Give Animals Rights Now.

Inside the dim recesses of the stark white laboratory lies a caged monkey, arms and legs spread wide and strapped to the metal wire, head firmly braced so as to not allow movement of any kind, and a gaping whole in his skull that lets the researcher to peer into his exposed brain.  Unfortunately, the animal is not dead; in fact, he is quite alive or the experiment would be of no value.  The primate's face is pinched with pain and confusion, his body exhausted from the never-ending physical and emotional stress, his eyes reflecting a barren wasteland that used to be a lively, healthy living being.

A few cages away lies a white rabbit with a patch of skin so eaten away that the ribs are clearly visible.  In the operating room, dogs are being induced to have heart attacks, treated and then left to die.  All this so that consumers can have safer cosmetics, non-toxic cleaning supplies and life-saving medical techniques.

But what of the rights of the animal who gives his life for the sole reason of benefiting human beings?  Where is the value of their life with respect to all living creatures supposedly possessing the right to a pain-free and quality existence, as opposed to the incredible suffering caused at the hands of man to further his own agendas?  It is absolutely horrendous what animals must endure because of humanity's self-centeredness toward their own and other species.  The idea that all creatures under man were put on this earth solely to serve the egotistical purposes of human beings is not only dangerously self-righteous, but it is also a sad reflection upon mankind's perception of his fellow inhabitants.

"Human beings must consider what impact our actions have on the lives of others. To limit moral consideration to humans only is no more logical or justifiable than limiting concern to white people only or to men only; speciesism, like racism and sexism, is wrong because all animals contribute to the ecosystem and are capable of suffering" (fsveg05.htm PG).

According to a recent poll in the Los Angeles Times, sixty-seven percent of the public felt that "an animal's right to live free of suffering is just as important as a person's" (Anonymous #1 PG).

I. ANIMALS IN RESEARCH

Vivisection, the practice of experimenting on animals, began as the result of a religious ban against the use of human corpses for medical study.  When the ban was lifted, it was too late for the sacrificial animal, because "vivisection was already entrenched" (fsexp01.htm PG) within the medical world.

Geoff Paddock, a representative for Imperial Chemical Industries, contends that animal testing, whether one likes it or not, is a "legal requirement" (62.html PG).  Dr. Charles Mayo, founder of the Mayo Clinic, refutes such a claim that animal testing is indeed a necessary component:

"I abhor vivisection.  It should at least be curbed.  Better, it should be abolished.  I know of no achievement through vivisection, no scientific discovery that could not have been obtained without such barbarism and cruelty.  The whole thing is evil" (fsexp01.htm PG).

Then came mandatory testing of cosmetics, cleaning products and myriad other consumer goods, all of which are routinely tested on animals.  Some of the most horrific displays of the complete disregard for animal rights are witnessed in the research laboratories.  Yet what is so incredulous is the fact that many of these torturous experiments no longer serve a purpose; their effectiveness was established years ago, and the need for them within the scientific industry is no longer necessary.  The reason they continue is anyone's guess.

The Draize test is just one of many experiments regularly performed that provides no new information from its results.  Using the ultra sensitive eyes of rabbits, researchers drop in caustic fluids to determine to what extent they burn.  Not only has this particular test become outdated, but its results have been determined decades ago, establishing its continued use as completely unwarranted.

When faced with the many alternative forms of research available -- computer models, laboratory created tissue, etc. -- the researchers say there would not be as good a comparison as there is with live animals.  However, that is nothing more than bureaucratic double-talk, because it is a well-known fact that human beings differ dramatically from the dogs, cats, pigs, rabbits and mice used to test products designed for their specific use.  Therefore, studies conducted on the animals' particular genetic and body makeup do not reflect the same results as it would if tested on humans.  Consider the drugs thalidomide, Zomax, and DES, which were all tested on animals and deemed safe but had "devastating consequences" (fsexp01.htm PG) for the humans who used them.

"Techniques that replace mammals with invertebrates and bacteria or, better still, human tissues, are being developed. Better computer models can also help testing. But demand for tests is rising as the public demands more information on the dangers of chemicals and genetic engineering provides new opportunities for drug companies. If the gap is to be closed and alternatives found to animal testing, then governments must come up with a lot more cash. The issue is not about principles but about the willingness of taxpayers to pay to get the job done" (Anonymous #2 PG).

