On PETA/animal rights and such

I think that it's rather selfish of us to keep animals around just because we think it's right. You could easily say it'd be selfish for us to not keep them around as well. But i think the former reason rather than the latter, this is my rationale. We have two directions of right now. One is to leave the planet as to close to as it was when we found it, the other is to realize the fact that all animals will not be able to coexist with us on the earth at the same time especially in the future. This will sound bad, but humans are growing at a large rate, and in the future we won't have any room for animals to roam or whatnot. If we choose humans to live, we can't have animals and vice versa. If we choose the animals we have to sacrifice humans for their "rights." The reason i put that in quotes is because we imposed our own beliefs of rights on them, and they aren't natural. They are simply interpretations of rights thought out for animals by humans who consider themselves in a position to be able to. They can't think complexly, and humans being the dominant species have to make a choice of how they want to survive on earth, partially or totally.

Overpopulation will demand us to invade more and more into animal habitats. Look at how many are extinct all ready. We're not going to respect their rights in the future over the necessity of our own to live. Teleologically, most people feel humans should be the ones to survive in the end, without regard to how animals will coexist when we grow in numbers too vast for them to survive. I'm examining it right now, and i see no way we could coexist in the future without some sort of "alternate colonization" (space or whatever) So what will become of animals? I'd say we'd narrow it down to the minimal number of animals we need to survive in "comfort", as in meat and stuff and we'd grow them on farms. All the rest of the earth would be plants and humans, maybe insects and some animals but none that require a real "habitat" of any kind. If nanotechnology has come along far enough, we'd analyze as many animals we could before they die off and when we need to, we'd "create them." Atom by atom. I think PETA just prolongs the future from happening (i know animal testing isn't all they negate, mistreating animals and such isn't right i think, but animal testing shouldn't be TOTALLY banned (i know it's not)). If we don't test on animals, how will we know the results? Animals don't have civil rights like humans do (they may, correct me if i'm wrong). We'd be in trouble if anything happened to a human as the subject would be hesitant as well. It's absurd. Don't say don't test on animals when you cannot think of a substitute for the problem. That's inherently hypocritical. Anyway, thats all.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged