I'm getting mixed messages here.
Which of you are against all forms of cruelty to animals and which of you are just against the form of cruelty that manifests itself in testing cosmetics on animals so that men and women can improve their looks? Because if it's the former, you also have to include: testing of drugs on animals (no animal would ask another species to do unspeakable things to itself in the name of science so that our species remains healthy), horse racing (no animal actively asks another species to bump around on its back), keeping pets in your house or garden (no animal was asked whether it wanted to lose its freedom in order to live a lifestyle it didn't choose) and so on. If it's just the latter, I'm not sure what the rationalisation is.
I'm not trying to be inflammatory, I'm simply trying to get my head round the thinking behind the stance.
I am opposed to all forms of cruelty and do everything I can to live a cruelty-free life. To address all your points could take an age, but briefly: I only contribute to charities that don't fund animal research. My able-bodied cats are free to leave the house and go anywhere they want to go, and my dogs run off the lead outside the house and garden every day - and they all choose to return to me and to their home of their own accord. My blind cats and neurologically damaged cats, who can't protect themselves, live a very spoiled and happy life within the boundaries of our house and our garden. I have been vegetarian and latterly vegan for 45 years, and never wear animal-derived materials.
As for horse racing - I would have thought that the fact that 1142 horses have died on race courses in the past 2726 days would be enough for anyone, but the problem is that most people don't know. http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/