II. ANIMALS IN ENTERTAINMENT

Three staples of Americana -- the zoo, circus and rodeo -- are some of the most cruel and detrimental situations to ever infringe upon animal rights.  As children, people are brought up to enjoy the zoo and its ability to display animals most would otherwise never have an opportunity to see.  The same goes with the scores of exotic animals who pass through in traveling circuses.  Yet the tortuous lives these imprisoned creatures are forced to lead are a secret part of Americana that is rarely noted and even less often seen.

Despite the popular myth, a zoo is not a substitute habitat for wild animals.  Metal cages and concrete floors are not what Mother Nature intended for her primates, big cats or any other untamed creature whose home is recreated by the ignorance of man.  Zoos are merely a place for collections of interesting "items" (fsent03.htm PG) rather than genuine havens or simulated habitats, as they claim to be.

Virginia McKenna, star of the ground breaking movie Born Free and active campaigner on behalf of captive animals, says animals are in emotional and physical dire straits when their lives are spent wasting away in zoos:

"It is the sadness of zoos which haunts me.  The purposeless existence of the animals.  For the four hours we spend in a zoo, the animals spend four years, or fourteen, perhaps even longer -- if not in the same zoo then in others -- day and night; summer and winter. ...  This is not conservation and surely it is not education.  No, it is 'entertainment.'  Not comedy, however, but tragedy" (fsent03.htm PG).

Circuses offer their own brand of cruelty toward the animals who give their lives for some unscrupulous proprietor's bank account.  But those dollars are often scarce within the big top atmosphere, which leads to the paltry care of these magnificent animals that once lived their lives as nature intended.  Now they are housed in cramped, filthy compartments for hours on end, allowed a brief reprieve from their solitary confinement only during performances.

As well, they are coerced into performing most unnatural and physically uncomfortable acts from bears balancing on balls to apes riding motorcycles to elephants standing on two legs.  What is even worse are the training methods imposed to encourage these animals to act in such strange ways.  After twenty-five years of watching countless animals routinely whipped and beaten into submission, former animal trainer Pat Derby contends "there are no kind animal trainers" (fsent04.htm PG).

Qualified veterinarians are hardly ever available along the travel route to treat the exotic animals; therefore, their well-being is often compromised.  Additionally, those who are indigenous to completely different climates suffer, as well, because they cannot acclimate themselves to the varying temperatures.  Elephants, for example, thrive in warmer weather, while bears prefer the colder climate.  When forced to travel and perform in adverse conditions to their natural body clock, they are left to languish in a muddle of ill health and psychological trauma.  To be sure, the circus is not the happiest place on earth for the animals whose rights have been striped away without so much as a modicum of responsibility.

While The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was established to reduce the tremendous amount of suffering endured by circus animals, there are not enough teeth in the act to substantially address the compromised rights of these sentient creatures.  The AWA requires that the animals "have enough room to stand up and turn around" (fsent04.htm PG) when they are confined to their incredibly small, dark cages, but this smidgen of code is commonly disregarded.  Even the largest purveyor of big top entertainment -- Ringling Bros. And Barnum & Bailey Circus -- received sixty-five violations in a matter of two years, proving that popularity does not preclude adequate care of the performing animals.

Still another abominable spectacle of American pleasure is that of the rodeo.  Steeped in tradition since the late 1800's, the original concept of the macho event was to exercise "human skill and courage in conquering the fierce, untamed beasts of the Wild West" (fsent01.htm PG).  What it has turned into is nothing more than a flagrant display of "human domination over animals" (fsent01.htm PG) that is thinly masked as entertainment.  The show, which is motivated solely by greed and profit, disregards the very basics of animal rights.

In the cowboy's attempt to puff up his own ego and appear to be a brave, the bulls and calves -- who are not aggressive by nature -- are routinely provoked to become "wild" (fsent01.htm PG).  The events that utilize the animals include calf roping, steer wrestling, bareback horse and bull riding, saddle bronco riding and steer roping.  To encourage performance, they are bombarded with electric prods, sharp sticks, caustic ointments, and other torturous devices that are "used to irritate and enrage" the otherwise docile animals.

One particularly maddening device, called the flank or "bucking" strap, is cinched so tightly around the midsection and groin area, the animal bucks out of intense pain.  This, after all, is exactly what the rodeo promoters want him to do so the crowd gets a good show for their money.  For the horse or bull, however, it is yet another excruciating experience of abuse at the hands of one who should, by all accounts, know better than to inflict such pain just because he can.

Injuries are a common occurrence for rodeo animals.  While arguments are made by proponents that cowboys sustain the same risk factor, there is one glaring difference: people have a choice to place themselves in harm's way at this spectacle of supposed bravery -- animals do not.  Calves who are roped while running at speeds of twenty-seven miles per hour often snap their necks back when the lasso wraps around it, many times resulting in internal hemorrhaging, broken bones, bruises, crushed tracheas, spinal  injuries, as well as paralysis.

