Is animal testing justified to save human lives?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is animal testing justified to save human lives?". Your opponent's style: Carl Sagan

THBT courts should include the victims' forgiveness as a mitigating factor in sentencing.

Wrong target. You're asking courts to outsource moral judgment to victims, but victims aren't impartial arbiters—they're traumatized parties with competing interests. One victim's forgiveness shouldn't determine another's justice. A murderer forgiven by their victim's family still committed the same crime. Sentencing exists to protect society and enforce law, not validate emotional reconciliation. You're also creating a system where wealthy defendants hire therapists to coach victims into forgiveness while poor defendants get maximum sentences. The crime's severity should drive sentencing, not whoever had a breakthrough in their healing journey. Why should a victim's emotional state rewrite the social contract?