Associated Press – VIENNA, Austria
In some ways, Hiasl is like any other Viennese: He indulges a weakness for pastry, likes to paint and enjoys chilling out watching TV. But he doesn’t care for coffee, and he isn’t actually a person — at least not yet.
In a case that could set a global legal precedent for granting basic rights to apes, animal rights advocates are seeking to get the 26-year-old male chimpanzee legally declared a “person.”
Hiasl’s supporters argue he needs that status to become a legal entity that can receive donations and get a guardian to look out for his interests.
Our main argument is that Hiasl is a person and has basic legal rights,” said Eberhart Theuer, a lawyer leading the challenge on behalf of the Association Against Animal Factories, a Vienna animal rights group.
“We mean the right to life, the right to not be tortured, the right to freedom under certain conditions,” Theuer said.
“We’re not talking about the right to vote here.”
Austria isn’t the only country where primate rights are being debated. Spain’s parliament is considering a bill that would endorse the Great Ape Project, a Seattle-based international initiative to extend “fundamental moral and legal protections” to apes.
This is unbelievable. Is it really necessary to declare a chimp a ‘person’ in order to guarantee they are cared for?
All hail General Thaid.
This is unbelievable. Is it really necessary to declare a chimp a ‘person’ in order to guarantee they are cared for?
It shouldn’t be. But, apparently it is. Look at how we treat our closest relatives in medical research facilities. By the time we’re ready to test on chimps, gorillas, and orangs, we’re ready to take human volunteers who have a real interest in the research.
About 10 years or so ago, there was a push to have the genus homo extended to include all of the great apes in the hopes of improving their treatment. The anthropologists admitted the closeness of genetic relationship but want to keep all of the genuses that are used to express the great differentiation that has taken place in hominids despite the closeness of the relationship.
Perhaps declaring them legally persons is a step in the right direction without any loss to the scientific community.
#0 – hhopper
“Is it really necessary to declare a chimp a ‘person’ in order to guarantee they are cared for?”
I agree that it shouldn’t…To extend the same protections to animals as to humans is absurd, but treating them as property, disposable-at-will is not acceptable either.
To be honest, it’s inevitable – there are going to be clashes in the near future between people who respect higher forms of non-human life and those cold-blooded bastards (of which there is no shortage) who have no more compunction about killing an ape, a monkey, a dog or cat than they do about squashing a roach.
Maybe it’s best a prëemptive move is made now rather than later, which is often too late.
I personally regard any creature who has a personality as a person, by definition. And we have animal cruelty laws already – it might be time to work on them, develop them more fully. (This, unfortunately, will also bring out the loonies who’ll insist, among other extremist absurdities, that lobsters and snakes are equally deserving of protection)
Perhaps an intermediate category of protection, recognizing ‘non-human persons’ is called for, since, as Lao Tzu would remind us, the middle way generally turns out to be the proper one.
Then again, on the other hand, as K’ung-fu-tzu so sagely pointed out, Lao Tzu might’ve been talking out his ass. 😀
Hey, if we can elect one as president, why not call one a person?
Too bad I can’t remember the name of the SCIFI novel in question but there is one addressing a possibility of this slippery slope: first apes, than sea-mamals than all the animals were given “human rights”. Followed by plants as it have been proven they have feelings too. Book ends in the collapse of the civilization as econuts achieve human rights for microbes and viruses.
Humans should not be vicious to the nature for our own good but we should realize that the nature is not Disneyland. If it is in our advantage to use animals in certain ways, we should.
I wonder if this would be a issue if they looked like a spider or were a predator like a shark. We have a very species centric bias just like when we complain about global warming which is going to harm human civilization more than anything else on the plant. We need to get over ourselves.
Well, this is what happens when you start disregarding centuries of religious and philosophical advancement, in favor of some feel-good platitudes cornballed into something called “humanism”. If we haven’t legislated basic behaviour into a law, you had better create that law. C’mon, mankind is supposed to have dominion over the lower animals, which means we have a duty to care for them.
Besides, doesn’t anyone have a clue as to what entity-aping-a-human being brought this poor creature to Europe in the first place? Make him/her/entity pay for putting Lancelot Link into a zoo or a wildlife refuge. It shouldn’t require a sponsor to do this. This is why making pets out of most species is absurd and should be made illegal. Legislate this instead, you can have dogs, cats and the occasional budgie. That’s it. Everything else is protected. Gaah – Europe is losing it.
The big question now coming up in the courts is the status of pets in the household, specifically dogs and cats. With this giant recall of pet food, many people are joining a class-action suit after losing a pet. In most families, pets are considered a family member and their loss can be traumatic. Currently the courts consider pets as personal property and in a case like this (tainted pet food) one can only receive the original value of the animal. This current suit may set a precedent as they will be asking for medical expenses, pain and suffering and punitive damages. I personally am out almost $5,000 for one pet that died and two others that needed extensive medical attention and I’m pissed!
