Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Should chimps have legal rights?


Claire.

Recommended Posts

NY Court Hears 'Personhood' Case for Caged Chimps

Should chimps have legal rights? A case debating the "personhood" of two captive male chimpanzees recently had its day in court, at the New York County Supreme Court's Appellate Division in the First Judicial Department.

On March 17, judges heard arguments from Steven Wise, president of the Nonhuman Rights Project (NRP) and the case's lead attorney, about recognizing the chimps — who are both residents of New York State — as legal persons. This would entitle them to freedom from captivity under New York's habeas corpus statute, which protects people from being detained involuntarily.

Wise claimed that habeas corpus, a fundamental human right, should not be restricted to people. He called for the chimpanzees — named Tommy and Kiko — to be freed from their cages and released to live in a Florida sanctuary, NRP representatives said in a statement.

Read more: Live Science

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Corporations have the same rights as a person.. this might be ok.. so long as it is for situations like this... or at least a special status.. like companion animals and the vision impaired dogs.....

please do not apply to all animals

... hopefully what they use for logic is the sane version

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more we learn about consciousness the more I think yeah chimps should have human rights. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

The more we learn about consciousness the more I think yeah chimps should have human rights. 

You obviously haven't seen planet of the apes. :)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, insanityitrust said:

Corporations have the same rights as a person.. this might be ok.. so long as it is for situations like this... or at least a special status.. like companion animals and the vision impaired dogs.....

please do not apply to all animals

... hopefully what they use for logic is the sane version

Relevant excerpt from an article discussing three rivers that recently became 'legal persons'.

Legal rights are not the same as human rights, and so a "legal person" does not necessarily have to be a human being. Take corporations, for example, which are also treated in law as "legal persons", as a way to endow companies with particular legal rights, and to treat the company as legally distinct from its managers and shareholders.

Giving nature legal rights means the law can see "nature" as a legal person, thus creating rights that can then be enforced. Legal rights focus on the idea of legal standing (often described as the ability to sue and be sued), which enables "nature" to go to court to protect its rights. Legal personhood also includes the right to enter and enforce contracts, and the ability to hold property.

There is still a big question about whether these types of legal rights are relevant or appropriate for nature at all. But what is clear from the experience of applying this concept to other non-human entities is that these legal rights don't mean much if they can't be enforced.

Source: Live Science

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no rights.   Only responsibilities ...... ;)

The sooner humans (whom some suggest are almost as intelligent as dogs, apes, crows and dolphins) accept that - and exercise those responsibilities - the sooner this world will become a better place. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Human worth is not the least bit denigrated by identifying a person with animal. Just the same, legal rights for animals do not necessarily have to require equal or identical treatment to humans; but they should, at the very least, require equal consideration.

This is not due to animals' intelligence, or capacity for reason, speech, or language — it is due to their sentience.

Every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering. They should also have the right to be free from oppression and confinement, not to mention, over-zealous use and abuse.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lilly said:

Ok, then so should dogs: http://nypost.com/2017/03/03/your-dog-is-actually-smarter-than-a-chimpanzee/

This is nonsense IMO. Dogs, chimps, dolphins are all very intelligent animals and they should be treated as such by humans. They are not, however, equal to humans as they do not possess the same level of reasoning that humans do.

I'm getting more worried about human rights recently! However, I do agree that animals should be treated as sentient beings by humans.

Laws are really starting to change for animals. When I divorced 15 years ago when my spouse was fighting it, I lost MY dog to a temporary custody and only visitation rights for a few months! 

Well, the dog was stressed and not groomed so I got custody in the court, but with visitation rights! I never heard of such a thing but it happens, animals are seen as children especially when no children are involved. 

 

Edited by White Unicorn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.