Medical Research and Animal Rights
That was quite an editorial (“Misplaced Sentimentality,” April 27). I don’t think I’ve ever seen the animal rights movement--excuse me, the “so-called” animal rights movement--so easily dismissed. Since you obviously can’t address the real issue--that animals are not ours to use, period--you resort to name calling: eccentric, cranks, self-righteous, zealots, silly, self-absorbed, vulgar.
It seems to me that those who defend using helpless animals any way they please are the ones who are self-absorbed. The fact that you came out against animal rights was no surprise, since you virtually ignore the movement and run pro-research articles. But such a shrill, mean-spirited editorial does all your readers a disservice, regardless of where they stand on the issue.
In fact, it was the most self-righteous, silly, and vulgar thing I have ever seen written on the subject.
JOYCE WISWELL
Santa Barbara
Sign up for The Wild
We’ll help you find the best places to hike, bike and run, as well as the perfect silent spots for meditation and yoga.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
