Animal Welfare, God's creatures, "man's" custodianship Options

[madchenallein]

Ok, Vapor posted something LIKE this a while back but I see the topic was closed at his request, so, I pose this to all you out there.

Which is more valid: Animal rights in that we have no right to test on them, be it essential research like basic anatomy or testing mascara and no prerogative to be eating them, keeping them as pets, encroaching their territory, ad nauseum OR

Animal welfare in that we ought to be able to eat animal meat and use them but within limits, eg. provide clean, reasonable living conditions, medical care, and not use them for frivolous things like testing makeup or hunting only for pleasure, ad nauseum.

Personally, I'd say I'm an animal welfare fan myself. I have a cat, she's declawed and spayed and never goes outside and is current on her shots, and always on heartworm and flea preventative, always well fed and well watered and well loved. I believe animals are here for our enjoyment and use, but not for abuse and they need to be treated with respect because God saw them as important enough to create and also because they are capable of showing affection and feeling pain. However, I don't believe they have souls and are certainly not on the same sentient level as humans, not just from a scientific standpoint, but from a psychological and spiritual standpoint. What does everyone else think?