"Animal rights group seeks 'legal personhood'"

[applegrove]

Animal rights group seeks 'legal personhood'

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/animal-rights-group-seeks-legal-personhood-for-chimps-1.2448387

"SNIP.................................


A U.S. animal rights group on Monday filed what it said is the first lawsuit seeking to establish the "legal personhood" of chimpanzees.

The non-profit Nonhuman Rights Project asked a New York state court to declare a 26-year-old chimp named Tommy "a cognitively complex autonomous legal person with the fundamental legal right not to be imprisoned."

The lawsuit seeks a declaration that Tommy's "detention" in a "small, dank, cement cage in a cavernous dark shed" in central New York is unlawful and demands his immediate release to a primate sanctuary.

Chimpanzees "possess complex cognitive abilities that are so strictly protected when they're found in human beings," Steven Wise, the president of Nonhuman Rights Project, told Reuters.



.................................SNIP"

[Katashi_itto]

1. If you can do Corporations....

[flvegan]

2. Tip of the cap to you, Mr. Wise.

[NYC_SKP]

3. This would be like the banana peel of slippery slopes.

I'd sooner give that recognition to dolphins.

Who don't rip your face off.

Like chimps are likely to do.

.......

[applegrove]

4. But we've already given it to the angry gorilla that is the corporation.

And it is causing mayhem.

[flvegan]

5. So it's about you then?

Just checking.

[NYC_SKP]

6. Uh, sure. OK.

But since you ask, no.

Seriously, chimps should not be singled out and the criterion that equates their species with humans is flawed and subject to endless interpretations and arguments.

Better would be the recognition that all species deserve a different and elevated level of care that, as nearly as possible, reflects their natural surroundings.

"Tommy's "detention" in a "small, dank, cement cage in a cavernous dark shed" in central New York" doesn't even come close.

Thus, we should examine all captive animal species and the manner in which we exploit them.

How you thought I felt otherwise is not something I understand.

Cheers.

[flvegan]

8. Very good answer.

Thank you for clearing that up.

[Go Vols]

9. +1

[applegrove]

7. I don't agree that chimps should be free where people are either. They are actually

very dangerous to humans. They are so strong they could pull your arms off. That being said I do think it is symbolically important.

[tblue]

10. Doggies are people. IMHO.

Actually they are way better than people.

If corporations and Tea Baggers are people, why not an intelligent, sentient being?

[jmowreader]

11. I'm going to disagree for a reason everyone here should agree with

If chimps are given legal personhood, this will necessarily lead to legal personhood for human embryos.

[eShirl]

12. I disagree, but it could possibly lead to

laws prohibiting and/or legalizing marriage between legally consenting human and non-human legal persons.

[jmowreader]

13. Hi, Mr. Santorum

My theory: RWNJs are so desperate to ban abortion they'll grab the first excuse they can. "They gave a chimp personhood, so we must give a fetus the same protection!"

We could do a lot to get the chimp out of his cage without declaring him human.