Human rights for apes?

[Larry1700]

I repeat – am I the only one who sees the irony of debating extending human rights to apes in a society that does not extend human rights to real humans?

No, vern_humphrey, you’re not the only one. Me too! Me too!

 

[vern_humphrey]

No, vern_humphrey, you’re not the only one. Me too! Me too!

Thank heaven! I thought I was losing it.

But then I’m so old I can remember when adults were supposed to protect children, when it wasn’t considered heroic to contract a venereal disease, nor especially generous to pass it on to someone else.

 

[Larry1700]

Thank heaven! I thought I was losing it.

But then I’m so old I can remember when adults were supposed to protect children, when it wasn’t considered heroic to contract a venereal disease, nor especially generous to pass it on to someone else.

Again: Me too! (I’m 47 yrs old).

 

[water]

I repeat – am I the only one who sees the irony of debating extending human rights to apes in a society that does not extend human rights to real humans?

ah! good thing you have mentioned this.
Somehow, people forget that an unborn child is less than an ape.

 

[vern_humphrey]

ah! good thing you have mentioned this.
Somehow, people forget that an unborn child is less than an ape.

You can do things to an unborn child that would get you jailed if you did it to an ape.

 

[Zooey]

I think that ricmat is right.

There is a movement to give the Great Apes basic human rights which would be consistent with a 2 year old.

The attack is on the idea of Human Exceptionalism. Their argument is that if you believe that humans are exceptional then you are a “speciest.” Read the stuff from our old friend Peter Singer. This form of radical egalitarianism equates speciism with racism.

The ultimate danger of the monkey rights movement is that it makes basic human rights conditional and hence no longer basic.

Am I a:shrug: crotchety old woman for thinking that this kind of thinking (especially where underlined) is a real insult to human beings who have been & are now being oppressed??
I mean, this argument for “radical egalitarianism” goes right straight back to the kind of excuses that have been used to support slavery, wife beating, child abuse + molestation, because someone decided that they were “less worthy of rights”. And now, what??? Somebody calls it "egalitarian, but that’s a backhanded slap at enslaved peoples, battered wives, etc… It’s like saying, “oh, yeah that was wrong…but only because its wrong to mistreat monkeys, so that goes for you all too”.

 

[water]

I am surprised that this thread is getting longer. While we should love animal, but there is no way animals are as equal as human beings (though we are animal ourselves )

 

[Iowa_Mike]

This is a gas! If they get rights no doubt the first thing the U.S. Government will do is raise taxes so we can establish an “Apes Rights Commission”. No doubt both politcal parties will court them for their vote…I wonder, will they be conservatives or democrats? Will they be eligible for medicare?

This could be big!

Iowa Mike

 

[gallo]

No, they should not.

There actually IS a trend, primarily in Europe (for the moment) to grant apes human rights. This is actually part of a larger campaign which denies that humans are better than animals, and which also denies that humans are in any way unique in God’s creation.

The people pushing this agenda would have us believe that humans are animals, **an accident of evolution **and not a work of the Creator. In fact, in their view there is no God.

Doesn’t this fly in the face of evolution? I thought evolution’s purpose was to “breed” a higher, more adaptable and intelligent being and man is this being. So in regard to this, wouldn’t saying humans are no better than animals an oxymoron…or then again, just moron? :doh2:

 

[vern_humphrey]

Am I a:shrug: crotchety old woman for thinking that this kind of thinking (especially where underlined) is a real insult to human beings who have been & are now being oppressed??

Your thinking is correct. This kind of thing degrades humanity – we become mere animals, a little smarter, maybe, but not as fast as, say a dog. So why should we have any more rights than a dog?

It also advances the proposition that there really are no rights – that is not unalienable rights as the Declaration of Independence says – only “decisions” by “society,” which can grant or withhold rights as it chooses.

To understand it fully, look at the point some of us have made – an ape will have more rights than an unborn human!

