That is a really, really tough one for me TBH. On the one hand I don't like the idea of it at all, but on the other I look at medical needs and value to our species and I get terribly torn.
Currently my views are:
1 - not for any form of cosmetic or non-medical reasons. If we want to put on some nice perfume I figure we find out ourselves if it causes a rash or not
2 - I accept it for medical research, however I feel that it should be a priority to minimise the need for animal testing, and the goal should be to develop research models and simulation based capabilities that eventually render animal testing unnecessary. A huge complication here is the uneasy mix of medical research for obvious illness and the better of our species vs the commercial aspects of medicine (which I believe is a huge conflict of interest but hey we would have an overly commercial society (IMHO)).
3 - I do not accept campaigners attacking or intimidating medical researchers. They absolutely should campaign, but medical progress is for the species and a minority just can't make the decision nor has the right to harm those legally going about curing illness for the rest of us
So in short I think it is acceptable within careful boundaries for medical research, but only as a temporary approach due to our current level of capability, and that the long term goal should be to reduce it to zero.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
