Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Still Waters

If animals are legally recognized as persons

8 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Still Waters

The first real attempt to see chimps legally recognized as persons may have failed, but it's an historic case that undoubtedly represents the first of many to come. It'll only be a matter of time before chimps and other animals are no longer seen as mere property, but rather as subjects worthy of legal protections. Here's what we can expect once that happens.

http://io9.com/what-...gniz-1484267280

Previous related topic -

http://www.unexplain...howtopic=258738

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
redhen

From the article;

"And if we should find that these animals possess the requisite faculties for legal personhood — traits like autonomy, the sense of self, awareness of others, mental time travel, and complex problem solving — than we will have no choice but to recognize them as legal persons as well."

While special legal status may help these favoured animals, our moral attitude towards non-human animals should not be based on higher levels of cognition, or in the words of Jeremy Bentham;

"The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purplos

I'm all for animal rights and protection, but I still think "person" means human. People are human. Chimps are chimps, chickens are chickens, whales are whales, etc. They can be self-aware, highly intelligent. emotional etc. but they're still not humans.

Why mess with word definitions. Just focus on protecting them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JGirl

i agree with purplos

this is just going too far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redhen

Why mess with word definitions. Just focus on protecting them.

Because there are only two categories of "things" in law; people and property. As property, you can do pretty much what you want with them. This is why animal cruelty is considered a misdemeanor in many states, akin to littering.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leonardo

Even if some animals acquire 'person' status, that will not grant rights equivalent to, or even approaching, those enjoyed by human beings. Corporations are 'persons' according to law, but do not have human rights.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSquirrel

I think it might be better to add a third state of being, between Persons and property. I do agree that we should be treating animals better, I mean, a happy cow makes a better burger (citation needed). I just wonder why they dance around stating that living beings should have rights and instead on making everything people. Soylent Chimps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purplos

So make better laws against animal cruelty.

There are crimes against property that are felonies, and even some animal cruelty cases in some states are felonies. For example, blowing up someone's house is a felony. that doesn't mean the house is a person.

There is no reason to call a non-human animal a person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.