Human rights for chimps?
 

Ladies and gentlemen, I kid you not. This is an actual news story. Though old, it is still utterly shocking:

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=688922007

Now, I have to ask myself, are these scientists totally wacko? What's next? Are they going to give chimps the right to vote too? Maybe these scientists are seeking a new voter block so they can push their own political agendas. Now politicians will have to start campaigning for the chimp voter block. This is amazing. I can't wait to see what these crazy scientists come up with next.

Well now, not as crazy as the environmentalists... SAVE THE SHRIMP, SAVE THE ANTS

They're animals. Fuck em. I know that scientifically speaking, the chimps are really smart but they're just animals at the end of the day. What about the laboratory mice?! What about their rights?!!! ROFL.

The moment an animal pleads eloquently for their rights, I will heed them. Until then, get back in the fridge and shutup.



unless its a cow. They taste too good.

Have any of you put any actual thought into the issue of animal rights? Because it is a very scientific, moral, and philosophical subject, that deserves much more consideration than is being shown in here. I suppose it's real easy to obey Genesis, however serious discussion of the topic begins with thought.

Sure animals have some rights but I'm not that worried about those raccood dogs and minks that end up as furs. Moreover it would be somewhat hard for me to turn into vegetarian.

:agreed

In many cases animals display many of the characteristics that we use as justification for human rights.
And even if that may sound unpleasant, there are cases of mental retardation that make certain animals more intelligent than some people, so intelligence can't be the deciding factor. DNA perhaps, but then again 99% of DNA is identical to that of a dog, or so I have heard.

Granting animals rights (not necessarily human rights) makes sense if you ask me as it will improve the awareness people have for their environment and maybe make them behave more responsible or think in cases where they are just following animal instincts.

Yes I have. And I have come to the simple conclusion that animals don't need human rights. Sure, they can have "animal" rights, but "human" rights? I don't think so. There are some areas of the world where there are humans who are denied human rights.

And I am not one for intelligent discussion because I am not that intelligent. But I love poking fun at absurdity. If any of you actually think we need to give animals human rights, then you are obviously out of your mind.

It's worth noting that the same attitude (and words) was given to ending slavery, and giving women the right to vote.

Animal rights - and that is certain legal rights for animals - do exist in some forms (anti-cruelty laws etc), and never rule out the possibility that the status quo could change.

Look, can chimps vote? Own property? NO! I am utterly amazed at how some of you don't see how absurd this story is.

And I agree that animals should have animal rights. But giving them human rights is just so asinine and futile it just pains me to see that people are even wasting their time on giving this story actual intelligent thought.

I support chimp rights. How much is and what to cover is negotiable. In this case I ahve to question if this is a move to get the money, but she was involved with the chimp before someone left it several thousand pound. I would give her the benefit of the doubt.

Would it be any different if a Alien race came to earth and decided the numerous hairless monkeys were intelligent but lesser animals than them and thus did not deserve any rights.

I watched a documentary several years ago about how the chimps were being treated and one of the guys in the show used to work as a grad student with the chimps and was one of the people that taught the chimps sign language.

The chimps know sign language and can communicate with anyone who knows sign language.

The guy walked in after a number of years and the chimp saw him and got excited and started signing to him evgen though it hadnt been used for signing experiments for years, it was now used for medical experiments.

The chimp got excited, wanted to touch and hold hius hand, spent time grroing him and when the guy left the chimp got sad and depressed, like any human would.

I would dare anyone who saw that show and saw how the chimp acted to its former handler to not be emotionally moved by its actions. The chimp may not have been human but it certainly deserved to be treated in a HUMANE fashion.

In a related story one of the Gorillas who had learned sign language in a American University was released back into its African home. Scientists who were observing were suprised to see the released Gorilla teaching sign language to the other Gorillas and habits and actions it had learned in captivity. Unfortunately the Gorilla was later found dead and its body dismembered and parts missing. Poachers had killed the Gorilla for body parts to feed a large black market demand for animal parts for folk medicine.

And neither could women or black people, during history.

The suggestion that they could was just as absurd to some then as this is to you.

I don't "Homo Sapien" or "Human" anywhere in the word "Chimpanzee," so, if we're giving them human style rights, you might as well rename it to "Advanced Animal Right."

I'm all for animal rights, but giving human rights to something that's not human is stupid.

In 1700's and early 1800's black people were considered not much better than Monkeys and had no basic human rights and could not vote. Some were not treated any better than animals. Some pics I have seen I would not treat my animal that bad.

I dont think anyone is saying let animals vote and run for political office. Its about seeing animals as intelligent beings with the same respect and consideration you would a mentally disabled person or a young child.

I am actually suprised at how strongly some of you object to recognizing higher intelligent animals as worthy of recognition and respect.

You can say its just a animal but if you walked in and sat down and the animal could say hello and carry on a conversation with you at what point do you realize this is not just some stupid animal?

They're called "human rights" for a reason. Giving animals the same rights as humans ought to mean that the animals are subject to the same laws as humans. In which case they would all be arrested for indecency by not wearing clothes in a public place...

The thing is, that the definition of animal is somewhat wobbly.
What do we consider animals?
Any creature or entity that is not us?
Then why not consider god an animal as well.

But if the deciding factor was sentience.......
Which apes as well as some other mammals (mainly whale type mammals) exhibit, then humans, as well as chimpanzees and gorillas, bonobos, Orangutans and whales, would not be animals.
Thus being over animals, they could technically deserve a number of rights that would put them over other animals.
Of course some rights are impossible to grant, but others....

