If we give animals "rights" where exactly should we end them? Should a dog be able to marry a cat? Sign a contractual agreement? If I die, can I leave my Pastel my property?

Rights are bestowed on those who can actually use them, and more importantly, those that are aware of their meaning. If we are going to blur the line further, why stop at animals, why not plants as well? How about viruses?

The question has a confusing premise. Technically, we COULD consider anti-cruelty laws a "right" on its own, even if it's somewhat vicarious. Granted, it doesn't extend any real rights on the animals themselves, but it certainly prevents us (as humans) from committing said acts. However, the same could be said of life. We technically don't have the "right" to live, we do have laws against murdering however.

As for the issue of animal testing, I find it odd to be against it. While there is obviously some pain in the process of testing, I fail to see how that is any more cruel than their natural habitats. Mice are tested in labs, and eventually killed in a very humane way. That's certainly more than they are going to get in the wild, unless you consider being eaten alive a humane death.