> moral standing Arguments coming from moral anything (moral obligation, moral standing, etc) are generally founded on some sort of abrahamic value system. Not

> moral standing Arguments coming from moral anything (moral obligation, moral standing, etc) are generally founded on some sort of abrahamic value system. Nothing wrong with that, but discussing it from that point of view has already been done (note that there is a post in this chain that says the reasoning for animal testing being okay is made from the supposition that humans are superior) and is therefore not very interesting. You can of course invent fake ethical situations until the sun turns into a red giant, but they would still not be germane because different situations deserve a different treatment. The fact that you are transitioning into personal attacks three sentences into your post also really doesn't do what you are saying any favors. Perhaps you find torturing animals because it might save children perfectly acceptable and reasonable and other people find it monstrous and wrong. You might imagine those same people find their own positions to be reasonable.