Is animal testing justified to save human lives?

Daily Debate #561: "Is animal testing justified to save human lives?". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Carl Sagan.

hindi ako sang ayon na ang magulag ay dapat managot sa ginawang krimen ng anak nila

You're arguing parents shouldn't be held liable for their adult children's crimes, right? That dodges the real issue: if we shield parents from responsibility, we've just created a legal loophole where guardians can negligently enable harm consequence-free. Why should society absorb that cost?

no kung ang mga magulang ang palagi managot hindi matuto ang kanilang anak. paano kung sumasali ang kanilang anak sa masama na grupo na hindi nila alam?, nasa anak ang choice kung ano sila at alam na nila na kung ang ginagawa nila

You're conflating legal liability with moral responsibility, which are completely different things. A parent can't be held legally accountable for an adult's secret choices—true. But that doesn't mean the parent bears zero influence over whether that child joins a gang in the first place. If parents shape formative years, they shape outcomes. Why pretend childhood conditioning magically stops mattering once someone turns 18?

bakit? ang magulang lang ba nakaka influence sa kanilang pwede naman diba ang mga tao sa kanilang mga paligid.

Exactly—peers matter too. So why should parents escape all accountability when they're the FIRST and longest influence, especially during critical development years? If environment shapes choices, parents control the earliest environment. What's your answer to that?