Chimps... Are they people too?

Message boards : Politics : Chimps... Are they people too?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1585813 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 15:59:22 UTC
Last modified: 12 Oct 2014, 16:10:11 UTC

Now for a slight change of pace...

A State Appeals Court in New York heard arguments on Oct. 9th, 2014 in a lawsuit over legal personhood for a chimp named 'Tommy'.

Thoughts?

Edit:
Oops... Forgot the URL link...



http://www.wired.com/2014/10/chimpanzee-personhood-hearing/
ID: 1585813 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24877
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1585815 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 16:02:43 UTC
Last modified: 12 Oct 2014, 16:05:38 UTC

With all the published "lawsuits" over the past several years, it seems that the States has lost the plot.
ID: 1585815 · Report as offensive
Мишель
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 13
Posts: 3073
Credit: 87,868
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1585816 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 16:03:23 UTC - in response to Message 1585813.  

Now for a slight change of pace...

A State Appeals Court in New York heard arguments on Oct. 9th, 2014 in a lawsuit over legal personhood for a chimp named 'Tommy'.

Thoughts?

Ridiculous. I mean, why?
ID: 1585816 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1585825 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 16:17:55 UTC - in response to Message 1585816.  

Now for a slight change of pace...

A State Appeals Court in New York heard arguments on Oct. 9th, 2014 in a lawsuit over legal personhood for a chimp named 'Tommy'.

Thoughts?

Ridiculous. I mean, why?


Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?
ID: 1585825 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24877
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1585826 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 16:19:03 UTC - in response to Message 1585825.  

Converse would be a good one to consider.
ID: 1585826 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1585868 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:02:09 UTC - in response to Message 1585825.  

Now for a slight change of pace...

A State Appeals Court in New York heard arguments on Oct. 9th, 2014 in a lawsuit over legal personhood for a chimp named 'Tommy'.

Thoughts?

Ridiculous. I mean, why?


Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

+1 ;-)
ID: 1585868 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1585872 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:06:06 UTC - in response to Message 1585825.  

Now for a slight change of pace...

A State Appeals Court in New York heard arguments on Oct. 9th, 2014 in a lawsuit over legal personhood for a chimp named 'Tommy'.

Thoughts?

Ridiculous. I mean, why?


Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

Well so far they have to be a corporation. I see no reason not to now open it up to actual feeling sentient beings.

A chimp has the understanding of a 2 year old child. They can learn to speak sign language. They can lie just like a real person. There is definitely a case to be made that they should have their personhood recognised by the law.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1585872 · Report as offensive
Мишель
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 13
Posts: 3073
Credit: 87,868
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1585877 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:15:55 UTC - in response to Message 1585825.  
Last modified: 12 Oct 2014, 18:16:52 UTC

Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

No, I would reserve person hood to anyone who is capable of asking for it or who is member of a species that as a species is capable of asking for it. So, for now that only includes humans. In the future it could include smart robots or intelligent alien species. A chimpanzee however, is normally incapable of asking for personhood. It needs to be done through his owners.

If you open it up to chimpanzees and basically say they are of equal standing in the eyes of the law as a human being, you are going to give them the same rights as human beings. So, that means that since they don't have a job, they have a right to welfare benefits. They have the right to medicare, they have the right for legal representation, you can't put them in zoos anymore, etc. More importantly if they get defined as person, you open up the gates to expand person hood to pretty much include pretty much all species on this planet. Which is a silly idea. Can you imagine it? A chimp getting welfare benefits?
ID: 1585877 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1585885 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:25:23 UTC - in response to Message 1585877.  

Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

No, I would reserve person hood to anyone who is capable of asking for it or who is member of a species that as a species is capable of asking for it. So, for now that only includes humans. In the future it could include smart robots or intelligent alien species. A chimpanzee however, is normally incapable of asking for personhood. It needs to be done through his owners.

If you open it up to chimpanzees and basically say they are of equal standing in the eyes of the law as a human being, you are going to give them the same rights as human beings. So, that means that since they don't have a job, they have a right to welfare benefits. They have the right to medicare, they have the right for legal representation, you can't put them in zoos anymore, etc. More importantly if they get defined as person, you open up the gates to expand person hood to pretty much include pretty much all species on this planet. Which is a silly idea. Can you imagine it? A chimp getting welfare benefits?

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....
ID: 1585885 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24877
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1585889 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:33:05 UTC - in response to Message 1585885.  

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

..or Cheetah making love to Jane (well that's what personhood can eventually lead to isn't it?)
ID: 1585889 · Report as offensive
Мишель
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 13
Posts: 3073
Credit: 87,868
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1585901 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:53:29 UTC - in response to Message 1585889.  

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

..or Cheetah making love to Jane (well that's what personhood can eventually lead to isn't it?)

Oh hey great, legalized bestiality as long as its with great apes.
ID: 1585901 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24877
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1585903 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 18:56:28 UTC - in response to Message 1585901.  

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

..or Cheetah making love to Jane (well that's what personhood can eventually lead to isn't it?)

Oh hey great, legalized bestiality as long as its with great apes.

Who's to say it can't happen?
ID: 1585903 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1585921 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 19:42:20 UTC - in response to Message 1585901.  

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

..or Cheetah making love to Jane (well that's what personhood can eventually lead to isn't it?)

Oh hey great, legalized bestiality as long as its with great apes.

Can they give consent?

There is reason there is an age limit on human to human sexual intercourse. It is because a child cannot give consent, yet they are still considered a person. I don't think the ability to give consent or not defines whether you are a person or not.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1585921 · Report as offensive
Sirius B Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 00
Posts: 24877
Credit: 3,081,182
RAC: 7
Ireland
Message 1585922 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 19:45:13 UTC - in response to Message 1585921.  