I mean, this argument for “radical egalitarianism” goes right straight back to the kind of excuses that have been used to support slavery, wife beating, child abuse + molestation, because someone decided that they were “less worthy of rights”. And now, what??? Somebody calls it "egalitarian, but that’s a backhanded slap at enslaved peoples, battered wives, etc… It’s like saying, “oh, yeah that was wrong…but only because its wrong to mistreat monkeys, so that goes for you all too”.

Yes. The effect will not be to elevate apes, but to degrade humans.

 

[Linnyo]

Seems to be a daft question! With rights, come responsibilities and apes do not understand responsibilities therefore thay shouldn’t have the same rights as those who do. It can be asked if criminals should have the same human right as those of us who live up to our responsibilities and I would argue that they shouldn’t have the same human rights either. There are to many people in jail sueing the system for infringing their human right whilst they, themselves have breached their victim’s human rights. The world is an upside down, topsy-turvy place. look at how crazy it gets.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6480483.stm

 

[MikeWM]

With rights, come responsibilities and apes do not understand responsibilities therefore thay shouldn’t have the same rights as those who do.

So what about babies or the severely mentally handicapped, or those very ill, or in a coma? Should they not have rights? They certainly don’t understand responsibilities.

Mike

 

[Linnyo]

So what about babies or the severely mentally handicapped, or those very ill, or in a coma? Should they not have rights? They certainly don’t understand responsibilities.

Mike

No but with help they can meet the responsibilities or, at least, not not meet them. there is also a chance that these peopel will learn these responsibilities but they are unlikely to be given responsibilities beyond what they can cope with. In my country children dont have the same rights as adults ie voting because they are not capable of makng informed decisions. Perhaps some adult people should not have these rights for that reason too.

 

[MikeWM]

No but with help they can meet the responsibilities or, at least, not not meet them. there is also a chance that these peopel will learn these responsibilities but they are unlikely to be given responsibilities beyond what they can cope with.

Well, apes can ‘learn’ to some degree. I see what you’re getting at, but I’m not sure it’s quite so clear-cut. As I said earlier, I do agree that apes shouldn’t have ‘human rights’ but that’s simply because apes clearly aren’t human beings.

In my country children dont have the same rights as adults ie voting because they are not capable of makng informed decisions. Perhaps some adult people should not have these rights for that reason too.

Quite possibly I don’t think people were suggesting giving apes the vote though!

Mike

 

[Linnyo]

Well, apes can ‘learn’ to some degree. I see what you’re getting at, but I’m not sure it’s quite so clear-cut. As I said earlier, I do agree that apes shouldn’t have ‘human rights’ but that’s simply because apes clearly aren’t human beings.

Quite possibly I don’t think people were suggesting giving apes the vote though!

Mike

lol - who do you think the apes would vote for?

 

[thechrismyster]

So what about babies or the severely mentally handicapped, or those very ill, or in a coma? Should they not have rights? They certainly don’t understand responsibilities.

Mike

That doesn’t pass the simple Chrismyster laugh test.

Apes aren’t humans in any capacity. other than beating me in arm wrestling due to a longer fulcrum… we’re superior in species and by nature.

given hard times, an asteroid hit or what have you… a tasty gorilla burger would be dandy with a little worchestshire and onion… a human, well, can’t BBQ those without moral implications.

 

[Maratom]

Why stop with an ape? What about granting personhood to a fox,bear, or even a horse?

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54959

 

[Maratom]

I’m sorry about the double post. But as I said, why stop with an ape?. why not give personhood to a goat, fox, maybe even a horse.?

 

[MikeWM]

That doesn’t pass the simple Chrismyster laugh test.

You should probably spend more time reading the context in which I made that comment, and less time laughing. I’ve already agreed that apes should not have human rights, but precisely because they clearly are not human beings, not because they don’t understand responsibilty.

Mike

 

[thechrismyster]

You should probably spend more time reading the context in which I made that comment, and less time laughing. I’ve already agreed that apes should not have human rights, but precisely because they clearly are not human beings, not because they don’t understand responsibilty.

Mike

this is an internet forum… who reads context?? Misinterpreting and jumping to conclusions haphazardly is half the fun of these things!!