Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Do great apes, the highest of the primates, aside from man, have a right NOT to be arbitrarily deprived of life and liberty? (freedom to wander about)?
I had intended a poll, but i messed up, so just state, yes, yes with quaifications, maybe, no, etc. and give your reasons.
If this is accepted, confining them in most zoos would be out, but not necessarily 'wild life refuges,' large tracts of land, for their own protection.
What is the argument? It's very simple: Leaving aside the language issue, these apes--gorillas, chimps, bononbos, for example-- are functioning like two year olds, at least. In terms of morality, then, they would seem to be entitled to the same rights: You can't for example, take your two year old, and shoot her. Nor can you perform experimental surgery on her, or drop detergents into her eyes, to test the irritation potential.
You don't let the two year old wander the streets, of course. Liberty is restricted for her own good. But she can't be caged. The two year old has a right to have fun, socialize with other kids, and adults, have parenting.
As to language, i'm letting that ride, for a simple modification of the example works. Suppose your two year old could not speak. You have to teach her sign language to express her wishes, although she can hear verbal instructions. The apes does not lose rights, then, even if they cannot speak.
The Declaration on Great Apes can be found at this url, and is a result of the Great Apes Project (q v)
http://www.greatapeproject.org/declaration.php
http://www.slate.com/id/2194568/
Animal-Rights FarmApe rights and the myth of animal equality.
By William Saletan
Updated Tuesday, July 1, 2008, at 7:52 AM ET
Should apes be treated like people?
Under a resolution headed for passage in the Spanish parliament, respecting the personal rights of "our non-human brothers" won't just be a good idea. It'll be the law.
The resolution, approved last week by a parliamentary committee with broad support, urges the government to implement the agenda of the Great Ape Project, an organization whose founding declaration says apes "may not be killed" or "arbitrarily deprived of their liberty." No more routine confinement. According to Reuters, the proposal would commit the government to ending involuntary use of apes in circuses, TV ads, and dangerous experiments.
Proponents hail the resolution as the first crack in the "species barrier." Peter Singer, the philosopher who co-founded GAP, puts it this way: "There is no sound moral reason why possession of basic rights should be limited to members of a particular species." If aliens or monkeys are shown to have moral or intellectual abilities similar to ours, we should treat them like people.[...]
Can apes talk? Slate V investigates:
If the idea of treating chimps like people freaks you out, join the club. Creationists have been fighting this battle for a long time. They realized long ago that evolution threatened humanity's special status. Maybe you thought all this evolution stuff was just about the past. Surprise! Once you've admitted chimps are your relatives, you have to think about treating them that way. That's why, when the Spanish proposal won approval last week, GAP's leader in Spain called it a victory for "our evolutionary comrades."
Opponents view the resolution as egalitarian extremism. Spain's conservative party frets that it would grant animals the same rights as people. Spanish newspapers and citizens complain that ape rights are distracting lawmakers from human problems. Wesley Smith, my favorite anti-animal-rights blogger, sees the resolution as the first step in a campaign to "elevate all mammals to moral equality with humans." Ultimately, Smith warns, "Animal rights activists believe a rat, is a pig, is a dog, is a boy."
You can certainly find that theme in some quarters. GAP calls humans, chimps, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans "members of the community of equals," and Singer holds out the possibility that GAP "may pave the way for the extension of rights to all primates, or all mammals, or all animals." But the arguments GAP has deployed in Spain don't advance the idea of equality among animals. They destroy it.
[...]
GAP's mission statement says great apes are entitled to rights based on their "morally significant characteristics." It says they
enjoy a rich emotional and cultural existence in which they experience emotions such as fear, anxiety and happiness. They share the intellectual capacity to create and use tools, learn and teach other languages. They remember their past and plan for their future. It is in recognition of these and other morally significant qualities that the Great Ape Project was founded.
I had intended a poll, but i messed up, so just state, yes, yes with quaifications, maybe, no, etc. and give your reasons.
If this is accepted, confining them in most zoos would be out, but not necessarily 'wild life refuges,' large tracts of land, for their own protection.
What is the argument? It's very simple: Leaving aside the language issue, these apes--gorillas, chimps, bononbos, for example-- are functioning like two year olds, at least. In terms of morality, then, they would seem to be entitled to the same rights: You can't for example, take your two year old, and shoot her. Nor can you perform experimental surgery on her, or drop detergents into her eyes, to test the irritation potential.
You don't let the two year old wander the streets, of course. Liberty is restricted for her own good. But she can't be caged. The two year old has a right to have fun, socialize with other kids, and adults, have parenting.
As to language, i'm letting that ride, for a simple modification of the example works. Suppose your two year old could not speak. You have to teach her sign language to express her wishes, although she can hear verbal instructions. The apes does not lose rights, then, even if they cannot speak.
The Declaration on Great Apes can be found at this url, and is a result of the Great Apes Project (q v)
http://www.greatapeproject.org/declaration.php
http://www.slate.com/id/2194568/
Animal-Rights FarmApe rights and the myth of animal equality.
By William Saletan
Updated Tuesday, July 1, 2008, at 7:52 AM ET
Should apes be treated like people?
Under a resolution headed for passage in the Spanish parliament, respecting the personal rights of "our non-human brothers" won't just be a good idea. It'll be the law.
The resolution, approved last week by a parliamentary committee with broad support, urges the government to implement the agenda of the Great Ape Project, an organization whose founding declaration says apes "may not be killed" or "arbitrarily deprived of their liberty." No more routine confinement. According to Reuters, the proposal would commit the government to ending involuntary use of apes in circuses, TV ads, and dangerous experiments.
Proponents hail the resolution as the first crack in the "species barrier." Peter Singer, the philosopher who co-founded GAP, puts it this way: "There is no sound moral reason why possession of basic rights should be limited to members of a particular species." If aliens or monkeys are shown to have moral or intellectual abilities similar to ours, we should treat them like people.[...]
Can apes talk? Slate V investigates:
If the idea of treating chimps like people freaks you out, join the club. Creationists have been fighting this battle for a long time. They realized long ago that evolution threatened humanity's special status. Maybe you thought all this evolution stuff was just about the past. Surprise! Once you've admitted chimps are your relatives, you have to think about treating them that way. That's why, when the Spanish proposal won approval last week, GAP's leader in Spain called it a victory for "our evolutionary comrades."
Opponents view the resolution as egalitarian extremism. Spain's conservative party frets that it would grant animals the same rights as people. Spanish newspapers and citizens complain that ape rights are distracting lawmakers from human problems. Wesley Smith, my favorite anti-animal-rights blogger, sees the resolution as the first step in a campaign to "elevate all mammals to moral equality with humans." Ultimately, Smith warns, "Animal rights activists believe a rat, is a pig, is a dog, is a boy."
You can certainly find that theme in some quarters. GAP calls humans, chimps, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans "members of the community of equals," and Singer holds out the possibility that GAP "may pave the way for the extension of rights to all primates, or all mammals, or all animals." But the arguments GAP has deployed in Spain don't advance the idea of equality among animals. They destroy it.
[...]
GAP's mission statement says great apes are entitled to rights based on their "morally significant characteristics." It says they
enjoy a rich emotional and cultural existence in which they experience emotions such as fear, anxiety and happiness. They share the intellectual capacity to create and use tools, learn and teach other languages. They remember their past and plan for their future. It is in recognition of these and other morally significant qualities that the Great Ape Project was founded.
Last edited:
) and are therefore not protected by the same rights.