I see nothing wrong with this. After all, the US has one as its president.
#4 & #9,
ROFLMAO!!! But still, let’s not be insulting here. Just because the man superficially resembles a chimp is no reason to insult decent intelligent chimps.
#6,
Good point. Sharks are highly intelligent. Dolphins are likely even more so. Even some species we don’t tend to think of as intelligent can be quite surprising. In fact, we almost always underestimate the intelligence of other species, at any point on the evolutionary bush (not the other one, just that the branching of life is more shrub-like than tree-like).
Here’s a good example. People have documented that prairie dogs, yes prairie dogs, have different calls. They even have different calls for human and human-with-gun. So, someone walked by with a gun and they called human-with-gun. The same guy walked by much later, not the same day (could have been a month or so later, I can’t remember) this time, not carrying a gun. The prairie dog called out human-with-gun. Think about the intelligence in having different calls for with and without gun and recognizing an individual of another species much later in time. And this from a rodent!!
On the contrary, I think most humans should be declared chimpanzees.
If humans and chimps can successfully interbreed (which hasn’t yet been officially tested), then chimps are, by definition, the same species as us.
Speaking of humans and chimps inbreeding, Michael Crichton has written a very interesting novel regarding that among other things, called Next. More information.
Next thing you know they will want to declare Al Sharpton a person.
Find a copy of and read “Jerry Was a Man” by Robert A. Heinlein – today’s headlines written quite a few years back. Maybe we should all be reading more Heinlein because these also feel much the “Crazy Years”.
#10
I still wonder though is instinct thought or just an evolved mechanisms for identifying threats. I would beat that the prairie dogs use some type of scent identification to distinguish the different people etc. Which is still pretty amazing considering the size of their brains. I wonder if prairie dogs would be more prevelent if they looked like small people instead of small rats.
#8, Harrison, I sympathize very much. Sorry for your loss. Death of a loved pet can be extremely traumatic. It’s happened to me way too often. Wish I knew what to say in a case like this.
It sure ain’t “Grow up and go buy another one.” Heartless jerks.
well soon this person will be having sex with the chimp…and now see this from Dave Chapelle (NWS): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9zLK70K-_w
Oh Great in 50 years they demand social security benefits and complain how we mis treated them.
A new generation of chimps in levis and rebooks drinking coke…
Flash back Planet of the apes…
The question for me is: what does one need to have to be called a “person”?
I’d say personality. Not so much intelligence. And personalities are ubiquitous at least among higher animals. If you have ever had groups of animals, be it dogs, cats, rabbits, birds or what not, you’ll have noticed that they’re not all the same. They all have personalities, they all have different behavioral patterns, things they like or dislike, more or less trust to you as a human etc.
Being a person to me means to be unique and respected as being unique and therefore valuable as one individual in the group. Any animal capable of expressing personality deserves that respect. This may reach much farther than just Chimps or Dolphins.
pj
A person is a Human being that is alive.
An ape is not a human nor is a dolphin.
Hint, Hint, Hint, —->DNA
About thousand years ago people thought they were so smart and bright. We call them living in “Dark Ages” today 😀
Im sure, thanks to examples like this one, that our oh-so-“modern” times will get appropiate label in the future too… something like “Debilism Ages” or similar, I am sure.
Hopefuly some pieces and bits of web posts will manage to survive to prove not everyone in our times was as dumb as we can read, hear and see in the news.
Well, on Futurama they refer to our present day as “The Stupid Age”. And for the record, I am against elevating the President to the status of “human”. We have got to draw a line somewhere.
#24, 888,
A very good point.
Can you say, “Self awareness?”
Even if, by the grace of God , that Chimps developed a high intellect, They are still not nor ever would be considered Human. They are a differnt species. Ditto robots, Dogs, dolphins or whatever …
The only thing they have in common is they are the closes species to mankind.Non the less they are very much differnet.
22, Comment by pjakobs — 5/5/2007 @ 11:10 pm
27, Comment by hhopper — 5/6/2007 @ 7:07 am
Star Trek, “The Next Generation” dealt quite imaginatively with this problem years ago. Lt. Cmndr. Data (android) was given rights as a ‘human’.
When Data refuses to be disassembled, a formal hearing is called to determine whether Data is Starfleet property or a sentient being of his own right.
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Measure_Of_A_Man
Darnit, I’ve posted too late again.
Is this any different than declaring a corporation a person? Both are equally absurd and should be revoked or outlawed.