We as homo sapiens havent even guaranteed others HUMANS their natural rights. how about we get that shiat done before we start worrying about the emotional state of a tuna fish...

But the thing is, we are not worrying about tune fish, but about sentient beings.

the thing is, there are more important things to get under control first before worry about luxury goals.
If your house is falling apart because of termites, you dont go worrying about getting new blinds for the windows. Priorities seem to be a bit mixed up with the better off folks i see.

I dont remember seeing anything about wanting to grant rights to Tuna's or any of the other non communicative animals.

We are specifically talking about Chimpanzees abut I am willing to extend the argument to Gorilla's.

The fact that we can teach a chimp or gorilla sign language and communicate with it means they are sentient and can communicate and carry on a conversation within their small vocabulary. We are not talking dogs, cats, fish, birds, or other animals that we can not carry on a conversation with.

I should say, that I don't believe Chimps deserve all the rights that humans do. I mean, I'm not a biologist, and I don't know as much as they do about the whole situation. But they certainly deserve rights. They are brilliant creatures. I actually don't see any problem with giving them the three inalienable rights that our Declaration of Independence was supposed to secure for us: the rights to "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness". They needn't vote, they needn't run for office, or whatever silly things were allegedly suggested. But they do deserve serious consideration.

Ok, there are animals and then there are humans. There is a dividing line between the two and there is no way to make an animal equal to a human. Chimps are inteligent, but they still are not individualized like humans are. Chimps may be able to think for themselves, but they can't think at the same level humans... hm... this is hard to put. Chimps act on instinct over thought, unlike humans. Therefore this makes them animals and I don't think that an ape that will live for less than two decades really could make use of any rights anyway.

I have to agree with Roaming East. It is kind of ridiculous to have this proposed. I do believe that they shouldn't be treated cruelly and what not. That's just evil. But you gotta draw the line eventually, dudes. A non-human, specifically an animal, shouldn't be able to have those rights. It's not like it needs them, since it generally gets to sit around in a cage all day. Next thing you know, they're gonna be trying to nominate Ham for the Presidency.

lol... nicely put. I was trying to say something like that. But if a pickle ran for presidant, I would vote for it!

You know something, 90% of what you do, of what you think is instinct. Well hidden instinct, but instinct nonetheless.
And again I say.
the line is not homo sapiens/all but sentient/non sentient.
I'm not saying just like loco, that primates should have to abide by our laws, be able to run for offices, have to register etc etc etc, but they should indeed be granted some basic humane rights.
See that I did not use human but humane.
For instance, I myself believe, that the willing killing of a chimp by human be classified as normal murder in a sense, for a chim has a very similliar potential of development as a human.


And ever read anything from the uplift war universe ?:)

We should give them equal rights for one day, they will rule the post atomic world of the future where man is the animal and Ape is the master.(clicky)

~Added so this won't get deleted~

Limited rights that protect them from cruelty: yes, therefore I believe they should have certain human rights.

Concerning civil rights, a line has to be drawn somewhere. Personally, I believe that it best exists at a clear scientific divide between the human and the inhuman. Ethically, one might seek to establish concerns for the more intelligent of animals, but regardless, granting governmental liberties to beings that are not of our species is more problematic than it's worth. If you grant one species special consideration, why not another - the next is only slightly less intelligent, after all. Continue this process ad infinitum, and guess what - nothing is left. Distinctions have to be made, or else one falls down an ideological slope.

I agree. The point you bring up is a good one. And I think this issue must be addressed by sophisticated means of inter-species communication. When we understand that certain creatures besides ourselves can have semblances of self-awareness and consciousness, we need to do away with killing them wantonly and thoughtlessly like we do now. We'll never know what's "going on inside the heads" of animals. But we can know that something is going on.

The line can be drawn I think where communication becomes futile. It's not a matter of a simple "level of intelligence", we can't have a scale from 1 to 100, and draw the line somewhere around 75. It doesn't work like that. The line will be drawn when science is advanced enough to allow us to communicate more precisely with the more intelligent species that are out there.
While it's probably true that Chimps have the capacity to reason that we do, as wraith cat said is true. We act on instinct no less than any other animal does. We are animals, after all. We evolved just like they did, and we are no less effected behaviorally speaking by our genes than they are. We can simply override instinct with reason. And maybe there are some other creatures than can to.

It's not reason that leads to sexual intercourse, it's instinct. Or to eating. Or to sleeping. The great majority of our daily lives, and the big turns that we take in our lives, are caused by instinct, not pure reason. Obviously, because our faculty for reasoning is so great, we can do brilliant things, like, for instance, write and read.

Are you serious? So what if we cut up the animals and store them in rusty cages? It might say we don't value the animals' lives but we probably don't because we're using them as disposable laboratories for our scientific/medical experiments. Being cruel to animals does not neccessarily translate to being a bad person. Sometimes you have to break eggs to make an omelet. When we find the cure for cancer using white rabbits, no one is going to care how many we killed [the word you'd probably use] to get to the results we wanted.

Huh? Am I serious that the issue deserves serious consideration? Yes.

You're funny. I like you. :rofl:

I agree with Locomotor.

Maybe it should not be referred to as human rights for chimps but there should be consideration given for chimp rights.

The main reason Man is at the top of the food chain is his/her ability to realise the intelligence of animals and respond to animals as members of the community, choosing relationships rather than direct hunter/hunted. Most of these relationships have been mutually beneficial, some have been exploitative. In the case of the wolf, Man would probably have become extinct without the symbiosis.