Re: Animal rights group calls on China to respect ratsFeb 5th, 2008
Praxius, you're saying that the Chinese individuals need to have a focus you've predetermined for them.
A vet or a lab worker isn't going to be in a position to push a human rights agenda. Their knowledge is focused in a different area. Their interest is focused in a different area. They should all quit and get different areas of interest/work so that their focus corresponds with what you've decided it should be, based on their country as a whole?
There's a word for thinking like that.
And yes the lab workers might not give two rat tails about how they treat their animals, but did you considder that some of the conditions these animals live in are based on what's available to humans and their income available to put towards those conditions? If they have to focus on their own rights and hardships in their everyday lives to survive, which they require human rights for to begin with, then how could you expect these people to follow new rules and regulations protecting those animals, which would most likely include them having to put out more money and more of their own limited resources to meeting those demands or face jail time/punishment?
Sure the government could work on animal rights first over their own citizens, but then the question remains as to how well those people could follow those rules and regulations.
What I was saying is they could work on the human rights first, then back to back, start working on animal rights right after those rights for humans have been implimented. Then when they have to follow the new guidlines on animal treatment, they'd collectively be in a much better position to follow them.
If they are told that now their business or home requires better quality living conditions, food, treatment for the animals in their care, and they do not have anything additional coming their way to meet those demands, then it's sort of a blood from stone situation.
And trying to impliment both at the same time I imagine would be not just an organizational headache, but a financial one, having to dish out money all over the country at the same time to meet all the required demands so that people have the rights and protections they need, and possibly the proper pay for what they do in order to improve the quality of life for those animals in their care/responsibility.
You make it sound like some of these people who test on animals, or keep them in zoos don't really care about animals that they test on or have held up... but maybe some actually do, but just don't have the resources to do anything about it. We have people here in our own country who care and those who don't care as well. It's a global thing, not just social. Some personally, without any animal rights implimented, might actually want to improve those animals lives while in their care, who knows?
We have animal rights here in Canada, but those rules and regulations existing do not force or change my attitudes on how I treat animals. I have always treated animals with as much respect as possible since I was a wee lad. If I have no rights, and I am working just to get by and survive because the guy I work for is cheaping out on me, then my priorities are going to be for myself over any animals in my care, as unfortunate as that is.
My main concern is not which one gets worked on first, or both, but the actual ability for them to impliment the new regulations as best as possible.