by the idea. So it goes. In this age of
free speech where anything goes, the animal rights activists have taken their beliefs
too far causing more harm than good.