Slavery protections for animals?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
SAN DIEGO – A federal judge for the first time in U.S. history heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Miller called the hearing in San Diego after Sea World asked the court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that names five orcas as plaintiffs in the case.
PETA claims the captured killer whales are treated like slaves for being forced to live in tanks and perform daily at its parks in San Diego and Orlando, Fla.

sacbee.com/2012/02/06/4243381/san-diego-judge-to-decide-future.html
 
Ridiculous…PETA can not represent animals…how did the animals communicate that they wanted to be represented?
 
SamH said:
Why don’t we start by treating humans like humans first.
Click to expand...
Don’t normally agree with you, but 👍.

Humans should be sorted out first, then animals. I watched a documentary and there was an animal charity visiting a very poor slum (can’t remember what country) and the charity money was being spent on making sure the donkeys used to pull carts had correct-fitting shoes. Pretty sure the money could have been better spent on education for the kids they were waving at, while the aforementioned children were working.

When will PETA realise that animals don’t really care so long as they have food, shelter, an area they can call their own and social interaction? They don’t need a pension, a living wage or flexible working hours!
 
:rolleyes:

I think I am going to agree with Sea Worlds attorney, but the fact is that he doesn’t even have to go as far as the constitution. Animals have no standing in court, and this case should have been dismissed as the court has no authority to even hear it.
 
jilly4ski said:
:rolleyes:

I think I am going to agree with Sea Worlds attorney, but the fact is that he doesn’t even have to go as far as the constitution. Animals have no standing in court, and this case should have been dismissed as the court has no authority to even hear it.
Click to expand...
It is California after all.:nope:
 
Frightening that the judge even agreed to hear the case.

Particularly in a state with such bad finances.
 
Nine_Two said:
Frightening that the judge even agreed to hear the case.

Particularly in a state with such bad finances.
Click to expand...
He is a federal judge, so this hearing shouldn’t cost the state of California anything.

But I do wonder why he even decided to hear arguments about it.
 
jilly4ski said:
:rolleyes:

I think I am going to agree with Sea Worlds attorney, but the fact is that he doesn’t even have to go as far as the constitution. Animals have no standing in court, and this case should have been dismissed as the court has no authority to even hear it.
Click to expand...
Unless, of course, PETA has found a way for the Sea World attorney to depose a whale. :rolleyes:

Jon
 
It’s just plain nonsense. But it would be fun to watch if the judge decides humans are enslaving the whales. Because then you can kiss goodbye the beagles the USDA has in airports, the drug-sniffing dogs the DEA uses, any police dog, any military dog, the dolphins the navy uses, National Park & police horses…What’s more, the US Government is an active slave trader! That’s right! They round up wild horses and burros and sell them into slavery!
 
Yerusalyim said:
Ridiculous…PETA can not represent animals…how did the animals communicate that they wanted to be represented?
Click to expand...
I am not necessarily a supporter of PETA, however on your point, anyone could in the same way as any person can represent an unborn child. Animals do have rights - the right to be treated with compassion, to be fed and given adequate shelter. I could add the additional God given rights to have space to move around freely and thrive. I am not sure what this case is all about but orcas do not belong in a tank.
 
LemonAndLime said:
Don’t normally agree with you, but 👍.

Humans should be sorted out first, then animals. I watched a documentary and there was an animal charity visiting a very poor slum (can’t remember what country) and the charity money was being spent on making sure the donkeys used to pull carts had correct-fitting shoes. Pretty sure the money could have been better spent on education for the kids they were waving at, while the aforementioned children were working.

When will PETA realise that animals don’t really care so long as they have food, shelter, an area they can call their own and social interaction? They don’t need a pension, a living wage or flexible working hours!
Click to expand...
I do not know about PETA who has done stupid things which sometimes are countereffective. animal rights are not about giving animals the right to vote, etc. I have already posted about the God given rights of animals. Orcas do not belong in tanks. It is not just about food and shelter. Some animals go get ‘depressed’ in confinement.

That documentary would not have given the whole picture. I know of a doctor in a very poor town who wakes up very early, goes out to feed the strays then returns to her free clinic. It is not mutually exclusive to care for animals as well as humans. This is not directed to you or anyone specifically but how many people, even Catholics are willing to go among the poor giving up their comfortable lives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top