It seems to me (unless I'm looking too far ahead for my own good), that mankind continues to push the boundaries to the limits. Just where will it all end? What will be the final line in the sand that will not be permitted to cross?
ID: 1585922 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1585973 - Posted: 12 Oct 2014, 22:01:12 UTC - in response to Message 1585928.  

Tommy presently is kept alone in a cage in a warehouse in Gloversville, New York. Eventually, hope his advocates, he will be moved to a sanctuary and into the history books as the first nonhuman animal person, possessing rights previously restricted to Homo sapiens.

I will repeat.

Chimps are not people, but in this case simple animal welfare should be taken into consideration.

I will repeat too!

Any living creature with self awareness and the ability to communicate is as much a person as you or I am.

Animal welfare should always be taken into consideration as we should consider ourselves the stewards of this planet, not the masters.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1585973 · Report as offensive
Profile James Sotherden
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 10436
Credit: 110,373,059
RAC: 54
United States
Message 1586107 - Posted: 13 Oct 2014, 5:43:15 UTC - in response to Message 1585885.  

Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

No, I would reserve person hood to anyone who is capable of asking for it or who is member of a species that as a species is capable of asking for it. So, for now that only includes humans. In the future it could include smart robots or intelligent alien species. A chimpanzee however, is normally incapable of asking for personhood. It needs to be done through his owners.

If you open it up to chimpanzees and basically say they are of equal standing in the eyes of the law as a human being, you are going to give them the same rights as human beings. So, that means that since they don't have a job, they have a right to welfare benefits. They have the right to medicare, they have the right for legal representation, you can't put them in zoos anymore, etc. More importantly if they get defined as person, you open up the gates to expand person hood to pretty much include pretty much all species on this planet. Which is a silly idea. Can you imagine it? A chimp getting welfare benefits?

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

I bet his owner did pay taxes.
[/quote]

Old James
ID: 1586107 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1586119 - Posted: 13 Oct 2014, 6:05:41 UTC - in response to Message 1586107.  

Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

No, I would reserve person hood to anyone who is capable of asking for it or who is member of a species that as a species is capable of asking for it. So, for now that only includes humans. In the future it could include smart robots or intelligent alien species. A chimpanzee however, is normally incapable of asking for personhood. It needs to be done through his owners.

If you open it up to chimpanzees and basically say they are of equal standing in the eyes of the law as a human being, you are going to give them the same rights as human beings. So, that means that since they don't have a job, they have a right to welfare benefits. They have the right to medicare, they have the right for legal representation, you can't put them in zoos anymore, etc. More importantly if they get defined as person, you open up the gates to expand person hood to pretty much include pretty much all species on this planet. Which is a silly idea. Can you imagine it? A chimp getting welfare benefits?

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

I bet his owner did pay taxes.

Owner, is that anything like "Master?"
ID: 1586119 · Report as offensive
Profile James Sotherden
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 10436
Credit: 110,373,059
RAC: 54
United States
Message 1586122 - Posted: 13 Oct 2014, 6:11:21 UTC - in response to Message 1586119.  

Why ridiculous?

Is the concept of 'people' going to be always and forever a 'Homo sapiens' only club? Or is it possible that at least certain members of other species might attain that status at some point?


If we are not going to be guilty of 'species-ism', what qualities would a non-human have to possess to be a 'person' under the law?

No, I would reserve person hood to anyone who is capable of asking for it or who is member of a species that as a species is capable of asking for it. So, for now that only includes humans. In the future it could include smart robots or intelligent alien species. A chimpanzee however, is normally incapable of asking for personhood. It needs to be done through his owners.

If you open it up to chimpanzees and basically say they are of equal standing in the eyes of the law as a human being, you are going to give them the same rights as human beings. So, that means that since they don't have a job, they have a right to welfare benefits. They have the right to medicare, they have the right for legal representation, you can't put them in zoos anymore, etc. More importantly if they get defined as person, you open up the gates to expand person hood to pretty much include pretty much all species on this planet. Which is a silly idea. Can you imagine it? A chimp getting welfare benefits?

Tarzan's Cheetah paying taxes on his movie residuals .....

I bet his owner did pay taxes.

Owner, is that anything like "Master?"

Id would say yes. And ES makes a valid point. If they can learn sign language and communicate raises some very good questions. Just because they dont know what questions to ask is another question that needs to be taken into consideration.
[/quote]

Old James
ID: 1586122 · Report as offensive
Мишель
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Nov 13
Posts: 3073
Credit: 87,868
RAC: 0
Netherlands
Message 1586210 - Posted: 13 Oct 2014, 10:47:26 UTC - in response to Message 1586122.  

Id would say yes. And ES makes a valid point. If they can learn sign language and communicate raises some very good questions. Just because they dont know what questions to ask is another question that needs to be taken into consideration.

Then you would have to wonder whether a species that at is intellectual maximum is as smart as a two year old child, should it be considered to be persons with all the rights and privileges that human beings enjoy under the law?
ID: 1586210 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1586218 - Posted: 13 Oct 2014, 11:51:50 UTC - in response to Message 1586210.  

Id would say yes. And ES makes a valid point. If they can learn sign language and communicate raises some very good questions. Just because they dont know what questions to ask is another question that needs to be taken into consideration.

Then you would have to wonder whether a species that at is intellectual maximum is as smart as a two year old child, should it be considered to be persons with all the rights and privileges that human beings enjoy under the law?


They aren't human so I don't think they fall under the same law but they should be treated with respect, no doubt about that.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1586218 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Chimps... Are they people too?


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.