Skip to comments.Animals Are Persons Too
Posted on 04/27/2014 4:13:57 PM PDT by don-o
How does a thing become a person? In December 2013, the lawyer Steven Wise showed the world how, with a little legal jujitsu, an animal can transition from a thing without rights to a person with legal protections. This Op-Doc video follows Mr. Wise on his path to filing the first-ever lawsuits in the United States demanding limited personhood rights for certain animals, on behalf of four captive chimpanzees in New York State. Continue reading the main story Related in Opinion
Dot Earth Blog: A Closer Look at Nonhuman Personhood and Animal WelfareJULY 28, 2013
Mr. Wise (who is also the subject of The New York Times Magazines cover story this Sunday) has spent more than 30 years developing his strategy for attaining animal personhood rights. After he started his career as a criminal defense lawyer, he was inspired by Peter Singers book Animal Liberation to dedicate himself to justice for animals. He helped pioneer the study of animal rights law in the 1980s. In 2000, he became the first person to teach the subject at Harvard Law School, as a visiting lecturer. Mr. Wise began developing his animal personhood strategy after struggling with ineffective welfare laws and regulations that fail to keep animals out of abusive environments. Unlike welfare statutes, legal personhood would give some animals irrevocable protections that recognize their critical needs to live in the wild and to not be owned or abused. Continue reading the main story Related Coverage
Should a Chimp Be Able to Sue Its Owner?APRIL 23, 2014
The current focus of Mr. Wises legal campaign includes chimpanzees, elephants, whales and dolphins animals whose unusually high level of intelligence has been recognized by scientific research.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I mean besides that it is OK to kill unborn human beings...
I will grant him this, chimpanzees, elephants, whales and dolphins are several notches smarter than your average Democrat.
And they seem to be able to survive without mooching off the American taxpayer.
Clint Eastwood defends animal rights.
I guess they’ll need to count them in the census and allow them to vote and collect welfare benefits.
Also, animals can be on your healthcare plan until the age of 26.
” O the monkeys stand for honesty/giraffes are insincere/elephants are kindly but they’re dumb...’’
I am in agreement with Michael Savage insofar as you can judge a great deal about a nation in how it treats its animals. That said, in modern day Germany it’s illegal to boil lobsters alive since it is considered cruel. A law put on the books by none other than Adolf Hitler.
Personhood resides in ones ability to use reason and logic. Animals are sentient (self-awareness) but do not use logic and rational thought, by and large. Animals are largely deterministic. That is not to say a chimp cannot use a stick to put in a termite hole and get a taste of termite. But on the whole civil rights are not accorded animals because they do not use reason and logic and rational thought.
You obviously have not watched one of my Dobes figure out how to successfully turn different types of door knobs.
My dogs are logical. They know where food comes from and how to get it. They have affectionate responses to my praise. One of them even talks and if you listen carefully, you can determine what she says...which is generally “let’s take a walk” or “I really want a treat.”
Yup, your average Democrat voter.
A Dangerous train of thought! For Cripes sakes, do we consider liberals capable logic and rational thought? Of course not! Shall we declare those of differing beliefs non-human?
I agree completely! I think we Conservatives have a tendency to react to Animal Rights issues with a knee jerk contrary response, mainly because the extremists are typically on the Left. I prefer to formulate my own reactions based on my personal beliefs. I believe it’s perfectly fine to eat humanely raised and slaughtered animals, and to hunt responsibly. Beyond that, unecessary torture of other living creatures repulses me, and as Mr. Savage, I think, would agree, casts doubt on just how “civilized” we really are.
Animals are just animals. Cats are our masters.
What they really mean is that people are just animals, therefore divesting them of all private property and herding them into high-rise containment facilities or killing them outright is perfectly OK.
Yeah, sure and humans are angels too.. RIGHT! (phhht!)
That is Pavlovian, not rationality. But those dissenters who referenced democrats as being without reason and logic do make a strong point. I will have to reevaluate my analysis of this matter.
legal jujitsu — pettifoggery?
What is the difference between my dogs and those with "personhood" who live off money that is extorted from those who are forced to support them? They have no self-awareness, rational thought or logic. They only want what they can get without giving anything up front or in return.
So people are also tasty?
My chimp dislikes shyster lawyers, and would probably try to bite one who suggested he should sue.
Animals are logical, smart, can be “guilted”, etc. I think what they lack is introspection.
Other Worlds of Isaac Asimov - It’s kindle time...
Thanks for the link Civ
Animal liberationists are not unlike the Nazis. Any movement that sets out to treat animals as humans will inevitably result in humans being treated like animals. Hence Nazis could feel good about outlawing the docking of sheeps tails and yet brand humans, ship them around in cattle cars and kill them with less thought for their suffering than they would for a cow killed for meat. It’s ironic that Jews are very prominent in A.L movement.
