A Treatise Against Vivisection
A Treatise Against Vivisection
A Dissertation to Charities Supporting Animal Experimentation
By Punkerslut
Charity: it is the revealed essense of a good heart, the
revelation of humanity. Charity is the acceleration of human
thought, the beautification of the soul, the memoirs of a person
who believes in doing good -- an affectionate and curious smile,
a warm welcome, all things which have been done by the heart.
Those men on this planet who have offered their charity to the
populations of cultures were more powerful than the greatest of
kings and more inviting than the most hospitable widow. From
their palms have come both the food that fed the hungry,
medicine that cured the sick, and wisdom that aided the
unknowledgable. On the crescents of civilization, from the
bravest to the boldest and the most intelligent to the most
enduring, men of charity have been to the lands of plague and
the lands of war, all to offer the heart of humanity, all to
give what can only be given in the name of compassion: charity.
However, for a charity to support Vivisection and animal
experimentation is more than just a blemish on the face of
charity. It is the hand of kindness, its surface covered with
thorns -- it is the thoughtful eye of a lover, storming with
dark vengeance. Of all things that have been done that are
careless and destructive, Vivisection is above all the worst. It
has taken animals from their homes, taken them to laboratories,
and mutilated their bodies. Animals, these conscious beings that
are just short of being human; to be human, all that would be
needed is the genes, the DNA, etc., all things indicating that a
body would be needed. However, there is one part that they are
equal with humans with: the capability to suffer. And just as it
is a mark of solemn sadness on the heart of every Humanitarian
to know that suffering exists, there is no mark big enough to
express the sadness from the suffering of Vivisection. To
neglect the fact that animals can suffer is of all things
inhumane and cruel, not in the slightest charitable. These
creatures, born of mothers like any human, nurtured and loved
like any human, thoughtful and active like any human, these
things which are merely us born in a different body -- they are
given no respect and no rights. The Vivisectionists will take
these creatures into their laboratory, and desecrate them. They
will tear newborns from the arms of their mother, they will beat
them to unconsciousness, they will burn their bodies, lash their
backs with the flog, cut their arms and legs, decapitate their
heads -- in all meanings of the word -- they will torture these
creatures, all for the sake of understanding something that may
forever be beyond them: suffering!
One psychologist created an experiment where he tried to teach
animals to be depressed. Dogs were placed in a room with two
compartments, seperated by a wall that could be jumped over. The
Vivisectionist sent electric shocks into the floor of one
compartment, shocking the dog, and forcing them to jump over the
wall into the compartment without electric shocks. Shortly
after, the Vivisectionist the sends shocks to both compartments,
leaving no opportunity for release of pain to the pour,
afflicted creature. In a short amount of time, the dog stops,
demobilizes, shuts down, and then helplessly writhes in pain.
The Vivisectionist watching ever so carefully, observing the
trembling skin of the creature, as it suffers. Its short
existence ends in this most horrid of experiments, in this cruel
and heartless attempt to make them learn to be depressed. It
becomes tired, weak, and injured. A time of pain, suffering, and
harm. There is nothing more brutal than to make a living off of
this. I could picture no conscienable person engaging in such
heartless activities, in abusing animals, and in creating
torment. It is the epitome of brutality and the end of humane
thought -- to do this to a creature, be it human or non-human,
is but of one of the worst crimes. [Animal Learning and
Behavior.]
Another experiment, involving a medical professor by the name
of Robert J. White, includes the decapitation of monkeys. White
wanted to observe a still-conscious head, apart from the body.
He wanted to observe the slick knife quickly slicing the skin of
the monkey, ending its life, and ending its existence. That is,
to say, he wanted to observe cruelty and inhumanity. But no
matter how long he gazed into the eyes of the decapitated head,
no matter how many tears he saw or how much pain he caused -- no
matter how many times his experiments trampled the ethic of
compassion and destroyed the meaning of reverence -- no matter
how many monkeys he killed, he still would not understand what
he did. The actions he committed were but of the most heartless
and brutal nature. De Quincey once said, "...the groans and
screams of this poor persecuted race, if gathered into some
great echoing hall of horrors, would melt the heart of the
stoniest of our race." [Written concerning the brutality given
to animalia. Quoted from Animals' Rights Considered In Relation
To Social Progress, by Henry S. Salt, chapter 2, 1894.] De
Quincey, however, lived centuries ago and was not familiar with
the Vivisectionist by the name of Robert J. White. If the
stoniest of our race would offer mercy to animalia when hearing
their screams, what can be said of the Vivisectionist, who lives
and thrives on those same screams, whose day is brightened with
the success of an experiment, -- or, whose happiness is elevated
at the desecration of another being? One reporter writes that
White's laboratory is "a rare and chilling glimpse into the
cold, clinical world of the scientist, where the life of an
animal has no meaning beyond the immediate purpose of
experimentation." [Scope (Durban, South Africa), March 30, 1973.]