Horses are not immune from the ravages of the rodeo, either.  Required to perform the unnatural act of bucking, they frequently develop back problems due to the repetitive pounding action endured.  Additionally, a horse's fragile legs become the target of multiple injuries, since they are not made to withstand the up and down motion of jumping.

III. VEGETARIANISM

As time has progressed through the ages, there has become less and less of a need for animal protein in the human diet.  Medically, there exist myriad reasons why animal flesh is detrimental to overall and sustained health, including heart disease and cancer; economically, the cost of eating meat is exorbitantly high compared to the vegetarian alternatives; and ethically, the suffering that goes on within the factory farming industry is enough reason to forego eating animals altogether.

It has been said that if slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would become vegetarian.  Unfortunately, that is what it would take to convince the masses that food animals have just as much right to live a happy, healthy and pain-free life as the family pet.  Somewhere between the processing plant and the neatly wrapped packages in the grocery store display, animals have suffered untold atrocities for the benefit of mankind's obsession with meat.

The human race did away with the "predator-prey relationship" when meat starting being packaged in aesthetically pleasing containers, preventing the consumer from witnessing any semblance of the horror experienced by food animals.  Only when man truly realizes the cruelty that comes with choosing a flesh diet will he redirect his ways toward vegetarianism.

IV. SPORT FISHING

Perhaps one of the most popular pastimes in American culture is that of recreational sport fishing.  It has bonded many a father to his son, created many a pleasant family outing out by the lake and been the source for some of the most exaggerated the-fish-I-almost-caught stories.  However, the one aspect that is always left out of the mix is the fact that another of man's seemingly innocent hobbies is a severely traumatizing occurrence for the fish unlucky enough to take the bait.

Catch-and-release fishing is one of the cruelest sports known to mankind, because it leaves the fish injured, confused and in a state of shock.  It is not uncommon for these delicate water creatures to die a painful death on account of so-called compassionate fishermen taking enjoyment from hooking, traumatizing and ultimately throwing back the unsuspecting fish.  Human ignorance not withstanding, the reason people feel their actions are justified is because there exists a huge misconception that fish cannot feel pain.  This could not be further from the truth, as all living, breathing entities experience some form of suffering.  Furthermore, when did the singular aspect of pain become the deciding factor as to which species has a right to live?

"[T]he evidence suggests that all vertebrates (including fish) . . . experience similar sensations to a greater or lesser degree in response to noxious stimuli.  Fish feel pain out of biological necessity, just as mammals do.  Without the ability to feel pain, they would not be able to survive" (fswil04.htm PG).

When fish become hooked on a line, they struggle out of both fear and physical pain.  Once they are ripped from their aquatic environment, they resist even more intensely as they begin to suffocate.  During this time, they can experience several unpleasant sensations due to the change in pressure, including collapsed gills and ruptured swim bladders.

Fish released back into the water suffer tremendous stress after being handled; in fact, they become so weakened that they either die soon after or become easy targets for a predator's meal.  In addition, during the struggle to stay alive, the fish releases an extraordinary amount of lactic acid throughout its body, which will ultimately make it stiff and sore, and less likely to survive.

V. CONCLUSION

Mankind has deceived its furry, finned and scaled friends by its disgraceful disregard for their basic rights as living beings.  Nowhere is it written that humans, while perhaps the most developed of all species, are the rulers over their nonspeaking counterparts.

Whether or not a person believes animals have the same rights as humans is not the issue: The issue is that animals have the same innate right to a life free of pain, suffering and exploitation as man does, regardless if they are lower on the life chain.  Animals have no one to "stick up" (Harahan PG) for them; mankind must adopt the role of their caretaker or prepare to suffer the consequences.

WORKS CITED

Anonymous #1. "Animal Rights Movement Shows Teeth.," Rocky          Mountain News,(1997) : pp. PG.

Anonymous#2. "The Means To An End.," New Scientist, (1997) :           pp. PG.

Cross, Dale S. "Animal Rights Activists Need To Explore All     Relationships.," The New Hampshire, (1997) : pp. PG.

Harahan, Brendan. "Activist's Ideas About Animal Rights             Could Change Your Thinking; No Place To Hide.," Chicago          Tribune, (1996) : pp. PG.

http://www.mcspotlight.org/debate/multis/messages/62.html,    1998.

http://www.peta-online.org, 1998.