No one here is going to turn around and say, "Yes, I'm for cruelty to animals. We need to be cruel" so that's pretty much a giv'n. Where the controversy lies is in the treatment of animals towards human gain. Taming animals was the first and probably most important step in distinguishing humans as the dominant species, so I'm not going to turn around and say "Oh we shouldn't use animals" otherwise, I, nor any of you, would not be sitting here today if our predecessors has. Thr arguement on the treatment is hard to discuss rationally due to the elements of ambiguity and ignorance. One persons torture is another's acceptable behaviour and some issues, definately for me, anyway, people do not know enough about the behaviour or what actually happens to make a fair judgement. Speculation and propaganda doesn't help, tyvm PETA. To put it this way, using animals is fine with me so long as it isn't used to excess. I think most people feel this way if I digress. If a cow is to be killed for food, then kill it in the quickest, most efficient and, importantly, humane way. Humane, we're humans after all, we know the boundaries so do it. Don't skin it alive or drain its blood or any of this bollocks, get it done with. If an animal is being tested for medicinal purposes because it's currently the best and most efficient way, again, fine by me. This of course is one of those issues I'm ignorant in, I don't know if there are better ways or what happens. I'd like to know the truth, but that's very unlikely. If it was revealed, like 100% positive, that somewhere like Burger King electrocutes zebras to death for their quarter pounders, then yeah, I'd probably boycott out of principle. But I just don't know.