I see no evidence that animals use the laws of logic.
Fine by me. I was just trying to be helpful.
I try not to read too much into it. If old Adolf got one right, then what the hey.
But rats won’t come up with differential calculus anytime soon, lovable as they are.
Perhaps, but let’s look at the bigger picture. ALL living things have some aspect of consciousness. The greater complexity we humans exhibit is due to our intricate brain making possible the fabrication of holographic meaning to the data we receive from events that have already happened. There is a gorilla who uses sign language on a primitive level, but she knows she is communicating so the use of language indicates use of syntax ... a form of logic.
Modern science has never clearly defined the life force.
Person... something that can be sued for damages.
In my big ToE (Theory of Everything) there is a dimension as real as dimension space or dimension time from which life force/consciousness is sourced. There is also a dimension of spirit. Consciousness inveigles space and time to exhibit living beings/things. Without time events do not occur and without space things do not exist, in the terms of how we define reality. There are at least three variable expressions of each dimension, and maybe more.
I believe the quantum mechanical electrical properties existing within proteins and lipid layers enable hyper light communication within living systems. The ability to “anticipate” thermodynamics through hyperlighspeed micro communication within molecular systems is what we call life.
You would enjoy a paper by Bernard Haisch, et al, published in Physics in 2005. He and a guy named Rueda, along with some input from Hal Puthoff have derived F = ma showing that wave function of the quantum vacuum, the zero point field, is the source of inertia and gravity. I don’t have the addy at my finger tips but it is googleable using Haisch Zero Point Field. You’ll want to read the 2005 paper for it’s more simple mathematical tightness. I want to get them to go one step further, to look at the zero point field as causing inertia because of pointing vector of time in every ‘parton’. I’m convinced that dimension Time is not what we have been thinking it is, as some background state. It has variable expressions, such as linear, planar, and volumetric.
The foundational principles behind this, is that we make up moral principles. They are not laws like mathematics, but a derivative of of culture, sort of like the current style of architecture. Without the common moral ground applicable to all persons we are left to the vasile thoughts of men. Disbelief in common moral ground is rapidly becoming a pillar of middle-class prejudice. How often have we heard 'I will not allow you to impose your morality on anyone else'. We see it every day with law suits by atheists to disallow Christians in the military from having access to a Bible.
I think we are not so far apart in the question before us. My problem is that due process, today, seems to be arbitrarily applied.
To quote Forrest Gump, "I'm kinda tired now, I think I'll go home."
My dog is offended to be considered beneath subhuman scum that are progressives. Hevk, he thinks he’s more people than people.
I would tend to agree, but a more powerful argument is that animals cannot make moral choices.
To know good from evil is to have the nature of, as J. Budziszewiski said, is to have a knowledge of 'what we can't not know'. This is referenced in Romans 1:20 through the second chapter of Romans. As hard as man tries, it is impossible to not know it is wrong (morally) to kill one's offspring, or to have sexual relations with your neighbors wife, or to blaspheme God. Now, this may be suppressed, but it cannot be discarded. It is the nature of a person. This is Natural Law. We cannot not know it is wrong to gratuitously harm another person. We cannot not know it is wrong to take property which belong to another person. If you look carefully at the Decalogue you will see the parallels.
I agree with your statement that animals cannot make moral choices. This is not in their nature to do so.
Does Mr. Wise honestly expect an animal to go to court if its “rights” are ever violated?
he (the evil one) is not at all unhappy to see the animal creatures being elevated in status.
Moral choices derive from spirit resonance, which is not a part of the animal soul behavior mechanism, except in those to whom God breathed a living soul. ... I contend that ETs are technologically advanced, but do not have a spirit component.
What I do know is that moral standards are prescribed by a Moral Lawgiver, and if there is a Moral Lawgiver then persons have a moral obligation to that Lawgiver. One does not reason the law, but discovers the law. Without objective standards of meaning of morality then life becomes meaningless and choices become capricious. There is, under this scenario, no right an wrong and no absolutes of any sort. Everything becomes a matter of opinion. J. Budziszewski says there is no country in which virtue and gratitude is vice. Everyone knows there are absolute moral obligations, at all times, and in all places.
Person-years or dog-years?
The Wendell Urth mysteries are few in number, but more entertaining than Asimov usually is; I think he wrote them under a pen name to avoid being associated with the detective genre, and maybe because he still had hopes of becoming successful again. :’)
By “we” I meant people who unnecessarily torture animals, and those who support their right to do so.
My rats took forever converting from a slide rule to a calculator.