There was another incident where scientists reared female
monkeys in isolation with the hope that they would develop
abnormally. (What would a humane person say to this hope? But
the question I am asking you is, "What would a charity say to
such a hope of Vivisectionists that it supports?") After the
female monkeys had reached sexual maturity, they were
impregnated by the scientists with a device they so eloquently
label the "rape rack." These monkeys were the target of abuse
and exploitation from the scientists. Their actions, their lives
ruined and based on suffering -- their existence was limited to
the neglect and pain offered to them from the Vivisectionists.
But when these abused female monkey mothers gave birth, they
neglected their infant's when they cried. The scientists had
succeeded, but to what end? They had created monkey mothers who
did not care for their children and they devilshly observed with
bright eyes the actions of the other monkeys...
"The other monkeys were brutal or lethal. One of their favorite
tricks was to crush the infant's skull with their teeth. But the
really sickening behavior pattern was that of smashing the
infant's face to the floor, and then rubbing it back and forth."
[Engineering and Science 33:8 (1970)]
In the New York City offices of United Action for Animals, they
keep records of experiments conducted on non-human animals. The
files are organized by the type of experiment with more than
fifty of each type, and the titles speak for themselves:
"Acceleration," "Aggression," "Asphyxiation," "Blinding,"
"Burning," "Centrifuge," "Compression," "Drug Tests,"
"Experimental Neurosis," "Freezing," "Heating," "Hemorrhage,"
"Hindleg Beating," "Immobilization," "Isolation," "Multiple
Injuries," "Prey Killing," "Protein Deprivation," "Punishment,"
"Radiation," "Starvation," "Shock," "Spinal Cord Injuries,"
"Stress," "Thirst," among others.
Some individuals may purport that animals cannot feel, that
they are without emotion. Yet this is a fraud to cover up the
inhumane and brutal fashion which scientists treat animals. To
quote Charles Darwin...
"Nevertheless the difference in mind between man and the higher
animals, great as it is, certainly is one of degree and not of
kind. We have seen that the senses and intuitions, the various
emotions and faculties, such as love, memory, attention,
curiosity, imitation, reason, &c., of which man boasts, may be
found in an incipient, or even sometimes in a well-developed
condition, in the lower animals." [The Descent of Man, by
Charles Darwin, part 1, chapter 4.]
When humans have inherited the world and hold dominance over
the environment, it is one of the greatest injustices to mankind
to deliver such abuse to animal kind. To rear animals for the
sake of exploiting them, of filling their lives with fear, pain,
and learned depression -- how sick mankind is to endeavor in
such activities and how miserable is the life of those animals
abused in such experiments! Robert Green Ingersoll notes on the
inhumanity of Vivisection...
"We can excuse, in part, the crimes of passion. We take into
consideration the fact that man is liable to be caught by the
whirlwind, and that from a brain on fire the soul rushes to a
crime. But what excuse can ingenuity form for a man who
deliberately -- with an un-accelerated pulse -- with the
calmness of John Calvin at the murder of Serviettes -- seeks,
with curious and cunning knives, in the living, quivering flesh
of a dog, for all the throbbing nerves of pain? The wretches who
commit these infamous crimes pretend that they are working for
the good of man; that they are actuated by philanthropy; and
that their pity for the sufferings of the human race drives out
all pity for the animals they slowly torture to death. But those
who are incapable of pitying animals are, as a matter of fact,
incapable of pitying men. A physician who would cut a living
rabbit in pieces -- laying bare the nerves, denuding them with
knives, pulling them out with forceps -- would not hesitate to
try experiments with men and women for the gratification of his
curiosity.
"To settle some theory, he would trifle with the life of any
patient in his power. By the same reasoning he will justify the
vivisection of animals and patients. He will say that it is
better that a few animals should suffer than that one human
being should die; and that it is far better that one patient
should die, if through the sacrifice of that one, several may be
saved.
"Brain without heart is far more dangerous than heart without
brain.
"Have these scientific assassins discovered anything of value?
They may have settled some disputes as to the action of some
organ, but have they added to the useful knowledge of the race?"
[Vivisection, by Robert Green Ingersoll, a letter written to
Philip G. Peabody. May 27, 1890.]
Does a man learn anything - except how to be inhumane - by
being cruel to animals? Does society become anything less than
revoltingly brutal when it consents to gross inhumanities? Do
politicians and leaders become noble and virtuous by completely
disregarding the interests of lower animals, when lower animals
can feel as much suffering as any human? In the sentiment of
humaneness and in the spirit of affection, I ask that your
charity stops supporting these abominations of animal
experimentation. A charity is a wonderful thing, offering
goodness and compassion; but when a charity supports such awful
experiments -- when a charity offers its donations to help
scientists cause suffering to non-human animals -- it ceases to
be a charity.
www.punkerslut.com
For Life, Punkerslut