Posted by Georgina the Giraffe under blog's category : Antivivisection & extremism

We were of course delighted by the verdicts in the court case against animal rights extremists operating in the name of SHAC, as reported extensively in the media.

As a recent article on The Guardian's Comment Is Free explains, there is no reason why the ‘rights' of the animals which the extremists are supposedly defending should override the 'rights‘ of those whose lives depend on medical advances achieved partly through animal research.

Indeed, it is difficult to see that any of these rights are absolute. The arguments for animal research, when made in advance, will always have to be on a case-by-case basis, depending on the potential benefits and likely harms to the animals. That is the basis of the law.