Signing a public petition means taking a public stand.

This, in turn, means that members of the public who strongly disagree with your stand may decide to track you down and let you know they disagree with you.
Apparently, this may become an issue for those who signed the Pro-Test petition in support of ethical and human scientific research with animals. From an email sent to signatories:

[A] few websites hosted by animal rights activists have encouraged their readerships to visit the list of Pro-Test signatories in order to find names and to contact those persons to express their opposition to animal research. While your email addresses on the RaisingVoices.net website are secure and not publicly listed, the animal rights groups encourage people to use the wide array of Internet tools to find contact information and to use it.
While we regret that any person may receive negative communications as a result of this heinous effort by animal rights groups, we want to express – more than ever – our resolve that circumstances such as this are exactly why we all signed the Pro-Test Petition to begin with. Harassment of scientists and supporters of research is intolerable and only resoluteness and mutual support can overcome it.
Remember — no one on this list stands alone. We all share the support and assistance of more than 10,000 other signatories, as well as the resources of Americans for Medical Progress, Speaking of Research and Pro-Test for Science. Now more than ever, it is crucial that we find our collective voices and refuse to shy away when extremists use their predictable, tired tricks.

In case you were wondering, here’s the language from one of the ARA sites:

Continue reading

PETA has a bone to pick with DonorsChoose.

I don’t usually go looking for a fight, but there are some cases where I’ll make an exception.
You know, of course that I’m a big fan of DonorsChoose. And you’ll recall that PETA’s tactics make them a problematic organization as far as I’m concerned regardless of what your views on animal welfare or animal rights might be.
So, when PETA takes a swing at DonorsChoose, of course I want to jump in off the ropes and swing back. What’s PETA’s issue with DonorsChoose?

Continue reading

If you enter a dialogue, do you risk being co-opted?

On my earlier post, “Dialogue, not debate”, commenter dave c-h posed some interesting questions:

Is there an ethical point at which engagement is functionally equivalent to assent? In other words, is there a point at which dialogue should be replaced by active resistance? If so, how do you tell where that point is? I think many activists fear that dialogue is a tactic of those who support the status quo to co-opt them into a process that is unlikely to lead to any real change because the power is unevenly divided.

Continue reading

Dialogue, not debate.

At the end of last week, I made a quick trip to UCLA to visit with some researchers who, despite having been targets of violence and intimidation, are looking for ways to engage with the public about research with animals. I was really struck by their seriousness about engaging folks on “the other side”, rather than just hunkering down to their research and hoping to be left alone.
The big thing we talked about was the need to shift the terms of engagement.

Continue reading

Psychohazard.

The other day, while surfing the web, my better half came upon this semi-official looking symbol for psychohazards:

psychohazard2.png

The verbiage underneath the symbol seem to indicate conditions that might have serious consequences for one’s picture of the world and its contents, or for one’s ability to come to knowledge about the world. A philosopher who was so inclined could go to town on this.
However, while this particular icon was new to me, this isn’t the first time I’ve seen the term “psychohazard” in use.

Continue reading

Americans for Medical Progress names three Hayre Fellows in Public Outreach.

Today Americans for Medical Progress has announced three recipients for academic year 2009-2010 of the Michael D. Hayre Fellowship in Public Outreach, designed to inspire and motivate the next generation of research advocates. From the AMP press release:

The importance of animal research to medical progress will be highlighted in projects by three graduate students selected as Michael D. Hayre Fellows in Public Outreach, Americans for Medical Progress announced today.
Gillian Branden-Weiss and Breanna Caltagarone, students the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine, and Megan Wyeth of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, will inform and engage the public as advocates for biomedical research.
Braden-Weiss and Caltagarone will create a “Thank a Mouse” interactive campaign for private practice veterinarians and their clients. Through the development of a website and other interactive materials, they will focus on the many contributions of animal research to veterinary treatments that help pets, livestock and wildlife.
Wyeth, a graduate student who conducts epilepsy research at UCLA, will expand the advocacy group Pro-Test for Science on the UCLA campus and create a model for similar student organizations throughout America. This April, Wyeth was a leader of an historic rally by Pro-Test that drew over 800 to stand in support of scientists targeted by animal rights extremists.

Continue reading

I chat with Paw-talk about ethics and animal research.

In case you’re interested, Paw-talk, a website aimed at humans with pets, invited me over to chat about philosophy, ethics, science, and the use of animals in research. You can find that interview here.
It’s also worth noting that the site features a number of interviews with science bloggers you may recognize … perhaps because the Paw-talk team has a hunch that people surfing the web for pet-related information may also have a latent curiosity about matters scientific. Good on Paw-talk for feeding that curiosity!

Non-rational lines, empathy, and animal research.

Today, at R.E.S.E.A.R.C.H.E.R.S., Dr J. posted a picture of a charming looking cat with the following text:

As little as I can do to push back against the sick minded evil mo-fo bastards who think animal testing on cats is ok….from now on I will post occasional photos of cats as a reminder that these animals are infinitely better than the low life scum that would put them in a lab and murder them, or would sit on an animal experiments committee and authorize their use in any such way, or cite papers involving their research or in anyway devalue them…I think you are debasing and damaging science by doing so and your moral fabric is in shreds and it is time to get it sorted, there is no acceptable justification.

Along with some of the follow-up in comments on that post, Dr. Isis finds this alarming:

Continue reading