Skip to comments."Planet of the Apes" ... Advocacy Group to Name Captive Chimp as Plaintiff in Historic Case
Posted on 07/17/2013 7:18:39 PM PDT by DogByte6RER
Should chimpanzees have legal rights?
The animal personhood movement believes dolphins, great apes, and elephants deserve to be able to sue and now it has a plaintiff.
Somewhere in Americaits lawyers wont say wherea chimpanzee is about to have its day in court.
In the next few months, an animal advocacy group called the Nonhuman Rights Project plans to file a case on behalf of its first animal client. It has already chosen the plaintiff, a captive chimp, on whose behalf it plans to file a writ of habeas corpus and ask a state court judge to grant the chimps liberty.
Their goal is to win animals a toehold in the world of legal rightsa strategy that is the culmination of more than two decades of writing and legal work by lawyer Steven Wise and an allied group of attorneys, scientists, and animal activists. They hope to have an animal declared a person in a court of law, breaking down a legal barrier between humans and other species that has stood for millennia.
Over the last century, animals have enjoyed a steady march in legal protections. Once treated no differently than inanimate objects, today they cant be abandoned, beaten, or deprived of food, shelter, or veterinary care. Despite these protections, however, animals are still legally considered property. And for Wise and others, given what we now know about the biology and inner lives of animals, this is no longer a tenable distinction. It is time, they argue, to grant at least some species fundamental rights such as the right to life and freedom from captivityand the surest way to accomplish that is for those animals to join human beings as legal persons.
Critics say legal personhood for animals is misguided...
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
The chimp in this video seems to already exercise his 2nd Amendment rights ....
"I'm getting offers for 'green cards' world wide."
Giving Chimps rights would only be the beginning - the Meat is Murder crowd don’t want us to use animals for human consumption or benefit at all.
It would take a logical leap for people to think that they can think for any individual animal. However if the judge in the chimp case is a pre-chosen chump then we might see the beginning of the end of your much loved bacon or steak. Of course as with any Liberal the end game is not in sight but they don’t care if it takes 50 years to get their victory.
Every time I see that monstrosity it creeps me out.
There is also a group for robot rights.
I guess everyone’s gotta have a hobby.
This guy’s is hanging to sheer idiocy for life.
How are we going to hold an animal responsible for any adverse action?
How would they come to understand rite and rong?
How could they obtain property rights?
How could they open and manage a banc account?
Watt wood b the D terminen fact ors witch Pro vyed unimpeachable, demonstrable and measurable proof they are sentient beings?